Issuu on Google+

Letters to the Editor: Responses to Susan Patton ’77


Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Friday april 5, 2012 vol. cxxxvii no. 38


{ } HIGH


61˚ 33˚

Morning showers. chance of rain:

60 percent

Follow us on Twitter @princetonian

In Opinion The Editorial Board discusses elitism among students. PAGE 4

Today on Campus 8 p.m. Relay For Life, a fundraiser hosted by the American Cancer Society, will feature Howie Day and performances by campus groups. Dillon Gymnasium.

The Archives

April 5, 1968 A day after Martin Luther King Jr. passed away in Memphis, the University held a memorial service in the Chapel and requested a moratorium on classes in honor of King.

PRINCETON By the Numbers


The number of candidates the New America Foundation interviewed before choosing Slaughter as new president.

News & Notes

Joke e-mail warns Dartmouth students of “zombified student”

a joke e-mail sent April 3 to students by the Dartmouth president’s office warned students of the presence of a “zombified student” who had been exposed to an experimental pathogen in the college’s Life Sciences Center. A similar prank e-mail was sent to University students on April 1 as an April Fool’s joke informing them that room draw times had been reorganized. The Dartmouth joke email, which originated from “president’” and was signed by Dartmouth president Carol L. Folt, explained the student displayed aggressive behavior that included “charging at and attempting to bite other students.” “We also wish to stress that as a community, we cannot and will not tolerate the derogatory term “zombie” being applied to any member of the Dartmouth community, whether infected or not,” the e-mail read. The letter also assured students that an Infected Student Incident Team had been established to respond to the problem and had confined the “zombified student” to a classroom. It asked students with information that could assist the investigation to come forward. The e-mail included an “artist’s rendition” of the infected student.

4.5 news FOR LUC.indd 1



Chen ’14, Kriz ’14 receive Goldwater By Loully Saney staff writer

Eric Chen ’14 and Daniel Kriz ’14, two juniors in the math department, are among the 271 winners nationwide of the 2013 Goldwater Scholarship, through which they hope to pursue Ph.D.’s in mathematics. The Goldwater Scholars are selected for their academic merit in mathematics, science and engineering. According to the Goldwater Scholarship press release, for the 2013-14 academic year awards, 271 of the 1,107 undergraduate sophomores and juniors who were nominated by their schools received scholarships. These oneand two-year awards will cover the cost of tuition, fees, books and room and board up to a maximum of $7,500 per year. Kriz said that he was encouraged to apply for the scholarship by his residential college dean, who contacted him because of his grade point average. A committee of Princeton faculty members chose four nominees for the scholarship from all the applicants and Kriz was among what he called the “lucky” four. This past summer, Kriz participated in the Duluth Summer Mathematics Research Experience for Undergraduates Program, where he worked to understand See JUNIOR page 2

Slaughter ’80 to transition to president of D.C. think tank By James Evans

in the academy for my entire professional life, and this is definitely something different. I think it’s a perfect fit.” “You don’t leave tenure at a great university lightly,” she joked. New America’s Interim President and Director of External Relations Rachel White said that Slaughter looked like the best candidate from the beginning. “Anne-Marie had exactly the sweet spot of what we were looking for,” said White, adding that the search committee was impressed by Slaughter’s intellectual capacity, creativity and proven record of managing and growing an institution. White explained that Slaughter’s appointment was the result of a 10-month long search process that considered 3,000 names and ultimately

staff writer

Wilson School professor Anne-Marie Slaughter will not be moving to Washington, D.C. following her appointment as president of the think tank New America Foundation. Slaughter will be leaving her post in academia but will continue to reside in Princeton with her family. In an interview Thursday, Slaughter said she will be able to work “at least a few days a week” from her home in Princeton, while also traveling to the capital and New York City, where New America also has offices. “It really was a question of what made the most sense both for me and for my family,” Slaughter explained. “It’s not a radical change — I’ll still be in the world of ideas. I’ve been

Andy Golden

Remnick ’81 to speak on Class Day By Loully Saney

Nassau Weekly. In the announcement sent to seniors designed like a cover of The New Yorker, Class Day committee members Lily Alberts ’13, Caroline Hanamirian ’13 and Grayden Holubar ’13 pointed to Remnick’s “witty humor” as a reason for his selection. “Princeton is nothing but a fantastic memory for me,” Remnick said, adding that he has “nothing but affection and deep feelings,” for the University and that the selection was an “enormous honor.” Remnick said that he was contacted last week with a request to be the 2013

staff writer

Pulitzer Prize-winning author and editor of The New Yorker David Remnick ’81 will speak to the Class of 2013 at Class Day this spring, the Class Day committee announced Thursday afternoon. Remnick began his career as a reporter for The Washington Post immediately after graduation, joined The New Yorker in 1992 and has served as its editor since 1998. While at the University, he worked for both the University Press Club and the

Managing Director of PRINCO

other benefits

taxable compensation Drew Riedl

5 Ronald Davidson Professor Emeritus of Astrophysical Sciences

University President

Managing Director of PRINCO




$619,854 compensation $195,081 benefits

$590,009 compensation $48,036 benefits

$1,432,277 $1,137,666


Class Day speaker, and accepted upon confirming that he would not have to give a “two-hour speech.” At the University, Remnick, a comparative literature major, said he studied what his father described as “fancy English.” He described himself as a “lit nerd” during his undergraduate years. Alongside several of his peers, Remnick also helped found the Nassau Weekly during his junior year. “There is something about journalism — about getting out of the house, seeing See ALUMNUS page 3 U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

2 Jonathan Erikson 3 Shirley Tilghman 4

President of PRINCO










$366,441 benefits


James Gunn

Professor Emeritus of Astrophysical Sciences


Christopher McCrudden

Vice President and Senior Advisor to the President

$602,735 $559,304 compensation $43,431 benefits

phy, she is also a consultant for Google. Given that she will be spending a substantial amount of time in Princeton, Slaughter said she hopes to continue to play an active role in the campus community. “I know that there are a lot of wonderful professors doing the kind of work that I’d love to connect to New America, so I’m hoping to continue meeting faculty, just in a different guise,” she explained. “I would love to continue working with women’s leadership issues with New America and the University… And of course I’m still very happy to be a member of the community and an emeritus professor.” When asked how the Foundation would change under See EMERITUS page 2


Top Ten University Salaries 1

saw 50 candidates directly interviewed. The NAF negotiated the offer for two weeks before officially offering her the position on Tuesday. Slaughter, who is currently a member of New America’s Board of Directors, said she was first contacted about the presidency last summer. According to a release by the NAF, the search committee that appointed Slaughter was led by David Bradley, the chairman of The Atlantic Media Company. Slaughter made waves last summer when she published an article titled “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” in The Atlantic, a magazine owned by Bradley. In addition, the chairman of the Foundation is Eric Schmidt ’76, also Executive Chairman of Google, Inc. According to Slaughter’s University biogra-


Christopher Eisgruber


Peter Schafer Professor of Religion




$510,586 compensation $50,644 benefits

$505,510 compensation $51,869 benefits


Mark Burstein

Executive Vice President



$505,100 compensation $48,427 benefits

$495,458 compensation $51,700 benefits


PRINCO employees received three of the top five salaries among all U. employees. Source: Internal Revenue Service

PRINCO employees earn top U. incomes By James Evans staff writer

The University’s 990 form for the 2010 fiscal year, submitted to the IRS in lieu of a tax return, shows that members of the Princeton University Investment Corporation received three of the top five salaries among all those paid to University employees for at least the third year running. PRINCO President Andrew Golden topped the list with a total compensation of $1,985,391. His compensation was mainly based on his baseline compensation, amounting to $689,200, and a bonus, of $850,198. In addition, he received over $300,000 in deferred compensation. See SALARY page 3


Local attorney pilots personal drone after lunch talk on privacy By Sarah Cen staff writer

Local attorney and privacy advocate Grayson Barber spoke about the increasing availability of drones to the government and general public as well as consequent changes in the nature of privacy at a luncheon

held by the Center for Information Technology Policy on Thursday afternoon. She followed the talk by piloting an Internet-purchased drone from her cell phone. “Drones are flying computers,” Barber said, describing their many capabilities. If airports can now perform full

body scans, then that technology could one day be placed on flying drones, she said. She explained that drones could also be used to spray tear gas over a rioting crowd, to intercept cell phone calls or to take photos from the air. According to Barber, the need to understand and regulate these capabilities

is becoming increasingly important. Otherwise known as unmanned aerial vehicles — or UAVs — drones are either controlled remotely by a human pilot or autonomously through a pre-programed assignment. They have a wide variety of uses, ranging from conducting

military attacks to obtaining video footage. Because no humans are aboard drones, supporters say that drones reduce the safety risks inherent in human aviation. However, Barber said that she hypothesizes that as drones become universally See UAV page 2

4/4/13 11:28 PM

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Friday april 5, 2012

Math majors win national scholarship Barber discusses impact of technology JUNIOR

Continued from page 1


factorizations approaches using additive number theory and explored the behavior of these factorizations. Kriz said he is intrigued by number theory because many mathematical prob-

lems are motivated by the basic properties of integers. Kriz is currently doing research with mathematics professor Chris Skinner; he said his goal is to become a math professor. He explained that his interest in mathematical research and his passion for the field are what contribute

most to his desire to continue with math and enter academia. “Undertaking what is essentially graduate work as a third year undergraduate has been highly rewarding and has greatly increased my technical knowledge,” Kriz said in an essay he submitted for the Goldwater.

