November 20, 2017

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday November 20, 2017 vol. CXLI no. 105

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Morrison delivers keynote address at Princeton and Slavery symposium

ON CAMPUS

By Isabel Ting contributor

Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison took the stage on Nov. 17 to kick off a scholarly symposium for the Princeton and Slavery Project, an academic exploration of the University’s historical engagement with slavery.

Morrison, the first African-American woman to win a Nobel Prize, also had a campus building renamed in her honor in July.

“I am not humble,” she said during her keynote address. “I came here because they’re going to rename a building with my name.”

The renaming of West College to Morrison Hall came largely as a result of student agitation and protests in 2015 and subsequent University efforts through the Campus Iconography Committee. The Black Justice League, which spearheaded the efforts, helped to catalyze a reassessment of iconography and alumni legacies, most notably that of former U.S. and University President Woodrow Wilson, Class of 1879.

Morrison joined Martha Sandweiss, founder and director of the Princeton and Slavery Project,

and Tracy K. Smith, director of the University’s creative writing program and U.S. Poet Laureate, to discuss race, justice, and the University’s historical ties to slavery.

Sandweiss characterized Morrison as someone “who perhaps more than any living writer has challenged us to imagine the experience of slavery itself and grapple with its lingering impact on American lives.”

An American novelist, essayist, editor, and professor emerita at the University, Morrison won the Pulitzer Prize in 1998 for her novel, “Beloved.”

She was also awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1993, selected by the National Endowment for the Humanities for the Jefferson Lecture (the U.S. federal government’s highest honor for achievement in the humanities), and presented with the Presidential Medal of Freedom by former President Barack Obama in 2012.

Through her own research, Morrison concluded that, while slavery in all civilizations was inevitable due to its lucrative nature, what was not inevitable was the “powerful, bloody social movement” against abolition, as seen from

APRIA PINKETT :: PRINCETONIAN STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison discusses implications of the Princeton and Slavery Project.

the bloodied attacks on abolitionists by the University’s students to the journeys of the University’s founders, trustees, and nine presidents who owned slaves. Morrison compared navigating between slavery and the University’s history to “navigating between a swamp and an iceberg.”

Morrison’s talk, which she gave with a soft, steady voice, was spirit-

ed and included the occasional self-deprecating joke. But she addressed the serious issue at hand with gravity.

“The history of Princeton’s involvement in slavery, both its support of the institution and the abandonment of that culture, is a long and complicated one,” she said, calling the history “embarrassing and shameful.”

The academic process to assess, reveal, and divulge the University’s ties to slavery are positive steps, she said.

While Morrison recognizes that the University is not alone in its attempt to study its own ties to slavery, she believes that the University “is one of the places that has leapt far beyond predictable acknowledgments of See MORRISON page 4

STUDENT LIFE

Thomas ’18 named Rhodes Scholar

By Hannah Wang contributor

Thomas is one of six students in the SINSI program and an RCA. ON CAMPUS

Foner, Allen discuss legacy of slavery at U.

By Samvida Venkatesh senior writer

Princeton is a perpetual living museum whose candid history can illuminate not just the past, but the times in which we live, said Eric Foner and Danielle Allen ’93 in a panel discussion on “The Princeton and Slavery Project: How it Changes Our Understanding of American History and Poses a Challenge to Historical Commemoration.”

Allen, director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard, said that the University and its peer institutions tend to view their tourists as prospective students

In Opinion

and present their history from an admissions and recruiting point of view.

She argued, however, that as living museums for the country, these institutions are charged, beyond their local responsibility to students, with applying correct historical standards to their work.

Foner, a history professor at Columbia, added that Princeton’s commemoration of such a history in the Princeton and Slavery Project was truly in the nation’s service, encouraging the real historical practice of critical inquiry in a time when “fake history is emanating from the highest offices in the land.”

See FONER page 4

Columnist Jessica Nyquist examines the moral complexities of donations to the University, and columnist Liam O’Connor asks us to think on Princeton’s relationship with veterans. Page 6

A. Darling GS ’70 Scholar and a recipient of the R. W. Van de Velde Award from the Wilson School for outstanding junior independent work.

Thomas serves on the Community House executive board, the Office of International Programs Student Advisory Board, and the Students for Education Reform board, and he is a Pace Center service fellow. He is also a residential college advisor in Rockefeller College.

STUDENT LIFE

USG discusses Puerto Rico resolution, Verdú statement

By Jacob Gerrish contributor

At the Undergraduate Student Government’s weekly meeting a week ago, U-Councilor Diego NegrónReichard ’18 attempted to persuade the University to house and educate Puerto Rican students displaced by the Hurricanes Irma and Maria. At the Council of the Princeton University Community meeting Nov. 13 — a day after the USG meeting — President Eisgruber turned down the suggestion.

This week, USG sought to respond, and it passed a new resolution recommending

actions the University can and should take to address the needs of Puerto Rican students on and off campus.

In addition to the Puerto Rico resolution, USG debated a second resolution regarding the sexual harassment case against professor Sergio Verdú and confirmed new members of committees in its weekly meeting on Nov. 19.

Negrón-Reichard introduced Senate Resolution 1-2017 which advocates that the University adopt a general policy on the effect of natural disasters on the University community and directs the University to en-

Today on Campus 7:30 p.m.: Gary Karr, acclaimed as “the world’s leading solo

bassist” (Time Magazine), makes a very rare public appearance in a guest artist recital with pianist Harmon Lewis. Richardson Auditorium.

gage in direct relief efforts.

After Eisgruber’s refusal to host Puerto Rican students, Negrón-Reichard said he met with other University officials to adjust his resolution’s policies.

The resolution asks the Office of Undergraduate Financial Aid and Student Employment, the Directors of Student Life, and the Undergraduate Admission Office to be proactive in reaching out to current and prospective students adversely affected by natural disasters.

“For Puerto Rican students that need financial aid, they haven’t come forSee USG page 5

WEATHER

COURTESY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Jordan Thomas ’18 was one of 32 students awarded the prestigious 2018 Rhodes Scholarship, as announced by the Office of the American Secretary of the Rhodes Trust.

Thomas, who hails from Newark, N.J., is currently pursuing a concentration in the Wilson School and dual certificates in Portuguese and African American

Studies. He is interested enhancing access and opportunity for disadvantaged populations through law, public policy, and education.

