Page 1

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Thursday September 14, 2017 vol. CXLI no. 65

{ }

Ivy Professors say ‘Think for yourself’ ON CAMPUS

By Jeff Zymeri and Sarah Warman Hirschfield Senior writers


Professor Robert George, one of the co-authors of the statement

best antidotes to bigotry.” Lastly, they explain that a bigot is “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.” “The only people who need fear open-minded inquiry and robust debate are the actual bigots,” they add, “including those on campuses or in the broader society who seek to protect the hegemony of their opinions by claiming that to question those opinions is itself bigotry.” On Aug. 30, George appeared as a guest on Tucker Carlson Tonight, a nightly news series on Fox News. On air, he noted that liberals and conservatives alike share the conviction that scholars should be

U . A F FA I R S

committed to truth. He also warned against name-calling, which he described as “out of bounds.” “Epithets like ‘bigotry’ are used all too often to shut down debate,” he said. George added that he wanted to release the statement before classes started in order to reach students. He contacted colleagues who “share this conviction” about truth-seeking to sign the letter. George, a prominent conservative scholar, has defended freedom of thought and expression several times. In March 2017, he coauthored a statement with University professor emeritus Cornel West, currently a professor at Harvard, encouraging academic comBEYOND THE BUBBLE

Twitter account for Ted Cruz ’92 accidentally ‘likes’ porn video

By Sarah Warman Hirschfield senior writer

Sara Cosgrove, TigerCall Manager


Annual Giving sets record with donation campaign By Katherine Wang staff writer

When the numbers were finally in, the University community had done it again: Annual Giving had set another record campaign total, raising $74.9 million, the highest total in Annual Giving history, and the first year it raised over $70 million. Annual Giving has supported many unique programs since 1940, enabling the University to provide unparalleled intellectual

In Opinion

munities “to engage with anyone who is prepared to do business in the currency of truth-seeking discourse by offering reasons, marshaling evidence, and making arguments.” Signatories to West and George’s statement included professors, students, parents, and members of the clergy. University professors whose names appear on the letter include George, Maria Garlock, Joshua Katz, Thomas Kelly, John Londregan, and Michael Reynolds. Other signatories include Yale professors Paul Boom, Nicholas Christakis, Carlos Eire, and Noël Valis; and Harvard professors Mary Ann Glendon, Jon Levenson, Jacqueline Rivers, Ty-

opportunities and need-based financial aid. According to the official campaign website, undergraduate alumni accounted for more than 80 percent of the total amount raised, with the Class of 1967 raising the greatest amount — more than $11 million. This cycle marks the sixth consecutive year that graduate alumni have raised more than $1.5 million, totaling $1,684,413 from 2,862 donors, and the tenth consecutive year University parents have conSee GIVING page 5

Senior Columnist Liam O’Connor criticizes class-based affirmative action, and Senior Columnist Hailey Siegel challenges Wonder Woman as a feminist icon. PAGE 8

The Twitter account of Senator Ted Cruz ’92 liked a porn video on Tuesday morning. On Wednesday, Cruz clarified that a member of his staff accidentally liked the post from @SexuallPosts. It took an hour before the video was unliked early Tuesday morning. “[T] he offensive tweet posted on @tedcruz account earlier has been removed by staff and reported to Twitter,” tweeted Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier just after 2 a.m. Later that morning, Cruz told reporters the incident “was a staffing issue and it was inadvertent. It was a mistake.” He added that a “number of people” had access to the account and that he was not the one who liked the video. Later, he joked that “[p]erhaps we should have done something like this during the Indiana primary.” Cruz’s denial fell on the deaf ears of @SexuallPosts, which thanked the senator “for watching.” “Follow for the Same Porn @TedCruz Watches,” reads its Twitter bio. Cruz quickly became

subject to mockery from screenwriter Craig Mazin ’92, Cruz’s freshmen year roommate, who tweeted, “Now imagine Ted Cruz is doing this four feet below you in the bottom bunk bed.” “Sadly, the fact that Ted Cruz jacks off to mediocre porn spam is the most human thing we can say about him. This is actually his high point,” he wrote on Twitter. Mazin declined to comment for this article, writing “I’ve said all I have to say about it,” in an email. In 2007, as a Texas solicitor general, Cruz defended a state law banning the sale and advertisement of sex toys in order to protect “public morals.” His legal team argued that “obscene devices do not implicate any liberty interest” and that “any alleged right associated with obscene devices” is not “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions.” “There is no substantive due process right to stimulate one’s genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship,” reads the brief.