They are among the 271 nationwide winners of the scholarship. Chen, also a math major, was the other recipient of the scholarship from the University. Chen is currently writing his junior paper on the cubic nonlinear Schrodinger equation under the supervision of mathematics professor Alexandru Ionescu. Chen said that his passion for mathematics extends back to his elementary school days. He explained that he has really enjoyed the quality of math classes at the University, one of his favorites being Professor Peter Sarnak’s MAT 215: Analysis in a Single Variable. Over the summer, Chen also participated in an REU program at the University of Minnesota’s School of Mathematics. In his work at Minnesota, Chen collaborated with fellow student Dennis Tseng to prove Ghorpade and Ram’s recent “Splitting Subspace Conjecture.” Chen indicated that he hopes to pursue a Ph.D. in mathematics and also plans to enter academia later in life. In the past, Goldwater Scholarship recipients have also gone on to receive postgraduate fellowships, such as Rhodes Scholarships, Marshall Scholarships and Churchill Scholarships.

4.5 news FOR LUC.indd 2


Continued from page 1


available, their use will need to be regulated. “They’re going to get smaller, cheaper and more ubiquitous,” she said. Barber, a politics lecturer at the University from 2003 to 2009, serves as an attorney and privacy advocate. She is currently on the advisory board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a non-profit research group which submitted a petition to the Federal Aviation Administration to recognize drones as a potential threat to “privacy and civil liberties” in 2012. According to Barber, the FAA currently only regulates drones heavier than 55 pounds, but new technologies allow drones to vary dramatically in size based on their use. In response to EPIC’s petition, the FAA has agreed to provide privacy guidelines for drones of all sizes in August 2014, she said. In creating guidelines for drone use, the FAA would need to consider the legal precedents

in constitutional, common and criminal law, Barber said. Potential guidelines for drone use should address the government’s capacity to use drones, the public’s access to drones and the legal penalties for infractions of these guidelines. She focused on the effect the increasing prevalence of drones could have on people’s expectations of privacy in public areas. Barber asked her audience how the government will accommodate a future where drones may occupy the airspace above public areas and explained that if drones can track a person’s whereabouts using face recognition technology, for example, they may interfere with one’s lifestyle or freedom of expression. In addition, Barber addressed the possibility that some people could buy and use drones for stalking, harassment and unintentional trespassing. In the 1946 United States v. Causby case, the Supreme Court ruled that a person only owns as much airspace above his home as he can reasonably use. Thus, current legislation allows drones to be flown over resi-

dential houses, she said. Barber said she believes drones will become ubiquitous and that those who dismiss drones as an inevitable part of life that one cannot regulate are taking “a highly irresponsible attitude.” “Drones are a neutral device,” Barber said. “They can be used for good or for evil.” Following the talk, Barber flew a $300 Parrot drone that she purchased from Amazon. com. Using Bluetooth, she piloted the drone from her iPhone. Made from plastic with an approximate wingspan of 2.5 feet, the device hovered smoothly using four separate helicopterlike blades. Barber’s drone, though not weaponized, had built-in cameras that are currently unregulated by the FAA. The cameras, which continuously refocus based on the drone’s distance from subjects, captured highquality videos that Barber played from her computer. The flight of Barber’s drone was streamed live on the CITP YouTube channel where videos of other CITP talks and events can be found.

Former WWS dean to leave U. post EMERITUS Continued from page 1


her leadership, Slaughter said that only time could tell. “Ask me in a year or six months. One thing I learned while leading the Woodrow Wilson is not to put out a vision until you’ve really had a chance to get to know your institution.” Slaughter will return to working in D.C. having already left a strong track record in the nation’s capital. In 2009, she took a leave of absence from the University to join the State Department as Director of Policy Planning and was the first woman to

hold that position. After completing her tenure in the Obama administration, Slaughter was awarded the Secretary’s Distinguished Service Award for her efforts

“I will miss you all, but will not be far away.” Anne-Marie Slaughter ’80 to coordinate the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development

Review. In a message to the Wilson School community distributed by Dean Cecilia Rouse on Wednesday evening, Slaughter said it was “hard to leave such extraordinary students” but that she also felt it was “time for me to move one step closer to putting ideas into action.” Founded in 1999, the New America Foundation is not affiliated with any particular political or lobbyist groups. According to White, the think tank focuses its efforts on three areas of policy — foreign policy, technology and education — while also encouraging innovative ideas through its fellowship program.

4/4/13 11:28 PM

The Daily Princetonian

Friday april 5, 2012

page 3

U. staff earn substantially less than counterparts at other Ivy League schools SALARY

Continued from page 1


Golden was followed by PRINCO Managing Director Jonathan Erickson who made a total of $1,432,277. He earned $542,704 in addition to a $543,194 bonus. Erickson also received almost $300,000 in deferred compensation. The overall figures also include non-taxable benefits and “other compensation.” According to the form submitted to the IRS return, top PRINCO employees “received incentive compensation from the University based on investment results relative to various benchmark indices, peer group performance and a discretionary factor.” As a non-profit institution, the University is required to make publicly available its three most recent tax returns. University President Shirley

Tilghman received $902,205 in total compensation, slightly less than the $910,626 she took home in the previous fiscal year. Continuing a recent trend,

University President Shirley Tilghman received $902,205 in total compensation. Princeton’s highest-paid employees earned substantially less than their counterparts at other schools in the Ivy League. In FY2010, Yale paid its Chief Investment Officer David Swensen $2,996,165, while Director of Investments Dean Takahashi made $2,250,268. Harvard Management Corporation CEO Jane

Mendillo received $3.5 million in the same period. Also appearing on the University’s FY2010 tax return were several other administrators and professors, including three professors who were given “bonus compensation in accordance with a voluntary incentive retirement plan offered to faculty members who reach retirement age.” Former VP for Finance and Treasurer, Christopher McCrudden received $308,142 in base compensation and $202,444 in additional compensation. McCrudden, who stepped down after the 2010-2011 school year, also received a $190,000 severance payment as part of a “leadership transition.” Similarly, former VP for Development Brian Mcdonald received a $400,000 severance package. McDonald is listed as a former employee in the form. The highest paid professors

in the 2010-11 school year were all given “bonus compensation” in accordance with a “voluntary retirement plan.” Astrophysical sciences professor emeritus Ronald Davidson earned a total of $638,045. His base salary was $210,614, but his bonus compensation amounted to $379,395, not including around $30,000 in deferred compensation. Davidson has been a member of the faculty since 1991, and served as director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory from 1991 to 1996. Two other long-standing members of the faculty also benefited from the voluntary incentive program were fellow astrophysicist James Edward Gunn, with $602,735 in total compensation, and religion professor Peter Schafer with a total of $551,866. Gunn and Schafer also made less in base compensation than

what they received from their retirement bonus.

Princeton’s highest-paid employees earned substantially less than their counterparts at other schools. Gunn first joined the University in 1968, while Schafer was appointed in 1998 and has headed the Program in Judaic Studies since 2005. According to a study con-

ducted by Education Dive, a website that monitors education-related news and commentary, the $148,403 average salary for a full-time member of the Princeton faculty is the 10th highest in the country, trailing only Harvard in the Ivy League. Also included in the tax document was a list of loans granted by the University to its employees. According to the filing, the University “provides home financing assistance on residential properties in the area surrounding the University to eligible employees.” The largest of these was granted to Erickson, who received a $758,398 mortgage. Both University spokesperson Martin Mbugua and Daniel Sherman, a tax accountant in the Office of the Vice President for Finance and Treasurer, declined to comment for this article.