In 2017, the Wilson School named Thomas as one of six students chosen for the Scholars in the Nation’s Service Initiative, an internship that he served at the Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education. Thomas is a Gilbert S. Omenn ’61 and Martha

HIGH

46˚

LOW

34˚

Sunny chance of rain:

0 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Monday November 20, 2017

Photo Essay: 2nd Annual Menstruation Celebration

By Juliet Oh ’21

Monday November 20, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

0101110110100010010100101001001 0100100101110001010100101110110 1000100101001010010010100100101 1100010101001011101101000100101 0010100100101001001011100010101 0010111011010001001010010100100 1010010010111000101010010111011 0100010010100101001001010010010 1110001010100101110110100010010 1001010010010100100101110001010 1001011101101000100101001010010 0101001001011100010101001011101 1010001001010010100100101001001 0111000101010010111011010001001 0100101001001010010010111000101 0100101110110100010010100101001 0010100100101110001010100101110 1101000100101001010010010100100 1011100010101001011101101000100 1010010100100101001001011100010 1010010111011010001001010010100 1001010010010111000101010010111 0110100010010100101001001010010 0101110001010100101110110100010 0101001011101101000100101001010 0100101001001011100010101001011 1011010001001010010100100101001 0010111000101010010111011010001 for (;;) 001010010100100101001001011100 { 0101010010111011010001001010010 System.out.print(“Join ”); 1001001010010010111000101010010 System.out.println(“Web!”); 1110110100010010100101001001010 } 0100101110001010100101110110100 0100101001010010010100100101110 0010101001011101101000100101001 0100100101001001011100010101001 0111011010001001010010100100101 Dream in code?

0010010111000101010010111011010 0010010100101001001010010010111 Join the ‘Prince’ web staff 0001010100101110110100010010100 1010010010100100101110001010100 1011101101000100101001010010010 1001001011100010101001011101101 0001001010010100100101001001011 1000101010010111011010100101001 join@dailyprincetonian.com 0100100101001001011100010101001 0111011010001001010010100100101 0010010111000101010010111011010 0010010100101001001010010010111 0001010100101110110100010010100 1010010010100100101110001010100 1011101101000100101001010010010 1001001011100010101001011101101 0001001010010100100101001001011 1000101010010111011010001001010 0101001001010010010111000101010 0101110110100010010100101001001 0100100101110001010100101110110 1000100101001010010010100100101 1100010101001011101101000100101 0010100100101001001011100010101 0010111011010001001010010100100 1010010010111000101010010111011 0100010010100101001001010010010 1110001010100101110110100010010 1001010010010100100101110001010 1001011101101000100101001010010 0101001001011100010101001011101 1010001001010010100100101001001 0111000101010010111011010001001 0100101001001010010010111000101 0100101110110100010010100101001 0010100100101110001010100101110 1101000100101001010010010100100 101110001010100101110110100010 0101001010010010100100101110001 0101001011101101000100101001010 0100101001001011100010101001011 1011010001001010010100100101001 0010111011010001001010010100100 101001001011100010101001011101 1010001001010010100100101001001 0111000101010010111011010001001

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Monday November 20, 2017

Morrison: My remarks on Princeton U. erected memorial to and slavery are simply appetizer, full students who fought in meal is the work of several lifetimes Civil War on both sides MORRISON Continued from page 1

.............

slavery,” since the project includes the voices of slave descendants, local African Americans, and diverse student and faculty populations.

Since everyone was “dirt-poor” in her hometown of Lorain, Ohio (which has a median income of $35,330), poverty was an equalizing factor, but when she attended Howard University in 1949, the line between races clearly emerged.

She remembers seeing the fountains that were

labeled “colored” and “white,” and at the time, she thought “that was a hoot because who would spend money building those fountains twice.”

During her college years, she also “learned about the shades of hue within the black community — whole societies based on color.”

“My remarks [on Princeton and slavery] are simply an appetizer,” said Morrison. “The full meal is the work of several lifetimes.”

She suggested that students ask themselves what they ought to be working toward to dismantle racial oppression.

When asked about the current political debates on controversial statues and monuments, Morrison said that statues of controversial history should not be removed.

Instead, she suggested that people discuss their offensive nature and perhaps “put up another statue that says the opposite.”

While more can always be done, Morrison did not seem worried about Princeton’s progress in uncovering its ties to slavery, even in the face of setbacks. As she eloquently put it, “What would life be without problems?”

FONER

Continued from page 1

.............

Yet, despite living through an explosion of scholarship on black histories, Allen cautioned the audience against letting these histories slip into the “seas of forgetfulness.”

She described the importance of weaving together the strands of oral history with traditional sources, particularly for black and Native American histories that might lack written records. Although schools will often dismiss such stories as “impossible” to recount, citing a lack of reliable sources, Allen encouraged scholars to seek out and verify oral history as an untapped wealth of information.

Indeed, student researchers at Columbia were able to uncover newspaper advertisements in Columbia (formerly King’s College) and New York for the purchase, selling, and capture of escaped slaves in spite of scanty records, said Foner, who is directing the Columbia University and Slavery Project.

He emphasized the many similarities between Princeton and Columbia.

For example, many of the early presidents and trustees of the two universities owned slaves, and donors often derived much of their wealth from the slave trade.

However, Foner said that Princeton’s reputation as the Southern Ivy was certainly justified. Columbia had only a dozen students from the Southern states for the first century since its founding and had virtually no students fight for the Confederacy in the Civil War. Princeton, on the other hand, erected a memorial in 1921–22 to its students that fought in the Civil War, but is unique in the country in not listing the sides for which each soldier fought, said President Eisgruber, who moderated the discussion. Foner suggested that such a memorial reflected the reconciliatory mood of the 1920s which insisted that the real meaning of the Civil War lay in honorable sacrifices on both sides, thereby entirely excluding AfricanAmericans and the ques-

tion of emancipation. He recommended installing a plaque by the memorial to acknowledge the reality of U.S. society of the time, to which Allen added that the University must attempt to draw a distinction between addressing its current ethical questions and understanding its past.

Telling these histories in full is also essential to complete representation in democracy, said Allen whose book “Our Declaration” was chosen as the 2016 Princeton Pre-read.