Today on Campus 5 p.m.: Nassau Street Sampler at Princeton University Art Museum. Featuring fun food, fine art, and all your friends.

“Ted Cruz thinks people don’t have a right to ‘stimulate their genitals.’ I was his college roommate. This would be a new belief of his,” tweeted Mazin last year. Cruz explained in an interview on Wednesday that he was just doing his job as solicitor general, saying that he thought the law was “stupid” and “idiotic.” He also asserted his belief that “consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want in their bedrooms,” and criticized the media for being “obsessed with sex.” Cruz’s presidential campaign team also drew criticism when — unaware of her background — it cast a porn star in a campaign video. In his book, “A Time for Truth: Reigniting the Promise of America,” Cruz recounts how he, as a 26-year-old law clerk at the U.S. Supreme Court, watched porn with some of the justices in order to determine whether Internet porn should be regulated. “As we watched these graphic pictures fill our screens, wide-eyed, no one said a word,” Cruz wrote.


On August 29, a group of professors from Princeton, Harvard, and Yale released a statement encouraging students to “think for yourself.” The statement was posted on the website of the University’s James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, an institute headed by one of the letter’s co-authors, Robert George, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence. The program is “dedicated to exploring enduring questions of American constitutional law and Western political thought,” according to its website. “‘Think for yourself’ used to be a platitude,” reads the statement, “But in today’s climate of political correctness, it’s radical advice.” Quoting English philosopher John Stuart Mill, the authors warn students about “the tyranny of public opinion,” which discourages minority thinkers from challenging prevailing moral and political views. “Since no one wants to be, or be thought of as, a bigot or a crank, the easy, lazy way to proceed is simply by falling into line with campus orthodoxies,” the letter says to students, telling them to “Think for [themselves].” The authors encourage students to seek truth in their intellectual pursuits. “Open-mindedness, critical thinking, and debate are essential” to this end, they write, and “are our

ler VanderWeele, and Adrian Vermeule. Debra Parker, program manager for the James Madison program, deferred comment to Politics Professor John Londregan, one of the statement’s signatories. Londregan explained that the commitment to free speech does not change in a world of “alternative facts.” “When [Counselor to the President] Kellyanne Conway coined the term ‘alternative facts,’ our exercise of free speech turned her into a laughing stock,” he said. “In a world of censorship, Conway’s feelings, which were doubtlessly hurt by the derision she prompted, would have led to silencing of her critics, and Conway would have shifted from buffoon to Orwellian tyrant.” Londregan also noted the perception that fringe skeptic groups place pressure on freedom of speech. “Unhinged groups are those that are most marginalized when the inconsistencies of their reasoning are exposed through open discussion,” he said. “Of course, sometimes there are groups on the fringes who have an argument worth listening to, and with free speech, we are able to sort through both sets of arguments, discard the craziness, and benefit from the useful – if unpopular – insights of others.” Londregan presented a full account of his decision to appear as one of the statement’s signatories in an letter to the editor for the ‘Prince.’