New Yorker editor has “affection” for U. ALUMNUS Continued from page 1

notion of the clubs and lived in Wilson College during his


things, learning things, talking to people and getting yourself out of yourself that was always very appealing to me,” Remnick explained. He said that his interest in journalism developed even before he came to the University. He compared the founding of the Nassau Weekly to “that moment in an old ’30s or ’40s movie when kids get together and want to put on a play.” Remnick was not in an eating club, explaining that at the time he was opposed to the

“Princeton is nothing but a fantastic memory for me.” David Remnick ’81

junior and senior year. Looking back at the beliefs he held

when he was a teenager in college, Remnick explained that he could not justify why he was opposed to the eating clubs as an institution at the time. Alberts, Hanamirian and Holubar declined to comment for this article, referring the The Daily Princetonian to a press release issued Thursday afternoon. Alberts is also a columnist for the ‘Prince.’ Class Day will take place on June 3 after the conclusion of Reunions and one day before Commencement. Last year, comedian Steve Carell addressed the Class of 2012, and Brooke Shields ’87 spoke in 2011.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 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 Reproduction of any material in this newspaper without expressed permission of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., is strictly prohibited. Copyright 2013, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

4.5 news FOR LUC.indd 3

4/4/13 11:28 PM

The Daily Princetonian

page S1

Friday april 5, 2012



On March 29, The Daily Princetonian published a Letter to the Editor from Susan Patton, alumna and President of the Class of 1977. In her letter, titled “Advice for the young women of Princeton: the daughters I never had,” she advises Princeton undergraduate women to “find a husband on campus.” She argues that Princeton is the best place for young Princetonian women to find partners who are

as intelligent and accomplished as they are — “you will never again have this concentration of men who are worthy of you,” she writes. This letter has since generated nationwide response and debate. Should finding a husband be a priority for women in college? Should a Princeton woman’s main aim be to marry her “intellectual equal,” and is it more likely, as Patton argues,

to find that person at Princeton? And what is the message to women who don’t want to marry men — or marry at all? Patton’s letter is only the latest in an extensive and nuanced discussion of career-family balance and marriage in these pages and on this campus. Columnist Cameron Langford discussed how Princeton women could reconcile their desires to be “both a mother and a bread-

winner,” opinion editor emerita Monica Greco suggested including extended family in child rearing to enable young parents to launch their careers, and guest contributor Margaret Fortney supported Princeton women who want to become stay-at-home mothers. And given the breadth of passionate responses to Patton’s letter — both on campus and across the nation — it’s clear that our

community is far from achieving consensus on these issues. We hope to provide a forum for our campus to continue the conversation. The Daily Princetonian asked for reactions to Patton’s letter — below are some of the responses we received from alumni, faculty and parents. Sarah Schwartz ’15 Opinion Editor

To the women of Princeton By Susan Patton president, class of 1977



It seemed to me that all of the wisdom that was being offered to you focused only on your professional development. I take it as a given that you will have a successful career that puts your many talents to productive use. The advice I offer is intended to encourage you to pursue a more holistic approach to fulfilling your life’s dreams — if those dreams include bearing children in a traditional marriage. I want to encourage you to take full advantage of everything Princeton has to offer: a world-class education, as well as a community of people who share your appreciation for aca-

A recipe for a failed marriage? By Catherine Tiedemann Morra ’77 Elizabeth Tiedemann Maass ’78 Charlotte Tiedemann Petersen ’82 princeton alumnae, sisters


s three princeton alumnae — sisters, no less — married to three Princeton alumni, we feel uniquely qualified, and even compelled, to respond to Susan Patton’s Letter to the Editor. Our parents, apparently, hit the trifecta. What was our secret? Was it our mother’s etiquette and decorum classes? Our father’s admonition to earn a return on his investment? Our own desire to make Reunions that much more fun? Sarcasm aside, we are dismayed at Ms. Patton’s suggestion that finding your life’s partner can, or

should, be orchestrated. It’s one thing to be open to finding that partner and quite another to set it as a goal. We were each obviously open to it – probably thanks to having had the good fortune to witness our parents’ healthy marriage — but we each married a man we met at Princeton, not a Princeton man. Ms. Patton’s advice strikes us a recipe for a failed marriage. Finally, we are embarrassed by her elitist tone and aggravated by her decision to identify herself as “President of the Class of 1977,” with its implication that she is speaking for the class. At least one of us can assure you that she is not. Sincerely, Catherine Tiedemann Morra ’77 Elizabeth Tiedemann Maass ’78 Charlotte Tiedemann Petersen ’82

ow that I know I have your attention...

demic excellence and an intellectual curiosity. You have an extraordinary opportunity to find lifelong friends, and maybe a life partner with whom to form a family and raise children. If that’s what you want, I am suggesting that you multi-task during these undergraduate years. This thinking is neither anti-feminist nor retrogressive. It’s practical. Simply put, there is not gender equality in all matters. The window of opportunity for men to marry and have children is almost limitless. You don’t have that kind of time. In the 1950’s, women were encouraged to find a husband early because opportunities for women in the workforce were limited. They had few options, so they married after college and spent the next ten to fifteen years having children. If after graduating, you spend the next

ten to fifteen years invested only in professional development, you will find yourself in your thirties and may have nothing but your career, limited marriage prospects, and a

“Pursue all of your dreams, not just the ones that are politically popular.” loudly ticking biological clock. Interesting how the same advice (find a husband early) is meaningful today, but for different reasons. Pursue all of your dreams

Ambition and all By Haley White class of 2012


y parents met at Princeton as undergraduates about 30 years ago and got married six days after my mother marched through FitzRandolph Gate for graduation. 18 years ago, they got a divorce. I don’t fault my parents for their union — without it I wouldn’t exist. I also don’t fault them for their divorce — they handled it with great dignity and took pains to ensure that my brother and I would not be placed in the middle of their disagreements. Having grown up in a fractured Princeton marriage, I was dismayed to read the Susan Patton ’77 letter last week. One of the many lessons my parents’ relationship taught me was that

the right person is not necessarily the man or woman who has the same academic credentials as you. The right person is the one with whom you feel comfortable building a life and making difficult personal decisions. Reducing the search for that person to an intellectual yardstick leads to poorly framed thinking about an institution that is so beautiful, fraught and complex. I also disliked Ms. Patton’s statement, “As Princeton women, we have almost priced ourselves out of the market.” It suggests that, before reaching out for a new accolade, a woman should stop and consider how much share that achievement will make her lose in the dating market — that, simply by attending Princeton, we have already limited ourselves to a boutique audience that we should not shrink any more. My snarky side asks: Is it re-

ally fulfilling to spend your life striving to maintain as bland an existence as possible so that you will turn off fewer potential suitors? And am I honestly supposed to believe that a good man — the kind with whom you could build a strong family — is actually going to want a woman who has shown little drive or work ethic? My more vulnerable side chimes in: Is it really that absurd to want someone to love me, ambition and all? Sincerely, Haley White ’12 P.S. I also would like to correct a factual error in Ms. Patton’s piece: Heterosexual ladies need not limit themselves to undergraduates. There are many interesting, attractive men over at the Graduate College. If your personal life has hit a lull, go to the DBar.

Why not? By Nicole Clarke class of 2009


was quite taken aback by the online response to Ms. Patton’s letter. The public outcry seemed to tout every possible position from elitism to sexism to antifeminism to she-must-be-totally-crazy-ism. But, truth be told, there are a good very many Princeton women for whom the salient points of her argument are precisely spot on. Speaking from two positions — that of a young professional who is squarely focused on building her career, and that of a woman who would ultimately like to find an appropriate partner — I count myself as one of them. There is such an incredible wealth of information and guidance available for the young professional woman on how to build her career. Even now as I work on my doctorate, there are career seminars for women on how to juggle family alongside scientific aspirations. There are lunchtime networking sessions with women who have risen to the highest ranks of their medical and scientific pursuits. There are entire conferences held to provide professional guidance to female students from across the university campus. It is a privilege to be so well-advised and to have so many resources available as we take these first steps in forging our careers. But, what about the rest of it? There are so many extraordinary women who are completely revolutionizing this world that we live in. Some of them

Untitled-1 4

have built wonderful, lasting relationships with their chosen partners, but in the sea of advice that they offer, often the “love stuff” is left untouched. I am quite thankful that Ms. Patton brought this conversation to the table. At this point in life, solidly in my mid-20s, my present focus is on laying the groundwork for my future career. In the back of my mind, however, there is a consideration of the type of man with whom I would ultimately like to settle down.