She claimed that as the 13 colonies were coming together to form a democratic republic, the question of representation was discussed as a mathematical concept. Yet to the civil rights activist W.E.B. Du Bois linked cultural and political representation, claiming that the right to vote was not simply a need to protect oneself but the “expression of a desire to be a co-creator in the kingdom of culture,” said Allen.

Foner expressed dismay that interest in such a Du Boisian conception of citizenship, for which one requires a broad education of the sort provide at U.S. liberal arts institutions, was quickly dying out on both sides of the political spectrum. Eisgruber countered, adding that the feedback he had received on the Princeton and Slavery Project highlighted the non-partisan way in which Princeton historians handled a delicate and difficult topic.

Eisgruber said that Princeton was thus rendered a place where faculty, students, and the community could practice the art of good citizenship while having difficult conversations, a setting that he hoped would be emulated across the country as a means of understanding justice through history. Allen recognized that changing the records in such a manner would likely puncture many narratives that people held dear, but that a gentle and empathetic change would enable this commemoration of justice.

The discussion was part of a larger symposium on the Princeton and Slavery Project, held in McCosh Hall 10 on Saturday at 1:30 p.m.

T HE DA ILY

Enjoy drawing pretty pictures?

Like to work with Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator or InDesign?

Join the ‘Prince’ design team! join@dailyprincetonian.com

Monday November 20, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page 5

ON CAMPUS

Slavery symposium panels discuss Southern legacy, antebellum campus opinions on abolition

By Isabel Ting contributor

After former University president Samuel Finley passed away in 1766, the slaves he had owned were sold in an auction outside of what is now the Maclean House, underneath the American sycamore trees that are nicknamed “liberty trees.” The names and fates of these slaves are still unknown, but their stories — intrinsically tied to those of the University’s — are being assessed and analyzed for the first time in the University’s history as part of the Princeton and Slavery Project.

The project is the result of years of research led by history professor Martha Sandweiss and involving multiple graduate student seminars and first-year seminars.

The research findings from these courses were published on a website this November, along with videos, interactive maps, and primary source documents.

To mark the project’s completion, the University hosted an academic symposium from Nov. 17– 18, involving academic lectures, artistic exploration in plays and sculptures, panels, and a keynote address by Nobel Laureate and Professor Emerita Toni Morrison.

After Friday’s keynote address, a panel of student contributors to the Princeton and Slavery Project joined college presidents and other leaders in the movement to investigate University ties to slavery, in order to share their research findings and experiences.

According to the panel, in the mid-1800s University students largely hailed from the South.

Joseph Yannielli, postdoctoral associate at the Gilder Lehrman Center of Yale University, reported that the University’s Class of 1851 was 63 percent Southern. In particular, Trip Henningson ’17

noted that Mississippians made up a significant proportion of the University’s student body by the mid-1800s.

“Slavery became part of the DNA of Princeton,” said Yannielli.

“Princeton became renowned as a safe space for slaveholders.”

In fact, Craig Hollander, an assistant professor of history at The College of New Jersey, told the story of 60 University students who assaulted an abolitionist who was visiting the town in 1835. The students claimed that they had the lynch law on their side and burned the abolitionist’s papers, forcing him “to run for his life out of town.”

Hollander further explained that the more Southerners that matriculated at Princeton, the more the University depended on the South for support. Hollander noted that to maintain harmony, most members of the University’s community, Northerners and Southerners alike, avoided potentially inflammatory discussions about the morality of slaveholding. One Charleston newspaper stated in 1857 that the sentiments of Princeton students and faculty were Southern in character, and that the University was the only Northern institution in which this was the case.

Yannielli criticized the “catastrophic failure of moral leadership” among the University’s faculty who encouraged their students to put profit before people and property rights before human rights.

While, on campus, some University students favored slavery in the mid-1800s, in town, there was a thriving free black community.

According to Isabela Morales, a Ph.D. candidate at the University’s Department of History, free African Americans worked as vendors, cooks, or assistants; donat-

ed to abolitionist organizations; and sheltered refugees. University students who called themselves “Southern blood” resented the free black community’s visibility.

Defenders of slavery, according to Morales, claimed that African Americans could not support themselves — that free blacks lived in destitution and were not better off than slaves.

The University’s historical ties to slavery are further complicated by the legacy of John Witherspoon, the University’s sixth president, who simultaneously advocated for liberty and lectured against the abolition of slavery in New Jersey. Lesa Redmond ’17 reported that Witherspoon privately tutored two free AfricanAmerican men, discussed the possibility of funding education for a free black Virginian, and baptized an enslaved man to free him from sin. Still, Witherspoon compared slaves to horses and and defined them as a form of property.

After the panel discussion, Prairie View A&M University Interim President Ruth Simmons and Northwestern University professor Leslie Harris discussed the efforts their universities have made to confront their connections with slavery. The talk, titled “The Princeton and Slavery Project: How it Shapes our Broader Understanding of Universities and Slavery,” was moderated by Wallace Best, a professor of religion and African American studies at the University.

Other universities that began researching their ties to slavery before Princeton’s project have received positive feedback from their communities. Harris said that one good outcome of the Transforming Community Project at Emory University, which she co-founded and directed and

Verdú statement to be modified, voted on before next meeting USG

Continued from page 1

.............

ward because it’s embarrassing to ask for more money,” Negrón-Reichard said.

More specifically, the resolution calls upon the University to support institutions of higher learning in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands affected by Hurricanes Irma and Maria.

Senator Eli Schechner ’18 inquired how the University might determine the threshold for harm done by different disasters.

“I think the criteria as evidenced in the substance of the resolution should be in cases where the communities affected are not able to rebuild and rehabilitate by their own power and require a lot of external support,” UCouncilor Ben Press ’20 said.

After amending the resolution slightly for wording, the Senate passed the resolution.

U-Councilor Pooja Patel ’18 presented Senate Resolution 2-2017, urging the University to intensify its disciplinary actions against Verdú, who was found responsible for sexual harassment in a recent Title IX investigation.

Graduate student Yeohee Im alleges that Verdú sexually harassed her on multiple occasions over a twomonth period. In response, the University allegedly required Verdú to attend an eight-hour training session.

Verdú remains employed by the University.

“There is just a huge disparity in power between a Ph.D. student and advisor that can affect you really for the rest of your professional career,” Patel said.

Patel also noted that despite additional allegations against Verdú, other women

were not willing to publicly accuse Verdú.

“No one was willing to come on record because of obvious personal and professional ramifications involved,” Patel said.