Mostly Cloudly with Rain. chance of rain:

40 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian


ORL support of Planned Parenthood draws criticism from U. community By Sarah Warman Hirschfield senior writer

On August 11, the University’s Office of Religious Life co-sponsored a rally at the Carl A. Fields Center in support of Planned Parenthood, drawing criticism from some members of the University community. The rally was organized by Run 4 All Women New Jersey one day before six local women ran 44 miles from the Princeton Women’s Center to Philadelphia’s City Hall “to raise visibility and funds for Planned Parenthood of NJ — and to advance the social dialogue about equitable health care, women’s rights, and empowered wellness more broadly!” Both events were advertised by ORL in a Facebook post, which also gave instructions on how to donate to Planned Parenthood on CrowdRise. As of this article’s publication, Run 4 All Women New Jersey has raised $6,592 to support the non-profit organization, which provides reproductive health care and abortion services. According to Rev. Theresa Thames, Associate Dean of Religious Life and the Chapel, who attended the rally, ORL’s “support for this ‘Run 4 All Women’ rally was really focused on the excitement of raising awareness about the work that Planned Parenthood does with supporting men and women and comprehensive health care and the access to such health care.” “This is a conversation about access, this is a conversation about economic justice, this is a conversation about so many things,” Thames explained. “Abortion is just a small part of what Planned Parenthood does.” Some members of the University community remained unconvinced that it was appropriate for ORL to co-sponsor this rally and voiced their concerns accordingly. Alexandra Cavazos ‘19, co-president of Princeton Pro-Life, explained that it was “especially odd that the ORL would want to co-sponsor something not organized by a student group, even while knowing that some of the religious groups represented within the ORL itself – for example, Catholics and many Christians, but also people of other faiths – would likely be strongly opposed to support of an abortion provider.” “I absolutely believe that

ORL’s decision to co-sponsor the event was at odds with its mission to ‘promote the care and support for the many religious and secular communities,’” she said, quoting from the ORL’s description of itself on its website. “I know there are religious and pro-life students who feel alienated by the decision and who feel that ORL has failed to represent them. So, I think there’s a certain level of trust that has been broken for some people,” Cavazos explained. She also suggested that the ORL consider supporting Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC) located in underserved areas as there are “16 FQHC sites for every Planned Parenthood center.” This suggestion was one that Father Gabe Zeis T.O.R., chaplain for the Aquinas Institute, the University’s Catholic campus ministry, also alluded to in an interview with Campus Reform, a conservative news website focused on higher education. Thomas Clark ‘18, president emeritus of the Elizabeth Anscombe Society and a member of The Daily Princetonian Editorial Board, echoed many of Cavazos’ concerns. “Abortion is a very controversial subject in most religious communities,” he said. “By co-sponsoring this fundraiser, the ORL divided rather than united, and took a hardline stance on a difficult moral question, rather than empowering students to hold and debate their own views.” “The ORL does not have to choose between pro-life and pro-choice religious students, since there are both at Princeton,” Clark said. “There are many issues that students of different faith backgrounds and different moral values can find common ground on.” Thames responded to these concerns by acknowledging the importance she ascribes to the discussion of tough moral issues. “Our hope is that in places where there is fraction or tension, instead of us going to our separate corners, we come together and have discourse and conversation and time of understanding and hearing different sides of an issue,” she said. “There are many, many issues that we want to invite people to talk about and engage in.” On the other hand, there were others in the Univer-

sity community who supported the ORL’s actions, such as Jessica Quinter ‘18, president of Princeton Students for Reproductive Justice. “The Office of Religious Life co-sponsoring and attending the ‘Run 4 All Women NJ rally for Planned Parenthood’ sends the strong message that the ORL recognizes and supports Planned Parenthood’s mission to give all women access to services to manage their reproductive health,” said Quinter. “We are excited to see this show of support from ORL, especially at a time when women’s reproductive rights are increasingly under threat. Access to basic, vital health care, such as that which Planned Parenthood provides, is something we should all support.” The ORL does not have an official stance on abortion, and neither does the University. “The Office of Religious Life does not take political stances,” said Assistant Vice President of Communications Daniel Day. “It does work with and support students and student organizations that hold many different viewpoints.” “In this case, the ORL called attention to a particular event,” he said. However, “it contributed no funding.” Day then went on to explain that the Office of Religious Life, like any University office or department, makes its own decisions regarding which events it calls attention to or co-sponsors in accordance with the guidelines in Rights, Rules, Responsibilities relating to the tax-exempt status of the University and political activities. The disagreement over this particular rally will not stop the Office of Religious Life from hosting its annual pro-life worship service in the University chapel. According to Rev. Alison Boden, Dean of Religious Life and the Chapel, “the service is centered on student leadership within Princeton Pro-Life and includes a variety of campus religious organizations.” The ORL has hosted the worship service since 2006, and preparations have already begun for the service scheduled to occur in the 2017-18 academic year. An earlier version of this article misspelled Cavazos’ name. The ‘Prince’ regrets the error.