“As a Princeton woman you are exceptional. Do not settle for anything, and in the particular context of romance, find the partner who is worthy of you.” Ms. Patton’s argument is based mostly on finding someone who is an intellectual equal. I would offer a modest refinement to her position by saying that I believe one — a man, a woman, a Princetonian or not — should strive to build a life with the person who would make the most ideal match. (It goes without saying that the foundation of that pairing should still be a great love and mutual respect.) For some that is simply an equally “smart” person. For

me, best-case scenario, that is someone who is kind and thoughtful with sound morals. He gets me, encourages me, challenges me and is as capable, as curious and as confident as me. And, he’s a Princetonian. Why? I counter with a resounding why not? We Princetonians are (mostly) a high-achieving, self-assured, cool, crazy and amazingly awesome bunch. The way I read Ms. Patton’s letter was not “QUICK! Get your MRS. degree,” but rather: “Here is a pool of men who will share a great many of your interests, who will not be bewildered by your extraordinary capacity for greatness and who have an equally as potent appreciation for ‘the Orange and the Black’!” She did not say to walk out of FitzRandolph Gate on graduation day and take your Princeton man directly to the chapel. It was simply that there are many of a woman’s classmates who in time could prove to be a great life partner. It would be up to us to use the good judgment to find a good one — because it must be stated for the record that not all Princeton men are gems — but, if romantic partnership is an important part of one’s long-term goals, why not consider the men seen everyday? If as an undergrad you find one, take some time, fill in the gaps, grow up a little and then commit to forever. She does not promise that this is the recipe for lifelong bliss, but it could very well be the start of something good — something really good. It is a valid piece of advice! At the very least, consider it. Taken at face value, there are several questionable elements to Ms. Pat-

ton’s reflections, but we have all been through Writing Seminar and should very well know how to deconstruct an argument. The applicable takeaways as I see them: 1) As a Princeton woman you are exceptional. Do not settle for anything, and in the particular context of romance, find the partner who is worthy of you. 2) Finding a partner is not the only reason to go to Princeton — the suggestion alone is ludicrous — but, while you are on campus (or at Reunions!), perhaps it is worth your while to consider the Tigers among you. Some of them have potential. 3) Do not expect the good ones to always come to you. Sometimes as a woman you have to do a little bit of work. That’s OK. 4) Once you graduate you will, of course, meet men who could very well make you happy. But, practically speaking, the deck is most stacked in your favor while you are at college. Ideal match aside, it is a numbers game, after all. In closing, a response from Ms. Lisa Belkin ’82 balked at the point Ms. Patton made about our “brilliant, resourceful, very well-educated selves” being capable of handling the various hurdles we will inevitably encounter along our career paths. Call me crazy, but I do not question our potential for professional accomplishment. If there were ever a one who could absolutely own the professional landscape, my money is on a Princeton woman. GO TIGERS! Nicole Clarke ’09

— not just the ones that are politically popular. And don’t be afraid to want what you want. Don’t be shouted down by those who want you to want what they want — instead of all you want for yourselves. To those of you who have written to me to express your thanks for my confirming what you’ve been thinking, but were afraid to say out loud, I sincerely appreciate your thoughtfulness. No thanks were necessary, nor were your apologies. I understood why you messaged me privately. Obviously, the opinions I express are my own, and as with any advice... you can take it or not. I wish you continued success and every happiness. Keep talking. Susan A. Patton ’77

A paradox Susan Patton ’77 may find something to consider in the following paradox: My wife of 26 years went to Berkeley, but she has never failed to interest me every day of my life with her. Yours sincerely, Frederic M. Smith ’62

What’s the rush? By Lisa Schmucki class of 1974


arrived at Princeton in the fall of 1970 after seven years in a girl’s day school. Getting married was the furthest thing from my mind. I made so many fabulous friendships with Princeton men, and women, many of whom are my dearest lifelong friends. I’ve met so many wonderful, intelligent, creative, fascinating men since who didn’t go the Princeton, and married a man who went to Berkeley. You can find love at any age, and mature love is often the best. Isn’t it nice to think you can save the best for last? My grandmother got remarried at 86 and said the last years of her life were the best. What’s the rush? Lisa Schmucki ’74


rinceton is an educational institution. It’s not a marriage bureau.” Shirley Tilghman University President

4/4/13 11:36 PM

The Daily Princetonian

Friday april 5, 2012

Take it or leave it By Lolita Buckner Inniss ’83 S’83 P’09


s a woman who attended Princeton and who holds deeply feminist views (and who, full disclosure, has been married for 30 years to the man she dated since freshman week), I have to say that while I disagree with most of Patton’s assertions, I don’t find them especially offensive. After all, women can take Patton’s advice or leave it. While Patton’s tone does seem overwrought and off key in several respects, I don’t find her message much different from any other piece of alumni advice. In fact, I find myself uneasier with the assumption by some women that Patton’s point of view is one that should be suppressed. I don’t agree with much of what Patton says. But neither do I think that Patton’s view should be silenced. Haven’t men told women to shut up long enough without women telling each other (for it is mostly women doing the silencing) to shut up? I for one think Patton ought to speak louder and longer to her points. If she did, we might engender fuller and more constructive engagement on the issue of women’s family lives. I am especially uneasy with the class and race privilege evidenced in the outraged responses to Patton’s letter. There seems to be at work here an implicit understanding that elite college women who look for early marriage with classmates (or perhaps for any marriage at all) are turning their backs on stellar opportunities or are being untrue to bedrock feminist principles such as autonomy or equality. This is problematic because although women come in all stripes, too often norms of feminism are shaped by the elite few. Feminism has been and continues to be the province of the wealthy, the white and the well-connected. Many of these women want to have it all or want a larger piece of the pie. Other women might be content to get any of it at all or might be content with some

of the crumbs from the pie much less a piece of it. It is difficult to frame a broad-based emancipatory feminist program in the face of such starkly contrasting metaphors for female success. The contrast may be especially bleak when comparing wealthy, white women to black women from poor and working class backgrounds. In the con-

“Only with this sort of honest acknowledgement of the conditions facing some women can we achieve significant change for all women.” text of marriage, some wealthy white women, for instance, may be far more likely to have access to well-paying jobs or other resources that obviate the need for a spouse’s financial support. Moreover, given a higher rate of placement in elite firms and more frequent residence in upscale neighborhoods, wealthy white women who do choose to marry may have far more opportunity to find a like-minded mate at places outside of the elite colleges or universities that they may have attended. For poor or working class black women and for some other women of color, there is often less available in the way of career or spousal choice. Even equipped with an elite college degree, highly educated black women from poor or working class backgrounds often earn less than their white, wealthy counterparts, making it harder for them to support themselves

alone. Highly educated black women from poor or working class backgrounds are also less likely than their wealthy white peers to live and work in settings where there are large numbers of people who share their interests or values. Yes, it may be possible to find a suitable mate in other settings. I’ll call such mates diamonds in the rough. Then again, it may not be possible. There are far more rocks in the world than diamonds in the rough. While solid and dependable, a rock is, well, just a rock. This is not to say that elite colleges and universities are brimming over with cut and polished diamonds in the form of highly suitable mates. But I think some of us protest entirely too much when we eschew the seeming elitism of remarks such as Patton’s “you will never again have this concentration of men who are worthy of you.” Certainly I’d adjust that statement to read men or women; heteronormativity is its own form of tyranny. And maybe Patton’s statement it is a bit too emphatic; never is a long time, after all. But the fact is, even if adopting the most antielitist stance possible, a lot of us do think this way. We just don’t like to say it and if anyone else says it we cry foul. Does this mean that I would give my daughter the advice that Patton is proposing? Absolutely not. If my daughter is lucky enough to attend Princeton or a school like it, I want her to view her college years as a momentous first step in a life full of grand possibilities of all sorts. Marriage may or may not be one of them. But, I would also make sure that my daughter understands that for some women, well educated or not, choices and opportunities, if they exist at all, may be narrower and more constrained. Only with this sort of honest acknowledgement of the conditions facing some women can we achieve significant change for all women. Lolita Buckner Inniss ’83 S’83 P’09

Beyond Princeton By Kunle Demuren class of 2011


y issues with the letter by Susan Patton ’77 published in this paper last Friday would fill up many pages, but for this response, I will focus on just a few. An integral part of the foundation that Ms. Patton’s piece rests on (well, besides sexism) is that once her theoretical Princetonian daughters leave the Orange Bubble, they won’t meet very many “intellectual equals”. This very sentiment is the kind of breathtaking arrogance that gives Princetonians a bad name. This attitude is a throwback to an era in which Princeton was a place only for the longestablished “elite,” so I found it extremely disappointing that an alumna who seems to be heavily involved in the University as it is today indulged in this view. This is not to say that Princeton is not a place for the elite anymore, but that elite status is ostensibly based on some merit beyond who one’s parents are. I would not claim that the University has come as far as it should in that regard, but I believe that it is well on its way.

