FORUM 2 CON BLOCKS
(A2 pro args)
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A2: Businesses will migrate
A2 Protecting against corruption with injected competition
A2 Tourism
A2: New revenue
A2: Pub subs necessary
A2: Stadium Subsides work
A2: Subs. Create jobs
A2: Boosts the Economy
A/2 Economic Sense in Subsidies
A2: Multiplier Effect
A2: Disaster Relief/Katrina
A2 Comparison of two different worlds
A2: Civic Pride
A/2 Neighborhoods benefitted
A2: Stadiums increase sex trafficking
A2 Stadiums Decrease Violence
A2: Gentrification
·A2 No Monetary Cost
A2: Environment
A2: Property value/ Eminent D
A2 Charities
A2 Ballet
2
A2: Businesses will migrate
1.There isn't evidence or any reason on why businesses would want to migrate because of
sports
John Siegfried and Andrew Zimbalist, “The Economics of Sports Facilities and Their
Communities”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2000, Pg. 98
http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/anderson/micro-principles/stadiums.pdf
The part of the contention that is not plausible is the notion that businesses will relocate to the
city because it becomes “big league.” Sound businesses move in search of a more qualified or
less expensive labor force, a convenient location for inputs or sales, a good infrastructure, a
sound fiscal environment with amenable tax policy, attractive government services, and
appealing cultural opportunities. The latter may include the quality of the local theater, opera,
symphony, parks, art museums, hospitals, public schools, universities or sports teams. If the first
half dozen or so items are equivalent between two cities, then the business may look at cultural
amenities and within them may consider sports. It does not seem plausible that the presence or
absence of sports teams would be a decisive location factor for more than a few companies.
There is no systematic evidence that business relocations follow sports teams.
2. Not true
Robert A Baade, “Stadiums, Professional Sports, and Economic Development: Assessing the
Reality”, Heartland Institute, April 4, 1994
3
http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/3075.pdf
“found no connection between professional sports and manufacturing activity in
approximately 90 percent of the tests conducted for a number of cities in the United States.
It is likely that other factors, such as the tax environment and the existence of a skilled labor
force, determine business location to a far greater extent than the presence of professional sports.
“
4
A2 Protecting against corruption with injected competition
1. Unlikely this would work
John Siegfried and Andrew Zimbalist, “The Economics of Sports Facilities and Their
Communities”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2000, Pg. 98
http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/anderson/micro-principles/stadiums.pdf
“ New entry would introduce competition to the monopoly sports leagues, but it is unlikely.
Many have tried, but few have succeeded (Quirk and Fort, 1992, chs. 8–9). The successes came
primarily in the 1960s and 1970s, after a long period during which franchise expansion in the
major sports leagues failed to keep pace with population growth, and in the midst of rapidly
increasing demand for sports entertainment fueled by the coming of sports interest age of the
post-World War II baby boomers and the expansion of access to television. Those were days
before astronomical broadcast rights contracts and stadium subsidies had driven players’ salaries
beyond the realm of normal incomes, and before the leagues realized that they could restrict the
number of franchises so much as to attract an entire new league. Today it would be difficult, if
not impossible, for a new league to successfully enter any of the four major team sports, and
individual teams cannot enter without the cooperation of incumbents because they would have
no one to play.”
5
A2 Tourism
1.Tourism won't increase.
Brad R. Humpherys, Dennis Coates, “Professional Sports Facilities, Franchises
Economic Development”, UMBC Economics Department, 2013
and Urban
Impact analysis studies also claim that a new sports facility will attract new visitors to a city,
leading to additional economic benefits. Visitors attracted by a new sports facility may occupy
hotel rooms and eat meals that would have been purchased by visitors who came to to the city for
other reasons, and the direct spending on sport made by these visitors would have gone to other
entertainment establishments. Porter (1999) and Porter and Fletcher (2002) report little or no
increase in hotel occupancy rates, retail sales, or airport traffic in cities that hosted Super
Bowls and Olympic Games in the U.S. in the past ten years.