Thursday September 14, 2017 BEYOND THE BUBBLE


Bill Bradley playing basketball for Princeton in 1964

Q&A: Bill Bradley ’65, former U.S. Senator By Sam Garfinkle Managing editor

Bill Bradley ’65 is a former University basketball star, Olympic gold medalist, Rhodes Scholar, U.S. Senator for New Jersey, and Democratic presidential candidate. The ‘Prince’ sat down to interview Bradley while he was on campus for an event to celebrate a second large donation of Bradley’s own documents to the University. The Daily Princetonian: Could you talk about what the Oral History Project means to you, and what might be included in it that wasn’t already donated to Princeton? Bill Bradley: All of my media shows will go in; I have nearly 500. And, there are a lot of papers that I’ve kept out that I’m going to donate. The main point today was not only the things that will be added, but the change of title, the ‘gift.’ DP: As someone who was deeply involved in both professional athletics and politics, what are your thoughts on the recent trend of athletes becoming more politically active, [such as Colin Kaepernick and Seth DeValve]? BB: I think that they are citizens too, and that they should follow their convictions. In some cases, these athletes have a following, and I think that people have to do what they believe is the right thing, but not expect that they are necessarily going to change the world. They are famous for being athletes, and sometimes, they try to transfer that and it doesn’t succeed, though sometimes it does. So I think we will all have to wait and see. DP: Given that your first career was in athletics, how

did you manage to transition from professional athletics to politics? BB: I had been going out to campaign for people from 1972 to 1978. When I was a basketball player, I’d often go campaigning for people in New Jersey because I was well known and would draw people to events. Because I was on TV on Wednesday nights for Knicks games, I might get 300 people in the room for an event as opposed to 50, but that meant I could either succeed or fail at that meeting. DP: When we interviewed you at your 50th reunion, you gave advice to current students on how they should be politically active. What, in particular, would you say that people and parties can do to reengage the large portion of the electorate that feels disenfranchised or disillusioned? BB: I think that you have to speak to people where they live their lives. You have to show respect for people. You have to tell them stories that they can see themselves in. That you can do with anybody. I used to say that, when I went before an audience, I knew that they would disagree with me on something, right? But what was I going to find in that audience that would create a vibe, what would be the connection? Sometimes it might be a story, sometimes it might be a position on taxes, sometimes it could just be the fact that you’re listening to them. That’s the most underrated skill in America, and it’s something that our current president knows nothing of.


A statue of Bill Bradley that stands near Jadwin Gym, the current home of the Princeton Tigers Men’s Basketball Team

Thursday September 14, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

page 4

The Daily Princetonian

Thursday September 14, 2017

Personality Survey:

1) During lecture you are... a) asking the professor questions. b) doodling all over your notes. c) correcting grammar mistakes. d) watching videos on e) calculating the opportunity cost of sitting in lecture. 2) Your favorite hidden pasttime is... a) getting the scoop on your roommate’s relationships. b) stalking people’s Facebook pictures. c) finding dangling modifiers in your readings. d) managing your blog. e) lurking outside 48 University Place. 3) The first thing that you noticed was... a) the word “survey.” b) the logo set in the background. c) the extra “t” in “pasttime.” d) the o’s and i’s that look like binary code from far away. e) the fact that this is a super-cool ad for The Daily Princetonian.