Even if we accept that Princeton is the right kind of elite place, we should not labor under the assumption that it would be that way regardless, simply from the virtue of having been around a very long time. During my four years at Old Nassau, I met some of the most brilliant and erudite people that I have ever known, then or since. (I also saw some of those same people do some really stupid things.) However, I also know plenty of incredibly smart people who didn’t go to Princeton, or even to any school of that reputation. It should never be taken as automatic that a Princetonian is incredibly intelligent; such an assumption demeans the huge intellectual effort that we put in while at Princeton to become better thinkers. It requires agency on our part to take the chance of a Princeton education and make it mean something. There are plenty of men and women in this world who are just as bright and intelligent as any Princeton student, and even others who are brilliant in ways that many Princeton students aren’t. Some of those people went to institutions with the prestige of a Princeton, some went to institutions with far less. Regardless, they do not deserve our scorn

just because they didn’t get the chance that we got. Whether we are evaluating someone’s dating or marriage potential, or merely interacting with him or her socially or in the workplace, a choice they made (or didn’t or couldn’t make) as teenagers shouldn’t change how we perceive them. Ms. Patton may not have intended to condescend to those who graduated from (or didn’t graduate from) “lesser” institutions, but her tone and assumptions do not really allow us to give her the benefit of the doubt. I was only able to go to Princeton as a 17-year-old because the University offered me a substantial financial aid package. I am immensely grateful for that opportunity, and I am almost always immensely proud to be associated with such an institution. However, if the calculators had spit out different numbers, I could easily have attended a university of less prestige. If I had, I would hope that if I had met Ms. Patton’s theoretical Princetonian daughter, she would look beyond credentials on my resume to form an impression of me. Kunle Demuren ’11

What I would say to the young women of Princeton By Priscilla Smart Schwarzenbach class of 1977

(Or any institution of higher education, for that matter ... and precisely what I said to my daughter as she headed off to college — not Princeton) Go off to college determined to get the best darn education you can. Take advantage of the great professors, get a taste of academic disciplines that are new to you, seek out interesting/diverse classmates, play a sport or an instrument, join a club or two and study what you love. Make the most of your time there and allow yourself to evolve. I would bet many of us wish we had done more. Most parents I know are not sending their daughters to college to find a husband. However, if along the way, you happen to meet someone and fall in love (be they your intellectual equal or not), lucky

Untitled-1 5

you. But I would caution you not to get married too quickly. Your education is far from over upon graduation. Particularly for a young woman, it is very important to know you can handle the world on your own. Given the marital statistics, who knows what’s to come. I venture to guess that the divorce rate for Princeton marriages is no better than the national average. If you don’t happen to meet “the one” while an undergrad, please don’t despair. Most of us didn’t. If marriage and family are important to you (as they are to me), remember that the world is full of smart, eligible people. You are no doubt welleducated, ambitious and bound to end up in a milieu where you will meet like-minded people. I certainly wouldn’t spend my precious four years at any university/college worrying about that. Priscilla Smart Schwarzenbach ’77

page S2

Advice for the young women of Princeton (and colleges everywhere): By Helen Coster class of 1998


s a princeton woman who’s been out of school for 15 years, I offer my own experience—and the experience of almost all of my female friends — as an argument for why you should ignore Susan Patton’s advice. At Princeton I spent four years taking classes I loved, juggling 10,000 activities and spending time with friends. I would have liked to have a serious boyfriend, I guess, but I didn’t. A few of my friends married men they met in college. But most, like me, graduated and went out into the world without a wingman. It was hard — sometimes excruciatingly so. I spent my 20s paying my dues in my profession, working long hours while attempting to meet someone. I went on a lot of bad dates, and at times, I envied my friends who didn’t have to navigate adulthood alone. I also had adventures. I climbed Mount Kilimanjaro, learned Spanish and backpacked through Alaska. I rose through the ranks in my career. Every man I dated for any

length of time loved the fact that I worked hard, that I had ambition, that I was curious about the world. They possessed those qualities, too.

“Don’t focus on finding a husband in college. Focus on doing the things you love.” (To Ms. Patton’s point: Yes, some men are attracted to women who are less intelligent than they are. But that’s not a reason to spend college hunting for a husband.) When I was 32, a friend from work set me up with a kind, handsome guy. (He went to Brown, and is super smart, but I don’t automatically correlate intelligence with an Ivy League degree. Smart people are everywhere, and from everywhere. I know you know that.) We got married last summer — almost

15 years after I walked out of FitzRandolph Gate. By the time I met the man who would become my husband, I had grown up, and was well on the way to becoming the person I wanted to be. I had kissed enough frogs to know a prince when I saw one. So here’s my advice, for what it’s worth: Don’t focus on finding a husband in college. Focus on doing the things that you love, and being with people you love. Cultivate your intellectual passion, your extracurricular pursuits, your friendships. When you graduate, pursue a career that excites you. Take risks. Travel. Live the rich, full life of your choosing. What I find most insidious about Ms. Patton’s letter is her belief that her sons have more and better marriage options than you do; that their intelligence is a virtue, while yours is a liability. Don’t believe this for a second. Don’t be scared off by people who tell you that smart women can’t find husbands. The smart guys — the right guys — will be out there looking for you. Helen Coster ’98

Baseless assertions By H. Carol Bernstein P’16 class of 2016 parent


s an advanced-degreed executive officer of a publicly-traded technology company who has 28 years of experience in both for profit and academic institutions focused on science and technology (and Princeton parent of a male student), Susan Patton’s March 30, 2013 Letter to the Editor appears wholly inconsistent with my personal experience as a wife, mother, friend and professional, as well as mentor and sponsor to various men and women throughout my career and 20-plus-year marriage. Moreover, her regressive beliefs, which appear to be based on little more than her own unhappy circumstances, detract from the important responsibilities those of us who are more senior in our careers and lives have to those younger men and women in our personal and professional communities of various academic and socioeconomic backgrounds who look to us for some guidance, assistance and example with regard to career development, “balance”, leadership and social responsibility.

Compatibility and success — whether in the personal or professional realm — are borne of many things but generally arise from and are sustained by common values; superficial measures such as equating mutual attendance at certain academic institutions with a priori “intellectual equality”, or other of the snobbish inanities proffered by Patton, serve as false proxies for them. Furthermore, Patton’s baseless assertions regarding the issues with which current college and newly post-college age women and men are supposedly concerned, and ignorance of the broad dissemination and availability of, and discussion related to, information regarding such issues (including the active debates of the past year alone engendered by thoughtful views of various individuals such as Anne-Marie Slaughter and Sheryl Sandberg like the very one in which Patton “participated”), make me question her supposed qualifications as a “human resources consultant and executive coach”, or at least why any entity or individual who has read her letter would ever consider hiring her for anything even remotely related thereto. H. Carol Bernstein P ’16

Marry her! By April Allison professor of comparative literature


arry her!

Susan Patton’s letter of March 31 reminds me of a piece that preceded AnneMarie Slaughter’s in The Atlantic by a few years: “Marry Him! The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough,” by Lori Gottlieb. After becoming a single mother after age 40, Gottlieb realized she still wasn’t quite living the dream: “The dream, like that of our mothers and their mothers from time immemorial, was to fall in love, get married, and live happily ever after. Of course, we’d be loath to admit it in this day and age, but ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).” At least Ms. Gottlieb does hint at an awareness that not all women are heterosexual, even though she doesn’t seem to acknowledge the existence of heterosexual women who don’t dream of marriage and children (or that lesbians might cherish that dream!). Her advice resonates strongly with Ms. Patton’s: addressing women who are already in the sad predicament Ms. Patton dreads for our female students after graduation from college and are no longer surrounded by “men worthy of them,” Gottlieb doesn’t mince words either. “My ad-

vice is this: Settle! That’s right. Don’t worry about passion or intense connection ... Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go.” As a heterosexual woman who put my ambition to earn tenure at Princeton before my desire to have a family — which as a result has not happened — and as a woman who has gone through two husbands and grueling IVF treatments only to find myself now single and childless, neither of which was part of my youthful dreams, I thank Ms. Patton for this chance to address an issue that’s so central to so many women’s lives and can be a source of so much anxiety. I don’t think it’s pure coincidence that Ms. Patton’s piece comes at the same moment when another issue has come to the forefront of public notice, even though neither Patton nor Gottlieb acknowledge the connection: The question of gay marriage and the variety of relationships and families that are possible. The day after Ms. Patton’s letter was published here, the Marietta Daily Journal published the objections to gay marriage of Georgia GOP Chairwoman Sue Everhart, who “warned that straight people might enter into fraudulent gay marriages to obtain benefits” (Huffington Post 4/1/13). Marriage fraud is of course possible regardless of sexual orientation, yet in practice it doesn’t seem to happen much. My modest proposal is to recommend that it happen much more: What a woman who does