With respect to the broad nature of the resolution’s language, Patel spoke on the necessity of an immediate statement about Verdú that the Senate may revise later.

She said the resolution must also allow for the inclusion of the Graduate Student Government’s developing list of policy proposals regarding sexual misconduct.

Other USG members indicated concern about the oblique language regarding elevating punishment for Verdú when USG members are not aware of Verdú’s precise punishment.

“I’m not comfortable with that given that we do not know the precise punishment,” Press said.

Vice President Daniel Qian ’19 responded that the Senate is aware at least of what actions the University did not take.

The Senate decided to pass Schechner’s motion to amend the resolution. Patel will revise the resolution to include citations for the exact magnitude of Verdú’s punishment and for a quote from Provost Deborah Prentice. Voting on the resolution will occur electronically prior to the next meeting.

Social Committee Chair Lavinia Liang ’18 discussed tabling for suggestions and merchandise in Frist on Nov. 27–29, as well as the Jingle Ball tickets giveaway and holiday art sale for charity on Dec. 5.

Additionally, President Myesha Jemison ’18 in her President’s Report and UCouncilor Ethan Marcus ’18 in his review of the CPUC

meeting on Nov. 13 spoke of the need for greater publicity for the Campus Iconography Committee, the CIC Portraiture Nominations Committee, and the CPUC Committee on Naming.

The Senate voted to confirm Preeti Iyer ’20 as UCouncilor, Sophie Torres ’21 to the Social Committee as design coordinator, Rachel Hazan ’21 to both the University Student Life Committee and the Project Board, and Zarnab Virk ’20 to the Project Board.

Hazan is also a contributing copy editor for The Daily Princetonian.

The next USG meeting will take place on Dec. 3 at 7:30 p.m. There will be no meeting Nov. 26, the first Sunday after Thanksgiving break.

was a multi-year program designed for the entire institution to rethink and confront its own race history, was that students and faculty felt great relief that they could talk about the past and be “given the permission to be honest.”

“As our community becomes more diverse, it changes the stories we want to tell,” said Harris. There was not a day when she worked on the project that she did not feel hopeful.

“If you are willing to engage the question, [through] small movements with butterfly wings, things start to change,” said Harris. “When histories or bad things are hidden, it’s in there, and you can feel it. You can feel bad things.”

Henningson acknowledged that this project “could hurt” and that the project could “shatter some ideologies” that people have regarding Princeton.

Simmons, who established the University Steering Committee on Slavery and Justice at Brown, faced difficulty in reconciling her identity with the investigative project. Many people urged her to not take on the project. In

their eyes, the study would be “tainted” simply because she was African American. Her identity caused the validity of the study to be questioned, and the immediate reaction to the project was overwhelmingly negative.

“Those who are descendants of slaves aren’t given the same authority to talk about slavery as whites are,” Simmons said.

Despite the difficulties, Simmons recognized that “the overwhelming importance of telling the truth governed everything.”

She believes that people are better served when they can talk candidly about events that have transpired.

“I think universities miss the point when they hide the light,” said Simmons. “Hiding the light means we become corrupt and scheming like other institutions, [and that is] very harmful to us as institutions. There are intruders that want to uncloak the dishonesty of the University. Our best defense is to do it in the light and with the utmost integrity because others will uncloak that if we don’t.”

Opinion

Monday November 20, 2017

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Honoring service and sacrifice Liam O’Connor columnist

Princeton is inextricably linked to the military and its veterans.

University alumni have long played leading roles in military affairs, from the dedication of “Armistice Day” by President Woodrow Wilson, Class of 1879, to David Petraeus’ GS ‘85 ‘87 ascension to generalship.

This isn’t by coincidence. Joining the military is the highest form of being “in the Nation’s service.” Currently, the University is planning to expand its undergraduate class size by 10 percent.

It already has a strong ROTC program for encouraging students to join the military, but is sorely lacking when it comes to accepting those who have already served.

Last year, the University had only one veteran undergraduate. In light of Veterans Day last week, Princeton should strengthen its commitment to military ties by increasing the number of veteran students in these larger classes.

The new Mudd Library exhibit shows how countless Princetonians answered the call to serve by joining the military. In 1917, 99 percent of students were either actively training or serving in the

military for World War I. Over two decades later, students went to war again, and 355 lost their lives in World War II while fighting to end tyranny. Alumni placed bronze memorial stars on dormitories to honor their sacrifices.

The Mudd Library notes how, “the GI Bill’s federal benefits, brought thousands of veterans to campus immediately following the war.”

As wars continued from the late twentieth century into the twenty-first, Princeton students continued to serve in the armed forces. Take General Mark Milley ‘80, for example. After receiving commission in the Army through Princeton’s ROTC program, he was deployed on missions ranging from peacekeeping in Bosnia to counter-terrorism in Afghanistan, and ascended through the ranks to become the Army’s 39th Chief of Staff. But he’s only one of countless other Tigers who excelled while “in the Nation’s service.”

While we often think of soldiers purely in terms of battlefield courage, some of their work is “in the service of humanity.” As U.S. Army Captain Zachary Beecher ‘13 told Princeton Alumni Weekly, “I try to remember the kids I’ve met here in Iraq” and that,

“they’ve lost so much. We owe it to them.” In Afghanistan, soldiers are building schools and renovating hospitals to alleviate the war’s damage. Meanwhile, the Air Force has been delivering relief supplies to Micronesia for the past 63 years.

Joining the military is a noble way to serve the nation. While one may disagree with the political reasons behind various wars, a soldier’s primary duty is — as mentioned in the oath of enlistment — to, “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” They risk their lives to protect the document that secures our freedoms and democratic government. For this reason, the University should help more of the veterans who have protected our rights.

Being a soldier has never been easy. It means that a person has to prioritize the country’s safety over one’s own pursuits for a portion of their lives. Doing this requires enduring long deployments away from family, surviving the horrors of warfare, and then facing the challenges of reintegrating into society upon return home. Princeton has been offering admissions to U.S. military veterans, and it should expand this program to help address the

latter problem.

But veterans’ service doesn’t end when they come home. Many join veterans organizations such as the Vietnam Veterans of America and Veterans for Foreign Wars (VFW). In fact, Franklin D’Olier, Class of 1898, served as the first national commander of The American Legion, now the world’s largest veterans organization. These groups lead community service projects, advocate for federal policies, and encourage general citizenship through activities such as voting campaigns and teaching flag etiquette. Princeton’s student body would surely benefit from these service-oriented individuals.