If you answered mostly “a,” you are a reporter in the making! If you answered mostly “b,” you are a design connoisseur, with unlimited photography talents! If you answered mostly “c,” you are anal enough to be a copy editor! If you answered mostly “d,” you are a multimedia and web designing whiz! And if you answered mostly “e,” you are obsessed with the ‘Prince’ and should come join the Editorial Board and Business staff! Contact!

Thursday September 14, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page 5

Campaign netted nearly $75 million in the previous year GIVING

Continued from page 1


tributed more than $2 million, totaling $2,666,914. Previous years’ Annual Giving has funded programs including Bridge Year, financial aid, the Princeton Neuroscience Institute, research stipends, and residential college activities, among other programs. Unrestricted funds — gifts not specifically designated — are included in the annual operating budget. The ‘Prince’ talked to the people who helped get the job done. Here’s how they raised enough to buy 7.1 million pounds of dried mango chunks at Walmart. We suspect that the University won’t be buying very many mangoes with the money, however. “TigerCall is an outreach program based out of the Office of Annual Giving [which] primarily focuses on supporting Annual Giving’s participation goal every year through their outreach efforts to parents and alumni. Two of my biggest responsibilities with TigerCall are data management and caller training. I maintain and segment the data to organize the calling structure for the fiscal year, [and] also oversee all of the caller training, to make sure every caller who joins TigerCall is set up for success. TigerCall benefits Princeton, because the student callers are able to continue building the relationship between alumni and parents with Princeton. Your Princeton relationship does not end when you graduate, and TigerCall is one great way to make sure alumni and parents are connected to campus each year through a student perspective.” — Sara Cosgrove, TigerCall Manager

“I’ve had quite a few fun conversations with alumni that were excited to talk. One time, mentioning that I took a freshman seminar about comics and graphic novels, I had a half-hour conversation with a graduate about our favorite books and comics. That was a lot of fun! Our supervisor has worked really hard to create shift times that will successfully reach many alumni across the world, and still are convenient for student schedules, so I hope we can break the record again this year!” — Karissa Lowe ’20

“Working at TigerCall involves calling alumni and parents of current students to pitch the Annual Fund. It isn’t just about asking for money, though. Calling alumni is a nice way to reconnect them with their university and hear about their experience as a student while sharing my experience at Princeton. The calls I’m most proud of are the ones that resulted in $10 or $15 gifts. Most of the bigger donors give every year regardless of TigerCall, but a lot of alumni need to be swayed. I think a lot of people simply forget about the Annual Fund, or they need a little push to convince them that it’s ok for them not to donate an entire building to make a contribution. I also think it’s nice for alumni to learn about what things are like on campus nowadays. At TigerCall, I honestly felt like I was directly helping to foster school spirit. I think Ti-

gerCall has done a good job of consistently outdoing itself, so I wouldn’t be surprised if TigerCall pushed the bar even higher this year. We always look for ways to improve, and this past year I noticed a more proactive strategy of following up with alumni after phone calls.” — Berthy Feng ’19 (Feng is a sports writer for the ‘Prince.’)

“My job entailed calling alumni, stretching from the Class of 2016 all the way back to the ‘50s, to update them on campus happenings and ask them if they would like to make a monetary gift to the University’s unrestricted funds. Sometimes the most memorable calls are the ones where you don’t actually receive a gift but the conversation more than makes up for it. I was calling an older alum. He graduated in the ‘50s, I believe, and he kept me on the phone for over half an hour —

even after my shift had ended — talking to me about everything from the Vietnam and Korean Wars to the flowers in the garden of his assisted living facility, and especially about how annoying it can be to live with dementia. He was a very sweet older man, and even though he didn’t have the finances to give any money to Princeton at the time of the call, I was glad he decided to share so many of his life stories with me. When I heard about the new record that was set this year, I felt really good about the fact that I was able to help make it happen. I know that by doing this work, we are helping to keep Princeton as financially feasible as possible for students, like me, who need it. In addition to making it possible for more students to attend, I know that through TigerCall we are helping to keep the experience that students have here as amazing as possible, which I think is very important.” — Aoife Bennett ’20 “Even though I’m just a sophomore, I think that Princeton has already done a lot for me and I think by working at TigerCall I’m helping to return that favor. At TigerCall we use the word gift instead of donation, and I think that’s because we see giving to Princeton not so much as a form of charity, but rather as a way of showing your appreciation for this wonderful family that we’ve