6
A2: New revenue
1. Theoretically true but not in reality
Joseph L Bast, “Sports Stadium Madness Why It Started ò How To Stop It”, The Heartland
Institute, Feb 23 1998, pg 9
A stadium would indeed generate “new money” for a metropolitan area if it
attracted a significant percent of its fans from outside the immediate area. This is generally
not the case for baseball and basketball, where “the number and frequency of games means
that most of the market for ticket sales is metropolitan.” Football games, because there are
fewer of them and they are scheduled on 22 weekends, draw fans from greater distances.
However, the small number of football games—just eight regular season home games—
means the total number of fans attending football games is much smaller than the number
attending baseball or basketball games.
!!!!!!2. A Study by Robert Baade examined the impact of stadiums on the local economy of
30 major cities.
Robert A Baade, “Stadiums, Professional Sports, and Economic Development: Assessing the
Reality”, Heartland Institute, April 4, 1994
http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/3075.pdf
Of the 30 MSAs where there was a change in the number of stadiums or arenas ten
years old or less, 27 MSAs showed no significant relationship between the presence of a
7
stadium and real, trend-adjusted, per capita personal income growth. In all three of the
remaining cases (St. Louis, San Francisco/Oakland, and Washington D.C.), the presence of
a sports stadium was significantly negative)
3, No new money
Aaron Gordon, “America Has A Stadium Problem”, Pacific Standard, July 17 2013,
Most fans do not spend additional money as a result of a new stadium; they redirect money they would have spent elsewhere on movies, dining, bowling, tarot-card
reading, or other businesses. And for every out-of-state fan who comes into the city on game
day and buys a bucket of Bud Light Platinum, another non-fan decides not to visit and purchases
his latte at the coffee shop next door. All in all, building a stadium is a poor use of a few hundred
million dollars.
8
A2: Pub subs necessary
1. Most people prefer to watch sports on TV
Teena Hammond, “Stadiums race to digitize: How sports teams are scrambling to keep
Millennials coming to games”, Tech Republic, 2013
Teams have faced the reality that it's a lot cheaper, and a lot easier, for a fan to watch the big game in
their family room. So the teams have to make it more appealing than ever before to lure fans to the
stadium. A recent Cisco study showed that 57% of fans prefer to watch the game at home.
2. Sports orgs would survive without public subs.
Journal of Economic Perspectives
The Economics of Sports Facilities and Their Communities P101
John Siegfried and Andrew Zimbalist
http://www.uwlax.edu/faculty/anderson/micro-principles/stadiums.pdf
The struggle over surplus created by professional sports teams is largely an income
distribution issue. The transfer of tax revenue to teams by providing them with free
stadiums consists primarily of a transfer from taxpayers to players and owners. If all
public subsidies to sports teams were eliminated, the existing teams could and would
survive. Players’ salaries would decline, perhaps substantially, and teams owners would
earn lower profits and capital gains.
9
NEIL DEMAUSE, NPR, (August 05, 2011) “The Nation: Stop The Subsidy-Sucking Sports
Stadiums”: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/05/139018592/the-nation-stop-the-subsidy-suckingsports-stadiums
Actually losing a team, though, is extremely rare. Most team owners prefer to keep
plugging for new stadiums in their hometowns even after their bluff has been called.
Florida Marlins president David Samson first declared in 2004 that a new stadium bill
"has to happen in the next week. And if not, we'll move on." He repeated similar threats
for four years, until the city of Miami and Miami-Dade County finally agreed to kick in
more than $478 million for a new stadium with a retractable roof.”
10
A2: Stadium Subsides work
1. Stadiums do not support subsidies
Dennis Coates and Brad R. Humphreys, “Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Sub- sidies for
Sports Franchises, Stadiums, and Mega-Events?” Econ Journal Watch, 2008. Pg. 300
“ Within the promotional literature, proponents of stadium subsidies argue that subsidies are
warranted because of the local economic development benefits of building a stadium or arena,
including the “big league city” benefits. They do not support subsidies based on the consumer
surplus derived by game attendance nor from consumer external benefits from such activities as
talking about the teams or following them through the print or broadcast media.”
11
A2: Subs. Create jobs
(IN CASE 1ST CARD)
1. Not true,
Jonah Chodosh, “Take Me Out of the Ball Game: The Efficacy of Public Subsidies in the
Success of Professional Sports Stadiums”, Claremont McKenna College, 2011, Pg.6
“Public subsidies for stadiums don’t seem to do as promised, as the “spin-off
development” from construction doesn’t display the wishful trickle-down returns. Most
jobs are transferred, rather than created, and income and wealth effects are menial,
misinterpreted, and misleading”
(IN CASE 3RD)
(TURN) 3. Job loss
Dennis Coates and Bra2. The jobs that are created pay very little and the influx of money
going towards new stadiums.