While celebrating Veterans Day this year, let’s not forget Princeton’s long symbiotic history with the military and its veterans. Their sacrifices have allowed us to freely pursue our academic interests at school. The University should support them by increasing its veteran population in its future plans. It’s one way we can thank them for being “in the Nation’s service.”

Liam O’Connor is a sophomore from Wyoming, Del. He can be reached at lpo@princeton.edu.

Campus intertwined with morally problematic donor, renaming not the solution Jessica Nyquist columnist

T

he Sackler family, donors of the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery at the University Museum, has recently been surrounded in controversy for their involvement in the opioid industry and the development of OxyContin.

The emergence of reports describing the family’s role in promoting the drug, prominent in the opioid crisis that causes over 1,000 American fatalities a week, has resurfaced debates at the University regarding donor stipulations and moral obligations.

Some argue that the name should be removed from the gallery in order to separate the University from the controversy. On one hand, displaying the name condones ethically questionable business behavior. But on the other, the art can be enjoyed independently of the donor. Student Beth Wang ‘18 shared her experience of “dissonance between what the Sackler name means to the actual art in the center and this greater context of what the Sackler family is and what they stands for,” as an Art and Architecture major frequently benefiting from the donation.

Though the source of the money is morally questionable, the gallery should keep its name as part of a commitment to the donor, and the art should be enjoyed for its intellectual value independent of the donor’s history. The art can be appreciated for what it is with an acknowledgment but not an emphasis on how it came to exist on our campus.

In his Practical Ethics class, Peter Singer confronted a similar problem of appreciating the contributions of a morally problematic figure. He issued a disclaimer at the beginning of a lecture dis-

cussing works by Thomas Pogge, a philosopher recently accused of sexual assault. Singer explained that the class would continue to analyze Pogge’s ideas and appreciate his intellectual contributions.

He emphasized the importance of using Pogge’s work to learn and discuss without passing judgment on his character. In this way, ethicist Peter Singer practiced this sort of separation between contributor and contribution.

Just as analyzing Pogge’s texts can be evaluated separately from the author, utilizing the Sacklers’ contribution can be separated from the actions and legacy of the family. Some may argue that keeping the name condones the family’s actions and makes the University and visitors complicit in their moral transgressions. However, regardless of the name of the gallery, the reality remains that it came into existence because of their contribution. If enjoying the gallery were morally problematic with the Sackler name, the ethical evaluation should not change with a change in naming. Visitors enjoy the contribution of the Sackler family regardless if it is labeled as such.

But another argument may express concern for the presence of the name itself as it honors and applauds the troublesome business decisions of the Sackler family. Perhaps the label imputes culpability to the University for endorsing and publicly promoting the family. But, unlike buildings named after historical figures, the gallery is named as part of a donation. In this way, the gallery is inextricably linked to the Sacklers and their fortune.

For these two reasons, removing the name is not a viable solution. The retroactive removal would do little to change the University’s involvement with the donation and the donors, and

it would be an unfair breach of commitment to the donor stipulations.

Rather than retroactively questioning the donations that have generously built our campus, the University should focus on evaluating future donations. While the problematic history of the Sackler family should be acknowledged, it is far from the only relevant consideration in the use of the gallery.

As students, how can we expresses contempt for this kind of donation of morally “dirty” money? I argue that enjoying the existing donation does not make students morally complicit in the donor’s actions. As we walk through the gallery and appreciate the art, we do not directly applaud the financial success of the donor.

We appreciate the donor’s contribution and choice to donate, but the art itself is not tainted by the moral wrongs of the donor. The effort to trace the moral pathway of every donation would surely result in discomfort for the use of many buildings; many prominent figures have transgressed at some point. Imagine a Supreme Court confirmation hearing-style process to accept any donation.

This stance does not declare the acceptance of donations as wholly unproblematic but instead considers this sort of retroactive moral evaluation impractical. Had the donation been in the public health department, we may have reason to question the correlation because of the direct connection. On the other hand, the gallery is more morally ambiguous: the art and artists can be applauded and discussed without reference to their donor. However, we as students can impress on the administration the importance of thoroughly vetting future donations to prevent our University from endorsing figures that we students find morally problematic.

T HE DA ILY

News. Opinions. Sports. Every day. join@dailyprincetonian.com

For example, the campus group Princeton Private Prison Divest consistently protests the investment of the University’s endowment in private prisons and urges the administration to take responsibility for their financial endorsement of morally wrong businesses. This group asserts that our profiting from one of the “most pressing and severe human rights crises in the United States” is “clearly in opposition to [University] values.” The student group collected a consensus of students through a referendum, 89 percent voting to divest out of 30 percent of the undergraduate population, to express to the administration that the student body resents our complicit involvement in these immoral funds.

Art and archaeology major Isaiah Nieves ’19 considers the he has “unfortunately been complicit in benefiting from and even implicitly supporting” the family by exploring the gallery. I disagree that the use of the gallery, especially without knowledge of the donor’s history, involves visitors in the moral controversy. Appreciating the art does not pass judgment on the morality of its donor. Using this donation as a reference, the administration should continue to vet donors and consider the moral implications of involvement with funds. As students, we should emphasize our concern with this issue and hold the administration accountable for future donation acceptances. It is a reality that the gallery exists as a result of problematic funding. But the name should remain as a commitment to the donor stipulation and the contribution should be utilized without visitor remorse.

Jessica Nyquist is a junior in computer science from Houston, Texas.