want a family really needs is not a husband, but a wife. The last time I was married, my husband and I would both (simultaneously) wander around our house with arms upraised, lamenting, “Where’s the wife? Where’s the wife?” because that’s what we both really needed. My advice to any woman who dreams of a family is this: Do exactly what those men Ms. Patton describes do, the ones who “regularly marry women who are younger, less intelligent, less educated.” As soon as same-sex marriage is the law of the land — or even the law of your state — go out and get yourself a Russian mail-order bride! Any ethnicity will do, of course, and she doesn’t even have to be younger, less intelligent or less educated — just less privileged, and thus ready to cook, clean and mind your children for you, all for a chance at living your American dream. She’ll doubtless be grateful not to have to get “done” doggy-style on top of all that, and thus will be all the more devoted to serving your other needs. If Mr. Right should still happen along, I’m sure he won’t mind the threesome. Of course, if you’re worried she might just be using you for the green card and insist on alimony payments and half of all you’re worth when she runs off with some guy after a few years — you can always just hire a nanny instead. While she’s rocking the cradle, you’ll be free to find a marriage of true minds with whatever sort of person really rocks your boat. April Allison Professor of Comparative Literature

4/4/13 11:36 PM

Barbara Zhan columnist


Friday april 5, 2013

{ }

A little nicer


he cartoon that ran on Monday parodying Susan Patton’s opinion letter easily summarized the most socially indicative part of her piece: Titled “A universe of women,” it depicted a male stick figure surrounded by multiple beckoning women. This was in response to Patton’s statement that “the universe of women” her junior son can marry is “limitless.” Although she seems to praise Princeton women throughout the piece, reminding them of their “soaring intellect” and saying that women have higher standards for their significant others than men do, it’s little statements like “universe of women” sprinkled throughout her essay, that show us exactly why the status of women is not where it should be by now. Obvious in Patton’s letter is the suggestion that women have to take an active role in finding a husband by being “nicer,” or as I read it, flirtier, towards guys, because men have so many choices while women’s are dwindling year after year. Women are fighting a steeply downward sloping demand, unlike Patton’s sons, who can essentially take their pick. What Patton suggests is similar to the message implicit in every cheap teen magazine — that women have to bend themselves to men’s expectations, or else end up in an unsatisfying relationship with an “unworthy” man.


Rather than being so mindful of pursuing a Princeton relationship and willingly subjugating themselves to external expectations, women should disregard those constraints and live their lives upon their own accord — not just to try to snag a husband.

page 4



Combating elitism


n the aftermath of the publication of Ms. Patton’s letter to the editor, there has been extensive media response to the sentiments she expressed. While commentators have largely focused on Ms. Patton’s advice for young women who attend Princeton, the Board feels that there is a second issue in the letter that has not been given adequate attention by the national media. Specifically, while the Board is concerned by several of Ms. Patton’s contentions, we are particularly troubled by the elitism implied in the letter. Ms. Patton’s letter implicitly assumes that those who have attended Princeton are inherently better than others in society. Though many within our community reject her views on marriage, we believe her view of the superiority of Princetonians is far more common among the student body. The discussion of Princetonian elitism is especially relevant in the wake of the admissions decisions that were released this past week. Over the next month, thousands of high school seniors will decide whether they want to attend Princeton University for the next four years. The University is a wonderful community of intelligent and hardworking students. The student body here has diverse academic interests and a desire to challenge themselves in all facets of their lives. However, attending Princeton will not grant people those desirable traits; students will not be suddenly altered by their choice of college. While many talented and successful students choose to attend Princeton, there are many more who go elsewhere. It is troubling that

vol. cxxxvii

we as a student body sometimes forget to remember that going to Princeton does not change us as people: It does not change our strengths, nor does it eliminate our weaknesses. Furthermore, it is often disturbing to see this elitism extend to within Princeton. It seems that too many among us judge friends or romantic partners by their affiliations with eating clubs, Greek life or extracurriculars. While we sometimes see ourselves as Princetonians, as separate from general society, we also see ourselves as separate from our classmates. We have become obsessed with labels to the point where we sometimes forget the individual behind the label. The truth is that the world is full of hard-working, intelligent people. While many of them attend Princeton, the vast majority of those people do not. Neither Princeton University nor its peer institutions have a monopoly on those qualities. It determinately affects Princeton if society believes that we, as students and alumni, believe that our Princeton education entitles us to some sort of special status within society. Accordingly, we urge the student body to make an added effort to demonstrate humility. There are many wonderful people here, and there is nothing wrong with marrying a fellow Princetonian. However, there is a much larger world outside our beloved Orange Bubble, a world that is full of intelligent and successful people. And these individuals merit consideration as potential spouses just as our fellow Princetonians do.

Luc Cohen ’14


Grace Riccardi ’14

business manager

EDITORIAL BOARD chair Ethan Jamnik ’15

Matt Arons ’13 Zeit Cai ’13 Christina Campodonico ’13 Daniel Cullen ’13 Robert Joyce ’13 Evan Larson ’13 Cara Eckholm '14 Eve Levin ’14 Connor Mui ’14 Ray Chao ’15 Brandon Holt ’15 Thomas Horton ’15 Mitchell Johnston ’15 Daphna LeGall ’15 Lily Offit ’15 Britt Sanders ’13 Varun Sharma ’15 Jillian Wilkowski ’15

Coffee Roulette Jonathan Robinson GS



::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Besides addressing female Ivy League students, it’s not really so different from Seventeen running an article about what nail polish colors to wear to attract guys. Both perpetuate a self-conscious mindset: What do guys want, and am I doing enough to fulfill their expectations? Although finding a compatible significant other is a considerably important objective, I find the deliberateness with which Patton, as well as society, treats this goal unsettling. Rather than letting a Princeton relationship happen naturally, you must keep it as a goal in the back of your mind. When you’re a freshman talking to a guy in your ECO 100: Introduction to Microeconomics precept, you should think to yourself, “Wouldn’t he make a great husband someday?” And even though you were already polite to him, it would really help your cause if you could be a “little nicer.” It’s sad that women today are so much more capable of independence than ever before, and yet, this attitude still exists, its vestiges still carried along by women’s magazines and people like Patton. Asking what men expect only gives them the power to define a woman’s role, which seems like a selfinduced backwards step. Just having the mindset that a man has a universe of women at his disposal while a woman does not is damaging to the perception and status of the female in society. This insecurity also exists in the workplace. In the newly published book “Lean In,” which Patton briefly references, Sheryl Sandberg talks about how women feel insecure in the workplace, preferring to check off boxes and do what others say than to break the rules and take risks for the possibility of a great reward. They ask the same questions in the workplace that Patton implicitly suggests they do in relationships — what does my company expect me to do, and am I fulfilling its expectations? In one example, Sandberg talks about how at a conference, the women would wait for acknowledgement that they belonged at the table before sitting, while the men simply sat down without hesitation. It is this self-consciousness that inhibits women, that seems to willingly allow others to define a woman’s role for her. The most detrimental part of Patton’s article is not that she seems to suggest young marriage, or that she suggests degrees earned are deterministic of intelligence. It is the deliberateness with which she suggests women treat, and essentially pursue, their relationships, as if chasing after a Princeton guy makes a Princeton marriage any more likely. Rather than being so mindful of pursuing a Princeton relationship and willingly subjugating themselves to external expectations, women should disregard those constraints and live their lives upon their own accord — not just to try to snag a husband. Although all of Patton’s advice stems from her very valid suggestion that women should maintain high standards for their future husbands, she imparts an attitude of desperation — act now while you are still young, preferably while you’re still younger than the majority of guys at Princeton. She does say that women can decide whom to marry; indeed, choosing an educated man is a pretty good decision by all accounts. But the choices are limited, so women have to act fast and act purposefully. Patton says nothing of the sort to men.

