Internationals at Princeton tend to be a rather wealthy group who have attended either an international school at home or a boarding school in an English-speaking country abroad
As a former ‘Prince’ opinion editor, I read President Tilghman’s letter in yesterday’s paper with interest. But when she writes that “anonymous debate is no debate at all,” I find myself forced to disagree. Managing anonymity is hard, but banning it would be a mistake.
I understand the desire to try and mitigate these unsavory consequences of speech. But I honestly and respectfully cannot agree with you, President Tilghman, that “anonymous debate is no debate at all.”
There is undoubtedly sexism in the workplace. Female managers are earning an average of 73 percent of the salary of male managers. Women account for only 3.8 percent of Fortune 500 chief executive positions. Yet, it is the overwhelming prevalence of these facts and figures in the media that has turned every gender-related comment into a matter of sexism. Men have been pitted against women in a war of sexes. Women are expected to stand against the patriarchal establishment.
As I sat by the wood fire in a cabin in the woods, Henry David Thoreau reminded me “it is never too late to give up our prejudices.” Our prejudice that our lives need to be busy; our prejudice that we need follow society’s definition of success; our prejudice that our view of ourselves is subordinate to other’s view of us.
What value do you place on readers who go to the ‘Prince’ website to witness the verbal equivalent of a food fight? I very much hope that editors will return to a policy that has served this paper well since its founding in 1876 and ask that its readers “own their words.”
This Board supports integrating the freshman seminar system with the faculty advising system and regularizing contact between peer advisers and students.
When I was in middle school, I had a friend who had moved to a more affluent area. His family was like my family, basically middle-middle class, but many of his friends in the neighborhood were wealthy.
To P/D/F or not to P/D/F, that is the question. And today is the deadline for deciding.
Unlike PCP, I do not mourn the deaths of the 49 Hamas militants, including the architect of Hamas’s missile program, Ahmed Jabari, who have rendered themselves morally liable to harm given their intentional targeting of civilians.
Let us all stand together, despite our different perspectives, in our efforts to end this tragedy once and for all, as we become the beginning of a new narrative of peace.
Since General David Petraeus GS ’87 resigned from the CIA the day after the election, you would think Lindsay Lohan was back on trial.
Make no mistake: Hamas certainly has blood on its hands. But Israel’s warfare will only bring about further death and destruction, not the peace and justice Israel claims to seek.
When I was little, I didn’t want to be a damsel in distress. After doctor, astronaut, and mother, it just didn’t make the cut. Which is why, in the midst of all this talk about hookup culture and gender roles, I’m surprised no one has mentioned another voice on gender roles: our own Anne-Marie Slaughter.
So if someone forces sexual intercourse from you despite the fact that you’ve said no and most likely used force to stop this person, these aspects could constitute a bad hook-up. I get it. These were the words told to Angie Epifano, a former student at Amherst, who wrote a gut-wrenching article about her rape and neglect by the administration. The last thing any sexual assault survivor would want anyone to question is that that maybe he or she wasn’t raped. Or even worse — maybe the victim caused the rape to happen. For a woman’s case, maybe her skirt was too short, she showed a little bit too much skin or she was insinuating that she wanted more from someone else than just to “hang out.” This sort of psychologically cruel and unjust interrogation is what causes victims like Epifano to remain quiet, to allow a criminal to walk free without even a slap on a wrist and most of all, to maintain the pristine, utopia-like images of elite institutions.
As Shruthi Deivasigamani elegantly admonished in her Oct. 18 column, “That the exclusivity exists for the sake of exclusivity and nothing more is something to legitimately complain about.” While I find myself agreeing with this statement quite profusely on nights when I have been turned away from the enticing beats rattling in clubs past the 1 a.m. mark, I occasionally appreciate the exclusivity that these members or passes only nights offer.