She can be reached at jnyquist@ princeton.edu.

vol. cxli

Sarah Sakha ’18

editor-in-chief

Matthew McKinlay ’18 business manager

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Kathleen Crown William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Lisa Belkin ‘82 Francesca Barber trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73

141ST MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Garfinkle ’19 Grace Rehaut ’18 Christina Vosbikian ’18 head news editor Marcia Brown ’19 associate news editors Kristin Qian ’18 head opinion editor Nicholas Wu ’18 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Emily Erdos ’19 head sports editor David Xin ’19 associate sports editors Christopher Murphy ’20 Claire Coughlin ’19 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Lyric Perot ’20 Danielle Hoffman ’20 web editor Sarah Bowen ’20 head copy editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Omkar Shende ’18 associate copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 head design editors Samantha Goerger ’20 Quinn Donohue ’20 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19

NIGHT STAFF copy Daniel Te ’21 Jade Olurin ’21 Armani Aguiar ’21 Hannah Freid ’21 Marina Latif ’19 design Dante Sudilovsky ’21

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: The Daily Princetonian is published daily except Saturday and Sunday from September through May and three times a week during January and May by The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., 48 University Place, Princeton, N.J. 08540. Mailing address: P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

Subscription rates: Mailed in the United States $175.00 per year, $90.00 per semester. Office hours: Sunday through Friday, 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Telephones: Business: 609-375-8553; News and Editorial: 609-258-3632. For tips, email news@dailyprincetonian.com. Reproduction of any material in this newspaper without expressed permission of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., is strictly prohibited. Copyright 2014, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

Opinion

Monday November 20, 2017

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Blessings Grace koh ’19

..................................................

Grappling with the world’s toughest problem Jon Ort

contributing columnist

L

ike every Princeton student, I feel compunction to study almost every minute of the day.

But, when I consider the millions of people who face the challenges and indignities of extreme poverty, worrying about the difference between an “A-” and “B+” seems like an unimaginable luxury.

A recent discussion with renowned ethics professor Peter Singer reminded me of how very fortunate I am to choose between made-to-order omelets and chia seed pudding every morning at breakfast. While I diverge from Professor Singer on a number of issues, he raises a compelling argument about our obligation to help the global poor.

Singer contends that private citizens of the United States and its affluent counterparts could and should do much more to help developing nations. He posits that a donation of $800 achieves relatively little in the United States. But, the same amount given to an impoverished Afghan family, which may earn the equivalent of only two dollars a day, would be an incredible windfall.

I subscribe to Singer’s altruistic view, presuming that people in need, rather than corrupt governments, would receive the full

donation. The venerated New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof echoed this approach when he visited campus last month. Incidentally, Singer interviewed him.

Kristof argued that we underestimate the potential of education to lift capable individuals out of extreme poverty.

We attend an institution that encourages us to grapple with global poverty. On campus, professors and visiting speakers sustain critical dialogue about how we can alleviate poverty, as my experiences in the past month reveal. Unfortunately, most students are financially dependent on their parents, precluding the philanthropy that Singer and Kristof envision. If we cannot give money, how are we to help the voiceless and impoverished who live thousands of miles away?

Last Wednesday, veteran reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner Katherine Boo, whose seminal work, Behind the Beautiful Forevers, revolves around her time living in a Mumbai slum, delivered the second annual Distinguished Teaching Lecture in Service and Civic Engagement. Boo advocated for rising above our usual impulse to portray the extremely poor only when tragedy strikes. She argued that the stories of these individuals – their daily strivings, travails, and triumphs – carry tremendous import.

By listening, we come to see the world’s most disadvantaged for the people they are. We should educate ourselves by reading books like Boo’s, perusing columns like Kristof’s, and becoming familiar with arguments like Singer’s. We should pay attention to economic goals and policies adopted by the United Nations, for these developments shape the economies of developing nations.

We should express our gratitude for the outstanding opportunities at our fingertips. By appreciating our University, we can better comprehend the immense scale of global inequality. We can keep our daunting academic challenges in perspective with the truly harrowing fight for survival that so many others face. If we are to stay true to our avowed pursuit of truth, grades should not be the most important cause on campus. Otherwise, we risk falling out of touch with reality.

We should trade our narrow focus on personal achievement for a broader worldview. A sleepless night spent wracking our brains over problem sets and papers may or may not improve our GPA, but heeding the globe’s poorest people enriches our understanding of the world.

Jon Ort is a first-year from Highlands Ranch, Colo. He can be reached at jaort@princeton.edu.

U. endowment: Legitimately earned and rightfully kept Miguel Caranti

contributing columnist

Two events have recently made the University’s endowment a subject of debate: the GOP tax plan proposal and the release of the Paradise Papers.

Together, these highlight the multifaceted controversy over how universities handle their billion-dollar endowments and how the government moderates that use. On one hand, University officials expressed formal opposition to the proposed taxes on the grounds that the endowment funds academic work and financial aid, and on the other, Princeton and others have drawn criticism precisely for employing funds in offshore investment.

My simple reply to these criticisms is that the University has every right to employ its capital free from restraint so long as it abides by the law.

The Paradise Papers, which comprise of leaked documents from Bermuda-based law firm Appleby, name 104 American universities as having offshore interests and their release raises several obvious concerns.

They reveal a disconcerting lack of transparency, despite

the fact that a university is not required to disclose the risk of investment, even to its board of directors. While Princeton has not been cited as investing in fossil fuel industries, multiple universities have departed from making only “green” investments, rousing alarm among students. As a private institution, Princeton correctly maintains the right to discretion with its investments, as long as no illicit activity is suspected.

The leaked documents also make evident how universities cleverly avoid taxes by investing in blocker corporations offshore. Investments in these corporations in tax-exempt jurisdictions have cost the U.S. treasury millions of dollars and have contributed to Princeton’s 12.5% investment gain, which have brought the endowment value to $23.8 billion. Together with tax breaks already in place, these investments continue to swell university endowments across the country.

Tax avoidance in the media has come to mean something close to “theft,” placing the spotlight on these maneuvers as if they were an evil not yet made illegal. What makes this “evil” is that Fed has less

money in its pocket. Princeton and other universities have done nothing against the law and they can use their money as they please. Made to seem like a sign of guilt, their secret use of blocker corporations is simply good business practice.

When investments depart from a school’s core mission, they incur a tax like other corporations, and so also like them, they invest in areas with less or no tax.

The proposed tax bill, which aims at drawing revenue from universities with endowments determined to have too much money, appeals to the arguments of equality with other businesses and of anti-elitism.

Princeton holds more than 4% of total endowment assets, according to a 2015 analysis by the Congressional Research Service. Moreover, with money being lost to the U.S. treasury by offshore investments, the move would seem all the more reasonable. But what does it mean to have too much money?

Princeton, with the highest endowment per capita in the U.S., receives criticism for using only very small portions of its revenue toward financial aid, in spite of its boasts of generosity. This does not mean

Princeton has too much money – there is no such thing – but it points to an issue between students and the school. The government has no place. Taxes on revenue, if anything, will decrease the amount of aid a great percentage of students receive, which is higher than other private universities. They cause less investment in human capital and the economy in general.