Barbara Zhan is a freshman from Plainsboro, N.J. She can be reached at

opinion.4.5.UPSTAIRS.indd 3

news Ella Cheng ’16 Lydia Lim '15 copy Jean-Carlos Arenas ’16 Eunice Lee ’16 Bethany Sneathen ’16 Oliver Sun ‘16 Crissy Carano '15 Nicole Kreutter '15 Anna Rubin '15 Emmy Williams '15 design Austin Lee ‘16 Helen Yao ‘15 Heidi Yi ‘15

Making misogyny the problem Lauren Prastien



n April 1st, Fox News Insider’s Megyn Kelly leapt onto the bandwagon of newscasters attempting to parse out some logic from Susan A. Patton’s argument in her now infamous Letter to the Editor. During the interview, Kelly empathized with Patton’s call for Princeton women to find their husbands during their time at the University, citing that intelligence “doesn’t necessarily turn out to be a ‘turn-on’ to some men.” As to substantiate that claim, Kelly referenced comedienne and Princeton alumna Nikki Muller’s Youtube hit “The Ivy League Hustle,” which Patton first referenced herself in her Huffington Post Blog response on March 31. In Patton’s words, “The Ivy League Hustle” does not “address how unsatisfying it is for exceptionally well-educated women to be with men who are not their intellectual equal.” Perhaps not in quite the way Patton does, but Muller does address how dissatisfying it is to be with jerks who are her intellectual equal. Who, by the way, still don’t treat her well. In the video, Muller raps a manifesto that may just be the exact opposite of Patton’s message. Exclaiming that she is going to “stop apologizing for penis” during a date with a cringingly

patronizing Wharton alumnus who smugly underestimates her level of education, Muller emerges from the first movement of the song unapologetic of her Princeton degree. Here, once more, we see the tension of the Princetonian woman’s education not being a “turn-on.” But while Patton urges us Princeton ladies to snatch up a potential husband before he becomes interested an unintimidating woman of “lesser intelligence,” Muller decides that she will be unrepentant about her accomplishments rather than attempting to seek out a man who is a cut above her. This is an attitude that can and should be adopted by any woman in a world that still dictates that she must undersell herself for fear of crushing her date’s ego. Certainly, Patton and Muller are on two sides of the same coin. However, the issue of Patton’s argument — aside from its elitism, sexism, ageism, heteronormativity, presumptuousness, general air of condescension and grabbag of exploited privileges — is that it makes being an educated, intelligent woman something that Princetonian ladies need to compensate and plan for. You know, provided they ever want a husband. But let me meet Patton on her level and pretend I am a resident of the strange little world she inhabits, where all

women want to be in relationships with men and the trope finding a life partner at Reunions is apparently out of the question. Even then, in a world where everyone is heterosexual and wants to be married by 23, I can see glaring issues in Patton’s argument that still divorce her idea from Nikki Muller’s rap. Rather than acknowledging that the problem is we exist in a culture that teaches heterosexual men that being in a relationship with an intelligent woman is emasculating, Patton instead attempts to help women buy back into that system by encouraging them to find a man who is “smarter.” Instead of writing a letter to the son she does have, compelling him to see a brilliant woman as someone who can inspire rather than intimidate, Patton teaches her imaginary daughter to be complicit with misogyny. Faced with a culture that still clings to more-than-residual notions of a man’s worth resting in his intelligence and a woman’s in her sexual appeal, Muller chastises any potential partner that feels their own value will be depreciated by her achievements and abilities and calls for social change, pointing to the absurdity of the fact that her Princeton education makes “anyone with a dick run away.” Muller refuses to let her credentials render her untouchable. On this issue, Patton chugs along, accepting the status quo, telling her

imaginary daughter that she will be untouchable and unappreciated unless she is outdone in intelligence. She places the blame in the woman’s hands, making the misogyny “her problem” while Muller declares misogyny is “the problem” and understands that this is in no way her fault. And, Kelly, unable to recognize the difference, confuses Patton as the answer to Muller. Unfortunately, the chronology is skewed. Muller had provided the solution nearly a year before Patton posed the problem and, in her own Huffington Post Blog response, declared an impassioned “NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!” in the face of being used to defend Patton’s argument. And, when it comes to men who are intimidated by her intelligence, Muller dismisses them as “douches,” as she rightfully should. So I hope that one day I will be able to write a letter to my children, should I have them, urging them to both be and seek out other people — as friends, co-workers and life partners — who do not perceive another’s triumphs as diminishing to their own-self worth. And I will remind my daughters to never, ever apologize for penis. Or, you know, vagina. Lauren Prastien is an anthropology major from Fair Lawn, N.J. She can be reached at

4/4/13 11:20 PM

The Daily Princetonian

Friday april 5, 2013

page 5

Rookie Mingo to start against Harvard Strong defense will be key against Yale BASEBALL Continued from page 6


shot of doing so against Harvard. Bradley emphasized that ERAs are oftentimes inf lated this time of year, but it is worth noting that the Crimson has the highest in the league and has allowed the most home runs so far. In contrast, Dartmouth has the league’s best ERA and boasts two starters, lefty

Kyle Hunter and righty Cole Sulser, with sub-two ERAs. “If they throw Sulser matched up with Hermans, it’ll be as good a pitching matchup as we’ve had in this league in a while,” Bradley said. If Hermans and company continue to pitch like they have so far, the Tigers may only need to slip a few runs past pitchers like Hunter and Sulser, but they hope to do much more than that this

weekend. Comfortable wins would bode well for the remainder of Ivy play, which will pit Princeton against its divisional opponents, all of whom have had good starts to their seasons. A good showing against Dartmouth would bode especially well, as Bradley and his players have indicated time and time again that the Tigers expect to meet the Big Green should they make it to the Ivy championship series.

Tight match expected against Syracuse M. LAX

Continued from page 6


school history, to nine games. The Tigers’ ability to create shooting opportunities will rely heavily on senior attackman Jeff Froccaro, who managed to rip off 10 attempts against Syracuse’s stingy defense last year — five more than any other Tiger. Froccaro, who has tallied a team second-best 20 goals thus far, earned Ivy League co-Player of the Week honors for his fourgoal, one-assist performance

at Brown on Saturday. Through 59 shots this year, he has maintained a shot-on-goal percentage of 53 while also winning 55 percent of his 29 face-offs. Senior attackman Luke Armour, who will be staging his long-awaited return to action this weekend following a concussion in early March, has praised Froccaro’s work ethic all season long. “Jeff is performing at an alltime high both on the field and in the classroom,” he said. “On April Fool’s Day, he submitted two theses: one thesis of his own work and one thesis on

how to write a thesis.” Froccaro and the rest of the Tigers will look to exact revenge against a team they have not beaten since 2009. The contest is the only one that will take place in Princeton Stadium this season, and — as Armour suggested — should be a treat for fans to watch. “[Froccaro] is planning on doing a full front flip while in the game on Saturday. You can’t miss it,” he said. The two teams square off at 5 p.m. this Saturday, and ESPNU camera crews will be present.

CWPA championship on the horizon W. W-POLO Continued from page 6

just starting, still excited and pumped to be playing.” Expectations have been high for this standout squad, and NCAA rankings reflect its place among the nation’s best. In fact, Princeton is the sole team from the East Coast ranked in the country’s top 15. Once this weekend’s slate of games has concluded, the team will turn its full attention to the upcoming CWPA Southern and Eastern Championships. Last year, the Tigers emerged

4.5 sports FOR LUC UPSTAIRS.indd 7

on top in both competitions to earn their NCAA tournament berth. However, a first round loss to USC took the team out of title contention. “It’s time to overcome the losses we had in the beginning of the season and show that we’re a better team,” freshman goalie Ashleigh Johnson said. Johnson, who has started every game in her first year, set a program record for saves in a single game in her first collegiate contest, a hard-fought loss to then-No. 4 Cal. She added that the team knows what it wants to accomplish this weekend.

“We’ve introduced some new plays and we want to master them,” she said. “We want to show that our offense is something to be contended with. Before, we haven’t really had our offense going. But lately in practice we’ve really been clicking.” The action starts at DeNunzio Pool at 1:30 p.m. Saturday, when the Tigers take the pool against Mercyhurst (12-8 overall, 0-3 CWPA) and continues that evening at 7 p.m. when Princeton plays Harvard. The regular season finale against Bucknell begins at 11 a.m. Sunday.