Aaron Gordon, “America Has A Stadium Problem”, Pacific Standard, July 17 2013,
Economists have long known stadiums to be poor public investments. Most of the
jobs created by stadium-building projects are either temporary, low-paying, or out-of-state
contracting jobs—none of which contribute greatly to the local economy. (Athletes can
easily circumvent most taxes in the state in which they play.)
d R. Humphreys (CATO Institute). “Caught Stealing: Debunking the Economic Case for DC
Baseball.”
12
The presence of pro sports teams had a statistically significant negative impact on the
retail and services sectors of the local economy. The average effect on employment in the
services sector of a city’s economy was a net loss of 1,924 jobs as a result of the presence of
a professional sports team. [WARRANT: FRANCHISE RELOCATION AND LOWER
WAGES]
13
A2: Boosts the Economy
1. No economic help
Andrew Zimbalist and Roger G. Noll, The Brookings Institution, Summer 1997, Sports, Jobs, &
Taxes: Are New Stadiums Worth the Cost?
http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/1997/06/summer-taxes-noll
In our forthcoming Brookings book, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes, we and 15 collaborators examine
the local economic development argument from all angles: case studies of the effect of specific
facilities, as well as comparisons among cities and even neighborhoods that have and have not
sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into sports development. In every case, the conclusions are
the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on
overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned
anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been selffinancing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of
analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic
benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.
2. Quantifies
Dennis Coates, professor of economics at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008, “A Closer Look at Stadium Subsidies”, The American: The Online
Magazine of the American Enterprise Institute. http://www.american.com/archive/2008/april-0408/a-closer-look-at-stadium-subsidies
Interestingly, Humphreys and I found that the overall sports environment—which, as
mentioned earlier, includes the presence of franchises in multiple sports, the arrival or departure
of teams, and stadium construction—in a given area reduced per capita personal income by
about $10. In other words, every man, woman, and child in the metropolitan area was
poorer by $10 as a result of the sports environment. This suggests that the public-good
benefits are worth just enough to pay for the subsidies. Sports economists and policy analysts are
using a variety of methods to get more precise estimates of the public-good benefits. In the
future, we should know better whether these benefits are sufficient—in combination with private
consumption benefits—to cover the public financing of professional sports stadiums.
14
15
A/2 Economic Sense in Subsidies
Principles of Economics, 7th Edition 2015 N. Gregory Mankiw Harvard University
“85% of economists agree that Local and state governments should eliminate subsidies to
professional sports franchises.”
16
A2: Multiplier Effect
1. No real impact
According to The North American Association of Sports Economists,
http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/spe/SzymanskiKavetsos_WellBeing.pdf
In addition, Siegfried and Zimbalist (2000) note that the multiplier for sports related
expenditures may be lower than that of other types of expenditures. This is because sports
related expenditures are more likely to leak out of the local economy than non-sports ones
(e.g. construction workers may be less likely to live in the local area, and therefore are not
expected to spend their income locally) (Matheson and Baade, 2004).
2. Baade concludes multiplier effect fails
Community.seattletimes.nwsource.com,. Mariners Stadium -- Study Shows Public Funding
Takes From Poor, Gives To Rich | Seattle Times Newspaper'. N. p., 2014. Web. 25 Jun. 2014.
What about the multiplier effect? Growth at Boeing and Microsoft creates jobs elsewhere
in the economy. Baade and Sanderson say, forget it. "A dollar spent on professional sports
rarely constitutes a dollar's worth of new spending within a community. To a large degree,
citizens who spend money on sports are simply substituting one leisure option for another." The
pie chart and companion article also give the lie to claims that money for the Mariners will not
interfere with funding for our schools. Just under 20 percent of public funds will come from
the state sales tax, accounting for an estimated $137 million over the next 20 years. This is
money that would otherwise have gone into the general fund to finance education, a cleaner
environment or possibly even a tax cut.”