Surely there is a sense of elitism, which generally carries a negative connotation, but it is an elitism that brings tremendous good and (potentially) leads to a common benefit, especially in education on all levels. There is nothing wrong about intellectual elitism.

Princeton provides a wealth of resources to the country in research, intellectual dialogue, professionals, and academics.

As University officials have expressed, the returns on investment support these resources.

They provide opportunities for students in academic pursuits and in their clubs and projects.

Regardless of the fact that returns may not be used to a fuller potential, the University provides a greater good to society than the federal government.

I think it’s enough to point

out that in 2017, the government allocated $525 billion dollars in tax revenue for the armed forces. It has no position to talk about taxing wealthy organizations when its military draws more funds than Walmart, the largest company in the world. The government does spend this money, but one should question how much it does for the general populace from which it took this money to begin with.

Princeton University is taxexempt because it is a nonprofit institution. Its central concern is education, placing it on par with charitable organizations. The managers of the University endowment work in the legitimate interest of education. When it earns those funds by investing in hedge funds and private equity, then it abides by the same rules as businesses. Investing offshore brings in legitimate capital which in one way or another supports education. If education is good, then no federal restraints should be placed on its funds.

Miguel Caranti is a first-year from Houston, Tex. and can be reached at mcaranti@princeton. edu.

I’m reclaiming my joy Madeleine Marr

contibuting columnist

Last semester, Princeton Students for Gender Equality (PSGE) and Princeton Students for Reproductive Justice (PSRJ) hosted the first Menstruation Celebration, a festive event in Frist Campus Center meant to both infuse joy into a discussion of a stigmatized topic and raise awareness about problems of access to menstrual products for those who need them. Additionally, sponsors of the event emphasized the acceptance of all uterus-owners and the disconnect between biological function and gender expression.

While the response to the event was generally positive, some remained skeptical about the necessity of the discussion. Others derided the event as frivolous, dismissing the fun and tonguein-cheek nature of the event as “silly.” The Princeton Tory, a conservative magazine on campus,

described prizes that were raffled off at the event as “interesting,” a comment which PSGE characterized in a written response as derisive.

Having just held the second Menstruation Celebration, the importance of incorporating joy into political activism and its political legitimacy as a feminist tactic again attains relevance.

Reclaiming happiness within activist work is a worthy aim, and does not detract, but rather contributes, to the overall goal of equality and destigmatization that PSGE and PSRJ strives towards with this event.

The H-Spot, a recent book published by Jill Filipovic about the future of the feminist movement, points out that “when it comes to pleasure, our political forces run the gamut from indifference to outright hostility, either ignoring any interest in feeling good or writing off pleasure as immoral, hedonistic, or lazy.” She makes a persuasive argument about the importance of happiness on

a broader level, gained through fulfillment that has been denied from women in this country via sexist policies and institutional obstacles. Part of that conception includes deriving joy through everyday experiences, including the event that every uterus-owner experiences once a month (or so): a period.

Katherine Fleming ‘19, a copresident of PSGE, described the Menstruation Celebration as a “fun way to break with people’s expectations that periods are the worst, something to be ridiculed.” She cited TV sitcom bits that show “that time of the month” as a something to be suffered through, as well as the prevalent concept in the political sphere that female leaders would be incapacitated once a month (and thus unable to effectively govern). One example: when asked what the downsides of having a female president would be, Marc Rudov, a political blogger, responded “You mean besides the PMS and the mood swings,

right?” Fleming, along with the other coordinators of the event, aims to demonstrate that periods should not only be destigmatized, but also celebrated.

Unashamedly reclaiming menstruation is a legitimate political act that contributes towards the goal of battling masculinedominance and the belittlement of the feminine.

Furthermore, the actual celebration incorporates joy into activism in a way that increases the efficacy of the event and sponsors self-care, which is also a radical act. Fleming acknowledged that holding the event in Frist, a public space on campus, is “confrontational,” but the location choice and exciting nature of the event draws people in, encouraging them to learn within a party atmosphere. Princeton students are inundated with emails about events and issues to care about, so finding a new way to appeal to an increasingly apathetic audience is integral, even if it means breaking “necessary” taboos, as

some have accused the Menstruation Celebration of doing.

The event aims to be fun and address serious issues about period stigma and lack of access to menstrual products. The absence of menstrual products in prisons has only recently been addressed, menstrual products are still taxed as a luxury item in some states, and food stamps don’t include them in the list of covered items. Closer to home, Princeton still does not provide menstrual products in all of its bathrooms, and PSRJ and PSGE are working to remedy this absence.

The aim of the Menstruation Celebration is admirable, and the incorporation of happiness into both the experience of menstruating and the activism itself represents a novel interpretation of feminism that includes women’s emotional well-being.

Madeleine Marr is a first-year from Newtown Square, Pa. She can be reached at mmarr@princeton. edu.

Sports

Monday November 20, 2017

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S SOCCER

Soccer stuns No. 2 Tar Heels in OT, advance to NCAA quarterfinals

By Chris Murphy associate sports editor

The 2017 Princeton women’s soccer season has had its fair share of exciting, big time games. But none compare to the Tigers’ stunning 2–1 victory over North Carolina, advancing them to the NCAA quarterfinals in the most exciting, high-stakes game of the season.

Familiar faces and veteran leadership led the Tigers to their wins against the No. 2-ranked team in the nation and the No. 1 seed in Princeton’s corner of the bracket.

Junior forward Mimi Asom opened the scoring when she scored an unassisted goal after UNC keeper Samantha Leshnak attempted to clear the ball only to have it end up in Asom’s possession. The goal came within the first four minutes of the game, continuing the Tigers’ trend of scoring early in their games. Asom nearly extended the lead to 2–0 later in the first half, but Leshnak made a nice save to keep the game at 1–0. Moments later, UNC would get on the board when Bridgette Andrzejewski launched a header into the Tigers’ net for her eighth goal of the season. With the game tied at 1, both teams

prepared for an exciting and hard-fought second half.