Continued from page 6


the weekend against Columbia and Cornell. These performances pushed her point total to 40 on the season, good for second in the Ivy League. On the other end, Franke saved 17 shots over the weekend, while only allowing 17 goals as well. However, the other reigning co-Offensive Player of the Week plays for the Bulldogs — freshman midfielder Nicole Daniggelis. Daniggelis broke the Ivy League record for draw controls against Lehigh with 15, while also putting up four goals. She currently leads the Ivy League with 46 draw controls on the season, and Princeton will have to figure out a way to deal with that dominance if it hopes to get consistent possession. Also dangerous for Princeton is senior attack Devon Rhodes, who sits fourth on the Ivy League scoring charts with 36 points. Dealing in part with that dangerous Yale offense (11.5 goals per game) will be senior defender Caroline Rehfuss. Rehfuss leads all Princeton defenders in ground balls with 14. Rehfuss also leads the team in caused turnovers with 13 and earned the first Ivy League Defensive Player of the Week honor of the 2013 season. She will also be assisted in defense by freshman Liz Bannantine and junior Liz Cutting, who have combined for 25 ground balls and 15 caused turnovers this season. On the offensive end, McMunn is the primary threat, but she has an impressive supporting cast. Freshman attack Alex Bruno had a breakout six goal performance against Columbia and is currently second on the team with 18 goals. Another key player for the Tigers is senior attack Jaci Gassaway, who led the team last season with 54 points (38 goals, 16 assists). Gassaway has seen a bit of a scoring dip this year, but remains an important contributor with 12

goals and three assists on the year. The keys to the game will be Princeton’s road woes and possession. The Tigers can play with the best teams in the country, as evidenced by their ranking, but have not yet proven that they can win con-

sistently on the road. Another obstacle for Princeton will be Yale’s Daniggelis and her draw control dominance this season. If the Tigers cannot get possession off draw controls and struggle to find a rhythm away from 1952 Stadium, look for a possible Yale upset.

4/4/13 11:42 PM


Friday april 5, 2013

page 6



Princeton looks to continue win streak

No. 7 Tigers to host No. 8 Syracuse

By John Bogle

By John Wolfe


staff writer

On Saturday the women’s lacrosse team (6-3 overall, 3-0 Ivy League) will head to Reese Stadium to take on Ivy League rival Yale (6-4, 0-3) for Yale’s Alumni Day. Princeton is currently riding a three-game win streak, highlighted by big wins over then-No. 12 Johns Hopkins and then-No. 11 Cornell, which has earned the Tigers a No. 14 ranking in the Inside Lacrosse polls. However, the Cornell victory was Princeton’s first road win of the season — they are 1-3 on the road. Couple these road troubles with Yale’s impressive 2-1 home record — their only loss coming to a talented Dartmouth team (7-3, 3-0) — and the stage is set for an intriguing matchup. Princeton comes in boasting the current Ivy League Offensive and Defensive Players of the Week: sophomore attack Erin McMunn and junior goalie Caroline Franke. McMunn earned her second straight Player of the Week honor by putting up eight goals and five assists over

After moving up to No. 7 in the nation with its 15-8 thrashing of Brown last weekend, the men’s lacrosse team will take on No. 8 Syracuse at Princeton Stadium on Saturday. The Orange (6-2, 2-1 Big East) and the Orange and Black (6-2 overall, 2-1 Ivy League) have experienced eerily similar seasons thus far; they sport identical overall and conference records and neither squad has lost a game by more than one goal all year. In fact, both teams fell to the exact same losing scores in their only two defeats: 11-10 and 16-15. The offensive and defensive abilities of the two powerhouse programs are nearly indistinguishable on paper, with Syracuse scoring 101 goals compared to Princeton’s 100 and allowing 70 compared to Princeton’s 72. The Tigers and the Orange have capitalized on 39 and 36 percent of their extra man opportunities respectively, while their man-down units have conceded scores 39 and 45 percent of the time.

See W. LAX page 5


Senior midfielder Jeff Froccaro, last week’s Ivy League co-Player of the Week, has scored 20 goals.

In a game involving two teams nearly deadlocked in every major statistical category, the possession battle will play a large role in determining who takes the upper hand. When the two squads met last season, the faceoff contest could not have been any closer — Princeton won with a 12-11 advantage but lost the game 10-9. This year, the Tigers have taken 51 percent of their face-offs while the Orange have taken only 42 percent. Much of Princeton’s success at midfield can be attributed to the drastically increased workload awarded to sophomore faceoff specialist Justin Murphy, who has already taken 106 draws compared to the 30 he finished with last year. He currently leads the Tigers with a winning percentage of 58, while Syracuse’s most used and most effective faceoff man, junior midfielder Chris Daddio, has won 49 percent of his 130 attempts. Offensively, Princeton will look to extend their streak of double-digit scoring performances, the second longest in See M. LAX page 5


W O M E N ’ S W AT E R P O L O

Princeton to face tests at Harvard, Dartmouth

Tigers to host final three games of regular season

By Stephen Wood sports editor

After a strong start followed by a shutout loss at Seton Hall on Wednesday, the baseball team will try to get back in the win column and keep pace with Gehrig Division rivals Penn and Cornell this weekend as it leaves the Orange Bubble for doubleheaders against Dartmouth and Harvard. The Tigers (5-18 overall, 3-1 Ivy League) swept the Crimson (4-19, 1-3) last year and split a doubleheader with the Big Green (15-3, 2-2) last year at Clarke Field. Princeton needs to get its bats going in order to stay competitive in the Ivy League. So far, the Tigers have relied heavily on the strength of their pitching, getting complete game wins from seniors Zak Hermans and Kevin Link as well as junior Mike Ford last weekend. Performances like those have allowed them to win several tight, low-scoring games, including consecutive 3-1 decisions against Brown on Sunday, but higher-scoring games have not been as kind to them. A 9-1 loss to Yale, the Tigers’ only Ivy defeat of the young season, came after junior starter Mike Fagan struggled and the bullpen could not stop the bleeding. Freshman pitcher Cam Mingo, who allowed no earned

runs in five innings in that game while his fellow hurlers struggled, will make his second collegiate start in the second game against Harvard. Head coach Scott Bradley said he is confident in the rookie, who has a 2.78 ERA and has logged the fourth-most innings of any pitcher on the team this season. “He’s pitched very well,” Bradley said. “He’s a pretty cool customer.” The Tigers will need a solid performance from Mingo, as they do not do well when their pitchers are not on. Princeton has not won a game in which its opponent has scored more than four runs this season. So far, the hitters have had a little trouble stringing hits together. “It’s all up to our hitters,” Bradley said. “A lot of times, these games come down not to how many hits you get but when you get them.” The hits have been coming largely from the top of the lineup, where junior leadoff man Alec Keller and freshman second baseman Danny Hoy are leading the starters with .333 and .300 batting averages, respectively. Though Keller has been stellar and Hoy has been a pleasant surprise, many of the hitters who helped Princeton to its 13-7 Ivy record last year have yet to get it going. They may have a good See BASEBALL page 5

By Andrew Steele contributor

The No. 12 women’s water polo team will begin a threegame home stand at DeNunzio Pool this weekend against conference opponents. The Tigers (17-5 overall, 2-0 CWPA Southern) open against Mercyhurst, whom they defeated last year at home and at the Harvard Invitational by scores of 10-2 and 9-5. Hoping to end their regular season on a high note, they take on Harvard later that evening and Bucknell on Sunday.

Princeton has not lost to the Crimson (13-10, 2-1) since 2004 and leads the all-time series 3011. The Tigers overcame Harvard at home earlier this year in an 11-7 decision. They also hold a substantial edge over their Sunday opponents, leading Bucknell (4-14, 1-2) in the series 32-5. Junior utility Katie Rigler, the squad’s leading scorer, is optimistic about the weekend’s matches; at this point in the year, however, the team has its sights set on the NCAA Championship tournament, which

they made last year for the first time in program history. “Of course we want to win, since it’s the last game for the seniors at home,” she said. “But the games we’re mostly worried about are Easterns and Southerns [Championship Tournaments]. I think we have a way better chance to win than we did last year. Last year was kind of a surprise to everyone. We knew we had it in ourselves. But it’s definitely tougher going in looking to defend your title.” Rigler, last year’s Eastern

Championship MVP, notes that late-season form has contributed to past success and should bring success this postseason. “We’re really consistent at the end [of the season],” she said. She also mentioned that Ivy League restrictions on practice time can affect the season’s conclusion: “Other teams like Michigan and Indiana have been practicing since September. By the end they’re burned out. We’re See W. W-POLO page 5



The softball team will take on Dartmouth and Harvard this weekend, seeking to stay atop the Ivy League. The Tigers are led by sophomore infielder Alyssa Schmidt, freshman first baseman Emily Viggers and freshman infielder Kayla Bose, all of whom are hitting over .400.

Tweet of the day


Follow us

‘Unnamed sports contributor to the Prince: Wait Shaq retired!?’

The men’s lacrosse team will play No. 8 Syracuse at Princeton Stadium at 5 p.m.

Prince Sports is now on Twitter! Follow us: @PrinceSports

sophomore Jack Woodall of the football team, on twitter (doodall50)

4.5 sports FOR LUC UPSTAIRS.indd 8

4/4/13 11:42 PM

Friday, Apr. 5, 2013