Reclaiming the OWL
In the next few days, you will see some surprising shirts around campus. The officers of the Organization of Women Leaders will be sporting shirts that read, "We're not just HOOTERS" alongside the Hooters logo. Certainly this will raise some eyebrows, and draw criticism from those who will see this as evidence that OWL is not "a serious organization."
Obviously, the officers of OWL are particularly aware of the criticism we might endure in light of the public debate sparked by our USG endorsement. So, why bother with a potentially controversial image? The answer is simple: we want to reclaim one of the most prominent symbols of women's objectification. We want to make it clear that while we are indeed a serious organization that hosts debates on abortion and marches in the Million-Woman March, we are first and foremost women. We have breasts, some of us may choose to wear short skirts, thongs and low cut shirts. We are also feminists. Our aim with these shirts is to reflect the dramatic changes in the feminism of our generation, which allows women to choose diverse ways of reflecting their personal femininity and feminism. Women can choose to wear either pants or a skirt, and the choice is no longer equated with liberation or oppression. Obviously, this is a simplistic symptom of a larger change, but the aim of the "Hooters" shirts is to reclaim the symbols of women's bodies and dress in much the same way that our predecessors were revolutionary because they wore pantsuits to work.
Some have criticized OWL, albeit quietly, saying that we are hypocritical to wear short skirts and go to the 'Street' and still claim to be activists for women. We think this is the problem with today's conception of feminism. College women are afraid to be labeled as feminists, associating it with the bra-burning radical stereotype of feminists that encouraged women to shun makeup and marriage as institutions of women's oppression. Similarly, men are afraid of "feminazis," the militant, man-hating image of feminism.
The real problem with each of these stereotypes is their one-dimensionality; women should have the freedom to shun makeup or marriage as easily as they may embrace short skirts and heels.
Our mission is to make people realize that women are not objects, they cannot be defined by their dress or body, they can be sexy and fun and empowered. Certainly there are plenty of images out there of girls who seek validation through attention from males, and who allow themselves to be objectified and are victims of their sexuality. There are also equally compelling examples of women who flaunt their femininity and own their sexuality, post-modern feminists such as Madonna. These women have shown us that you can wear a bra and fish-net stockings and still be in control of your sexuality. She rebelled against what Debbie Stoller calls the "virgin/whore complex" that you're either demure and a prude, or sexy and a slut. Where is there room to be feminine and be respected?
This year, one of OWL's main goals is to spread the word that "feminism" is not a dirty word. With this shirt, our goal is to draw attention to feminism in all of its forms and meanings. OWL does not presume to embody feminism for all feminists or to speak for all women on campus, but we do hope to draw attention to the many different ways that men and women can express feminism. As an organization, we cannot serve women unless we are comfortable with all facets of being a woman. The Officers of the Organization of Women Leaders
Speech was not sold
I am writing in response to recent opinion pieces published in The Daily Princetonian.
First, I have to believe that any possible links between Meg Whitman's generous donation and her nomination as Baccalaureate speaker are totally spurious. The idea of someone as busy and as already honored as Ms. Whitman spending $30 million for the privilege of giving a speech to the graduating seniors is so absurd as to be laughable and can only reflect a somewhat inflated sense of self-importance on the part of our student body. The fact that she has led a dot.com to actual profits and that she has done it in one of the most sexist of industries should be grounds enough for the invitation. If the Class of 2002 would like a different speaker from whom no financial returns can be expected, I am sure that Kenneth Lay is currently available.
As to campus architecture, the beauty and glamour of Wilson College need no defenders. We may not have gargoyles, but we have really nice table umbrellas. Our model is not necessarily Magdalen College, but more the Via Veneto. Miguel Centeno Professor of Sociology Master of Wilson College
Horowitz and reparations
Please, one last word on reparations for slavery and David Horowitz?
For the past three years or so, I've followed this controversial and often heated issue and across the nation, most white Americans are vehemently against reparations of any sort. Hell, you mention a mere apology for slavery and their shorts get all knotted. I truly believe that if the US government ever considered monetary reparations for black Americans, it would be the start of another civil war.
As for David Horowitz, I am very familiar with his Frontpage Magazine website, a huge message board where perhaps thousands of mostly conservative white Americans rant about "the other race." I only have one thing to say to Mr. Horowitz, go get a real job, advice he readily gives to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
Most black Americans realize that no check will ever be in the mail for slavery reparations, let alone for the 100 years after, the Black Codes, the Jim Crow years, lynchings, burnings, castrations, segregation, stealing of property, oppression, poverty, redlining, profiling and discrimination. The list is endless.
Will it take another 300 years before we realize we're all in this together? Pamela A. Hairston Washington, DC
Read More
What is a Princeton degree really for?
Joel IbabaoSo what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.
So what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.
If there’s one survey you fill out this year, make it the Year End Assessment
Jerry ZhuThe University cares about collecting good data — but it needs to centralize its efforts.
The University cares about collecting good data — but it needs to centralize its efforts.
In defense of ChatGPT
Eliana DuComplete avoidance of AI is not a solution to the issue Johnson rightfully points out. Avoidance merely leaves us ignorant, standing still in a moving world. On the contrary, Princeton students should discuss the use of AI tools in education with honesty and open-mindedness and consider it a novel tool as opposed to a morally objectionable scourge.
Complete avoidance of AI is not a solution to the issue Johnson rightfully points out. Avoidance merely leaves us ignorant, standing still in a moving world. On the contrary, Princeton students should discuss the use of AI tools in education with honesty and open-mindedness and consider it a novel tool as opposed to a morally objectionable scourge.