17
A2: Disaster Relief/Katrina
United Academics/Elke Weesjes/ Surviving Sandy: Staying Put in Far Rockaway/January 31,
2013
“For New Yorkers, this fear of public shelters was likely influenced not only by the lingering
memories of Katrina-Superdome horror stories but also by the experiences of people familiar
with homeless shelters in New York. Like many other residents of Far Rockaway—where
poverty is widespread—Anderson knows a number of people whose circumstances forced
them to make use of the city’s shelters. Their negative experiences exacerbated her own
fear of shelters, as did her memories of Katrina coverage: “The governor in New Jersey said
that if people decided to stay that they [emergency services] weren’t going to get them. People
like him have to understand that it isn’t easy to pack up and go somewhere else. There is a real
fear of the unknown. We knew there were shelters and that we could go there, but I know
what happened after Katrina in the stadium—rapes, muggings, theft; I am not going to walk
into that.”
18
A2 Comparison of two different worlds
My opponent calls for the comparison of a world with and a world without public subsidies.
However, the links and impacts drawn from this become null and void, as the resolution asks for
a comparison between benefits and drawbacks, not the conditions of one real-life situation and
one hypothetical situation. As Public Forum is a debate in the present tense, I suggest we adhere
to what the topic is asking us to engage in discourse about.
19
A2: Civic Pride
Dennis Coates and Brad R. Humphreys
October 27, 2004. “Caught Stealing: Debunking the Economic Case for D.C. Baseball”, Cato
Institute. http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp89.pdf
A baseball team in D.C. might produce intangible benefits. Residents might have an enhanced
sense of community pride and another opportunity to engage in a shared experience of civic
expression. Perhaps some people will think that D.C.’s image as a “world-class city” will be
further burnished. Rooting for the team will provide satisfaction to many local baseball fans. Yet
those intangible benefits largely accrue to people interested in being fans of the baseball
team and showing their support by purchasing tickets to games and team paraphernalia.
That is hardly a reason for the city government to subsidize construction of a ballpark, or
for the baseball team to avoid paying the cost to build it. District policymakers should not
be mesmerized by the faulty impact studies that claim a baseball team and new stadium
can be an engine of economic growth.
20
A/2 Neighborhoods benefitted
1. Not true
Dennis Coates and Brad R. Humphreys. Professional Sports Facilities, Franchises and Urban
Economic Development. 2003.
However, a growing body of evidence indicates that professional sports facilities, and the
franchises they are home to, may not be engines of economic growth in urban neighborhoods.
Econometric studies of the determination of income and employment in US cities find no evidence of positive economic benefits associated with
past sports facility construction and some studies find that professional sports facilities and teams have a However,
a growing body of
evidence indicates that professional sports facilities, and the franchises they are home to, may not
be engines of economic growth in urban neighborhoods. Econometric studies of the
determination of income and employment in US cities find no evidence of positive economic
benefits associated with past sports facility construction and some studies find that
professional sports facilities and teams have an impact on homes.
21
A2: Stadiums increase sex trafficking
1, Media isn't true
Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women
Gaatw.org,. 'Super Bowl? Or Super Hyperbole?'. N. p., 2011. Web. 28 Jun. 2014.
“GAATW’s 2011 report, What’s the Cost of a Rumour? A guide to sorting out the myths and the facts about sporting events and trafficking,
critically analysed this manufactured media hype about the role of
Although this always generates a
lot of media attention, action by anti-prostitution groups and law enforcement, and funding
for anti-trafficking activities by state actors and NGOs, there is no evidence to support the
claim.”
international sporting events in creating a “demand” for trafficked women and children.
2. Spotlight effect
22
A2 Stadiums Decrease Violence
1.Violence Increase
Daniel I. Rees and Kevin T. Schnepel. “College Football Games and Crime”. Journal of Sports
Economics 2009. http://www.sagepub.com/lippmanccl2e/study/articles/Rees.pdf
The results of this exercise are reported in Table 4. The estimated negative binomial coefficients of Away Game Win it and Away Game Loss it
are never statistically signif-icant at conventional levels, a pattern of results that lead us to focus on home games, where there is evidence that
losses lead to larger increases in the number of offenses than wins. For instance, home
game losses are associated with a
12% increase in assaults, but home game wins are associated with only an 8% increase in
assaults. To take another example, home game losses are associated with a 24% increase in DUIs, but
home game wins are associated with only a 10% increase in DUIs. However, the results presented in Table 4 do
not provide definitive evidence that the outcome of the game matters. In fact, in four of the five cases we cannot reject the hypothesis that
estimated negative binomial coefficient of Home Game Lossit is equal to the estimated coefficient of Home Game Win it .