all been lucky enough to be a part of and of helping ensure that future generations of Tigers will have the same great experience. Everyone who works at TigerCall is really enthusiastic and our alumni are really loyal, so it doesn’t surprise me that we have such an incredible alumni donation rate. I’m optimistic that we can beat it next year. We’ll be changing up the calling schedule to give the West Coast some more attention and replacing some shifts that weren’t as highyielding.” — Alexander Helman ’20

“I spent six hours per week working shifts at TigerCall, so about 90 hours per semester. I’ve had many positive calls before but one of the most memorable calls I had was just a month into President Trump being elected. The reason it was so memorable was because the alum that I had spoken with was a member of the EPA. In the conversation we had, he was distraught and fearful for his job and family, for his agency, and for the environment. It hit me especially hard because the election was definitely an emotional time for many of us, but this was the first occasion in which I would come in contact with someone being directly affected by Trump’s presidency. I was stunned in the call and didn’t really know what to say but I made sure to share with him mine and many others’ appreciation for his work. TigerCall is an important job because not only is it maintaining the relationship between the University and the alumni, but it’s also a great way for alumni to stay engaged with the current Princeton community. Also, all the gifts go to Princeton’s Annual Fund which supports financial aid as well as all the funds that students use for study breaks, research, and other events on campus which are definitely a huge part of the Princeton experience!” — Katie Zhou ’20

page 6

The Daily Princetonian

Thursday September 14, 2017

Thursday September 14, 2017

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 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 7


Thursday September 14, 2017

page 8

{ }

A disaster waiting to happen Liam O’Connor columnist


ffirmitive action is under assault. In the 48 years since President Richard Nixon instituted its present form of racial preferences, lowertier colleges have abandoned it, the Supreme Court has rolled back its policies, and voters in eight states have banned the use of race in admissions for public colleges. This has posed a problem for colleges wanting to preserve diversity in their student bodies. As a result, schools are switching to class-based affirmative action, the practice of giving preference to applicants of lower socioeconomic status, rather than racebased affirmative action. Although these schools have pursued this course in the names of equity and social justice, their policies are misguided and will have disastrous consequences for students from lowincome families. Affirmative action is a policy that creates an illusion of fairness without actually addressing the root causes of inequality. Admissions preferences may increase the number of low-income students, but it will not help them pay for college’s substantial cost or adapt to a new environment for which they are not academically prepared. If society is truly committed to creating equal opportunity for all Americans, it needs to abandon all policies that provide preferences to applicants based upon their background and craft public policy that fights the root causes of inequality. The Boston Globe re-

Hailey Siegel


cently analyzed the costs and student debt levels of Massachusetts’ colleges. Many of these schools have been at the forefront of increasing low-income representation in their student bodies to promote diversity; however, this policy change has produced unintended results. Sixty-five percent of the state’s colleges have a net price — the amount paid after financial aid — above the national average of $20,412 for families making $30,000 or less annually. This means that a low-income student will attend a school whose tuition bill could consume over 70 percent of a family’s income. Families won’t devote all of their money to cover college costs, so students are forced to take out loans. Although low-income students usually have the smallest amounts of college debt, they are the most likely to default. Even outside of Massachusetts, the prospects are grim for low-income students. In 2012, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco reported that families living in the lowest economic quintile in western states would have to use at least 70 percent of their income to cover college costs after financial aid. Student debt is lowest in the West, so it is likely that the situation is comparable or worse for low-income families in the rest of the country. Supporters of classbased affirmative action will cite statistics showing how people with a bachelor’s degree have higher lifetime earnings than those with a lower level of education. But not all college degrees are created equal. As the Boston Globe showed in its