Neither team seemed willing to give in during the second half as the defenses kept this game knotted at 1 apiece. The Tigers weathered the storm of two separate UNC f lurries, one during the 50th minute and another that began during the 62nd minute. Perhaps the most nerve-wracking time for the Tigers came in the final minutes of the second half; after a shot by Alessia Russo was saved by sophomore keeper Natalie Grossi, senior defender Mikaela Symanovich received a yellow card leading to a shot by Joanna Boyles that hit the crossbar and foiled the Tar Heels’ best chance of winning the game. Grossi would finish the game with seven saves in net, while the Princeton defense faced 24 shots in the game. The second half ended quietly after that f lurry of shots, and the Tigers played their second overtime game in a row.

Unlike the last game, however, this one did not go all the way to penalty kicks. Instead, Princeton ended the game in the 98th minute, when sophomore forward Abby Givens netted her 11th the goal of the season off

COURTESY OF PRINCETON ATHLETICS COMMUNICATION

Despite being outshot by UNC, the Tigers held on to clinch an upset with a 2-1 victory in overtime.

assists from Asom and senior defender Natalie Larkin.

The goal also sent the Tigers into the NCAA quarterfinals where they await the winner of UCLA vs. Virginia.

Princeton continues its best tournament run since 2004,

when it advanced the the semifinals after a 3–1 victory against Washington in the quarterfinals. The game will be played this Friday or Saturday depending on the outcome of other games.

The Tigers took down the

most decorated women’s soccer franchise in a thrilling showdown. With only one more win needed to advance to their second NCAA semifinals, the Tigers are waiting for their turn to etch their name into the history books.

Tigers sweep Yale, clinch bid to NCAA WOMEN’S VOLLEYBALL

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

The women’s team will return to the NCAA with an automatic bid.

By David Xin sports editor

With a bid to the NCAA on the line, the Tigers put together a strong performance to sweep Yale in the Ivy

League playoffs. Princeton and Yale led the Ancient Eight this season, sharing a piece of the Ivy League title. The tie meant a playoff match in New Haven would determine which side would enter the NCAA. The Tigers clinched

their return to the tournament with an emphatic 3-0 victory over the bulldogs.

Despite the strong performance, the Princeton team did not start the match with their usual proficiency. In fact, the Bulldogs pulled ahead early, boasting a 17-7 lead in the first set. It seemed certain the Yale side would take the first set, but the Tigers had other ideas.

Showing the resilience that served them well the past three seasons, Princeton strung together two crucial runs to swing the momentum and put them back into their favor. Sophomore outside hitter Natasha Skov would put the final nail in the coffin with a remarkable kill to put the Tigers up 1-0.

The Princeton team would

keep the pressure on Yale the rest of the game, never giving the Bulldogs an opportunity to get back into the game.

Sophomore right side hitter and Ivy League Player of the Year Maggie O’Connell spearheaded the Princeton offense with 12 kills. Junior middle blocker Nnenna Ibe added 8 kills, hitting .421. All-Ivy sophomore setter Jessie Harris paced the offense with her 32 assists, helping lead Princeton past the best defense in the Ivy League.

The Tigers also posted a strong effort on the defensive end. Senior libero and co-captain Maddie Huber posted 19 digs in the final Ivy League match of her career while sophomore outside hitter Devon Peterkin added 14 digs to the Princeton effort. Princ-

eton managed to keep Yale’s hitting percentage to just .153 while maintaining a .230 hitting efficiency themselves.

The Tigers, 10-4 in the Ivy League, have plenty to be proud of as they look back in the season. Despite a strong pressure from Yale throughout the season, the Princeton team showed resilience when it mattered most. With the win, the Tigers have qualified for the NCAA tournament for the second time in as many years.

Last season, the Princeton squad faced off against a tough No. 10 BYU team that ultimately defeated the Tigers in three tough fought sets.

The Tiger’s next opponent will be announced during the NCAA Selection Show this coming Sunday.

MEN’S BASKETBALL

Princeton falls to St. Joseph’s, start season 0-3

By Jack Graham staff writer

Eight months after winning the inaugural Ivy League Championship in Philadelphia, Princeton Men’s Basketball returned to the City of Brotherly Love to face St. Joseph’s in its 3rd non-conference game of the season. This time, however, the Tigers failed to come away with a win, falling 7158.

The game remained tight throughout the first half.

Princeton scored the first 5 points of the game, but St

Joe’s responded quickly.

Devin Cannady was particularly effective for the Tigers in the first half, connecting on 5 three pointers in the half. Neither team was able to take a commanding lead, and Princeton went to the locker room for halftime trailing 32-31.

Roughly midway through the second half, St Joe’s began to pull away, as Princeton’s offense went stagnant.

Princeton was unable to replicate its hot shooting in the second half, connecting on just 3-15 second half three pointers. Princeton led 48-

Tweet of the Day

“The Tigers defeat No. 2 North Carolina, owner of 21 NCAA title, and are going to the NCAA quarterfinals. UCLA vs. Virginia tonight at 9 to decide the Tigers’ next opponent. Wow.” Princeton WSoccer (@ PrincetonWSoc)

45 with about 10 minutes remaining in the second half, but St. Joe’s went on a 14-2 run over the next four minutes to take a 59-50 lead. Princeton struggled to contain St Joseph’s Freshman Taylor Funk during this period; he scored 10 of the teams 14 points on the run.

With 5 minutes remaining, Princeton trailed by 10, as the raucous St Joe’s home crowd began to come alive. A serious comeback effort never materialized, and St. Joe’s ran out the clock to secure the 71-58 win.

Cannady led the Tigers in

scoring with 22 points. Cannady was hot from behind the arc for much of the game, shooting 6-10 from 3-point territory. The other two members of Princeton’s Big 3, Myles Stephens and Amir Bell, added 13 and 15 points respectively. Combined, the three players scored 50 of Princeton’s 58 points.

Funk led the way for St Joseph’s, scoring 23 points, and James Demery contributed 13.

St Joe’s was careful with the ball throughout, committing only 4 turnovers and forcing 9. St. Joe’s shot well, finishing with a 47% field goal

Stat of the Day

3474 yards Chad Kanoff broke Ivy League singleseason passing yards record with 3474 yards this season.

percentage and a 37% 3-point percentage, compared to 41% and 31% for Princeton.

With the loss, Princeton fell to 0-3 on the season, though the losses have been at the hands of strong teams from power conferences.

The team will return home Wednesday to continue its non-conference schedule against Lafayette. In order to begin racking up wins, the team will need continued stellar performance from its stars, Cannady, Stephens, and Bell, as well as increased contribution from its role players.

Follow us Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!