Losses at
home are associ-ated with more arrests for DUI than wins at the .10 level.
23
A2: Gentrification
Why is Gentrification a Problem? - Stephen Sheppard, Williams College, 2011
http://web.williams.edu/Economics/ArtsEcon/library/pdfs/WhyIsGentrificationAProbREF
ORM.pdf
“The risk of displacement from gentrification was capable of changing the incentives that
residents have to engage in any of the variety of activities that can improve a community. The
risk of displacement that is characteristic of gentrification imposes a social cost on the
neighborhood. This cost is borne by the community as a whole and not by only those
persons who are poor or those who are displaced.”
No Social Mixing - Are Residents Who Are Displaced by Gentrification Better or Worse Off
After Relocating? [Alice M. Anigacz, Macalester College,], 2010
http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=economics_ho
nors_projects
“Interviews with long-term residents suggest that there is no or very little
social mixing, so that residents cannot benefit from the positive neighborhood effects
thatupper-class gentrifiers bring
Dennis Coates, The American, April 28,2009, A Closer Look at Stadium Subsidies
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/april-04-08/a-closer-look-at-stadium-subsidies
“Of course, even if the benefits of stadiums and arenas cover the subsidies, the subsidies still may not be sound policy. First, there may be
enormous variation in the distribution of the consumption and public-good benefits. It is clear that not all citizens in a community benefit equally
because the tax revenues used for the
subsidies are often generated from lotteries and sales taxes whose burden falls
disproportionately on the poor, while the consumption benefits go mostly to relatively
wealthy sports fans, the net benefits are distributed regressively. Second, we should consider the net
from the presence of professional sports franchises in their city. Indeed
benefits to the community of alternative uses of the funds spent subsidizing sports facilities. Good policy means using the money where the net
benefit is greatest, not simply where the net benefit is positive. That’s something state and local governments should keep in mind before
pledging millions of dollars to fund the next new stadium project. And it’s something Congress should remember when evaluating the future of
U.S. tax policy.
24
·A2 No Monetary Cost
1.Subsidies Paid for by New Taxes which Disproportionately Impact the Poor
Dennis Coates, The American, April 28,2009, A Closer Look at Stadium Subsidies
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/april-04-08/a-closer-look-at-stadium-subsidies
It is not quite correct to argue that local governments could use the tax revenues they spend on stadiums in “better” ways,
such as on schools or health programs. Typically, the funding for stadiums does not come directly out of an existing
government budget but rather from a new source of revenue, like special taxes on tickets or add-ons to the local sales tax.
The municipality likely would not impose these taxes for any purpose other than subsidizing the stadium, so other governmental services are not
necessarily being shortchanged. (Of course, the increased taxes do reduce the disposable income of local consumers, so the stadium subsidy does
impose opportunity costs on citizens, despite having no such effect on the government’s budget.)
“Of course, even if the benefits of stadiums and arenas cover the subsidies, the subsidies still may not be sound policy. First, there may be
enormous variation in the distribution of the consumption and public-good benefits. It is clear that not all citizens in a community benefit equally
from the presence of professional sports franchises in their city. Indeed, because the tax revenues used for the subsidies are often
generated from lotteries and sales taxes whose burden falls disproportionately on the poor, while the consumption
benefits go mostly to relatively wealthy sports fans, the net benefits are distributed regressively. Second, we should
consider the net benefits to the community of alternative uses of the funds spent subsidizing sports facilities. Good policy
means using the money where the net benefit is greatest, not simply where the net benefit is positive. That’s something state and local
governments should keep in mind before pledging millions of dollars to fund the next new stadium project. And it’s something Congress should
remember when evaluating the future of U.S. tax policy.”
25
A2: Environment
1. Idea in which more stadiums though green will still produce more energy than less stadiums
2. econ outweighs
3. private stadiums incentivised to protect the environment to save money. Less energy
consumption = $$$$
3.Not impactful
For Eagles, a Winning Mix of Wind, Biodiesel and Solar: Ken Belson, Nov. 2010, NY Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/sports/football/18stadium.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
As large as they are, sports stadiums consume just a sliver of the nation’s energy and
produce a fraction of its waste. But they are seen and used by millions of Americans every day,
which [Green energy efforts] has helped leagues counter the perception that sports teams
are wasteful enterprises and in fact can convey socially responsible messages to fans of all
political and economic stripes.
26
A2: Property value/ Eminent D
20% underappraisal – Eminent Domain is a bad ploy for underwater mortgages [Steven Greenhut], 2012
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-28/eminent-domain-is-bad-ploy-for-underwater-mortgages.html
The “fair market value” probably wouldn’t be based on an expected sales
price of the home, but on a wholesale value that would be at least 20 percent
lower than that, said Mark Dowling, the chief executive officer of the Inland
Valleys Association of Realtors. (The value would probably be based on the fair
market value of the mortgage -- the home price minus many transaction costs -and thus far lower than the fair market value of the home itself.)
27
A2 Charities
Paula Lavigne, Athlete charities often lack standards, 2013, ESPN
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9109024/top-athletes-charities-often-measurecharity-experts-say-efficient-effective-use-money.
That mystery was heightened by an eye-opening report on Sunday's "Outside the
Lines," which found that 74 percent of 115 athlete charities investigated fell short of
acceptable nonprofit standards used by the top three charity watchdogs.
Paula Lavigne, Athlete charities often lack standards, 2013, ESPN
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9109024/top-athletes-charities-often-measurecharity-experts-say-efficient-effective-use-money.
Some specific examples of what "Outside the Lines" found after conducting
interviews and examining documents: NBA forward Lamar Odom's charity that
promised money for cancer research has not given a dime in grant money to any
cancer entity in its eight-year history. Phone numbers listed for NFL receiver Randy
Moss' charities ring to a private residence in the Canadian province of Manitoba. New
York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez's two foundations stopped filing tax returns
about five years ago, leaving almost $300,000 from a fundraiser unaccounted for.
2: Idea in which you're sprinkling money back to the poor
28
A2 Ballet
1) No reason to look at ballet over all other sports
Turn: Ballet is sexist, don’t subsidize ballet
Lewis Segal, The Times' dance critic, “The Shape of Things to Come” The LA Times, April
1, 2001
Ballet forces females to accept what society wants them to look like. It tells them that in
order achieve perfection, you must deform your body and natural figure that in it of itself
is sexist and dangerous
Ballet perpetuates female stereotypes
[Modern Dance Pioneer Isadora Duncan warned]
"Ballet condemns itself by enforcing the deformation of the beautiful woman's body," modern dance pioneer
Isadora Duncan warned nearly a century ago, describing a situation she found to be "the result of the training
necessary to the ballet."
At the heart of this training is something one might call natural selection, or anatomy-is-destiny. This
principle holds that ballet isn't just a matter of a woman mastering difficult steps, but of being able to define
an idealized silhouette, that flowing, unbroken, sculptural arrangement of hyper-extended limbs and torso
called ballet line.
In other words, if you happen to be born with the "wrong" body, all the classes in the world won't make you
look right in a tutu-the uniform for classical conquest and symbol of the sylph sisterhood. Alas, the small,
compact Fredrika Keefers just don't fit the mold.
2. Ballet is dangerous
29
Jennifer Dunning, “Eating Disorders Haunt Ballerinas”, New York Times, July 16 1997
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/16/arts/eating-disorders-haunt-ballerinas.html
''The problem is much more common in middle- and upper-class women, particularly
white women and young women under 25,'' Dr. Warren said. ''Dance is one of the worst
areas. The average incidence of eating disorders in the white middle-class population is 1 in
100. In classical ballet, it is one in five.'' Most are female students and the youngest female
professionals, particularly those with less physical facility and less-than-perfect bodies. Older
women tend to suffer from less serious eating problems, like yo-yo dieting and the age-old
dancers' regimen of diet soda and cigarettes,which affect about 46 percent of professional ballet
dancers, according to Dr. Hamilton.
30