report, many graduates of middle and lower-tier colleges have starting salaries under $35,000 per year. Further, the Brookings Institution found that the income gain from earning a bachelor’s degree is less for a low-income student than for someone from the middle or upper classes. These problems are exacerbated by the fact that low-income students drop out of college at high rates. The Pell Institute said that over 40 percent of college students coming from families making less than $30,000 per year dropped out. For first generation lowincome students, only 11 percent earn a bachelor’s degree within six years. Consequently, many of them drop out of school with debt and without a degree to get a job. This doesn’t happen because low-income students are less intelligent than higher income students. As a U.S. Department of Education report noted, “Inadequate academic preparation is the key factor in lack of college success.” This causes a mismatch where students attend colleges for which they are unprepared. Rather than lower the standards of admission to attract low-income students, we should be raising them up to the same level as their peers by the time they apply to college. Like I wrote last month about race-based admissions policies, class-based affirmative action doesn’t solve the problems that deny low-income Americans equal opportunity. It doesn’t address the stagnation of wages, inability to regularly provide food, increasing costs of college, or deteriora-

tion in the quality of public education. Adopting this new form of affirmative action would result in a large inf lux of low-income students into colleges who would then struggle to keep pace with their betterprepared peers while trying to pay substantial bills. Their dropout and debt default rates would be astronomical. Princeton is renowned for its generous financial aid package that has allowed low-income students to attend at little cost, and for programs like the Freshman Scholars Institute and the Scholars Institute Fellows Program that help them adjust to college life. But few colleges outside of the Ivy League have the financial or institutional resources to support such students. Again, the only way to provide equal opportunity for low-income Americans is to adopt an identity-blind meritocracy where society fights the causes of poverty. By ignoring both race and class in college admissions, student diversity in colleges will fall for the short-term. But schools will become more diverse in the long-term if the country devotes itself toward creating equal opportunity for all Americans through market and governmentbased programs. Feel-good policies like affirmative action don’t work. We must create a society where individuals advance to the best of their abilities and are not hindered by their identity and economic status. Liam O’Connor is a sophomore from Wyoming, Del. He can be reached at

In defense of the real woman


AMES CAMERON’S criticism of the recent Wonder Woman film as objectifying an icon, rather than celebrating feminism, is perfectly valid. For anyone who wants to dismiss his statements as the sexist ramblings of a misogynist — I’m a minority woman here to defend his position. I completely agree that the latest iteration of Wonder Woman is a pseudo-feminist puff piece tailored to please Holly wood and mainstream moviegoers, both male and female, who are fixated on political correctness. As Cameron notes, it is a significant “step back” for women in film, marking a return to the notion that strong female characters can only be so if they are also physically attractive and morally incorruptible. Instead of depicting a more complex character who struggles and fights her way to a position of power and earns her hero status, Wonder Woman’s aspirational female hero is not a real woman at all, but an Amazonian princess who can jump tall buildings and f lick off bullets with her brace-

lets, all the while captivating any man she comes in contact with. Frankly, I found the bulk of the plot and the characterization of Wonder Woman herself to be inherently sexist. For God’s sake, it’s not as though we can argue against the fact that part of the film’s draw and the appeal of Gal Gadot as its star is her exceptional good looks. Furthermore, despite being touted as a feminist milestone and a narrative that does not cater to the male gaze, the film still plays up Wonder Woman’s sexualized, childlike naiveté and her overtly feminine emotional reactions to a disturbing degree. When stripped of her inhumane Amazonian physical powers, she’s nothing but a bustier-wearing, one-dimensional, cardboard cut-out of what society wants a woman to be: a virginal sweetheart, a damsel in distress, and an innocently angelic crusader for the oppressed, all in one package. I acknowledge with trepidation director Patty Jenkins’ response to Cameron’s call for a “stronger” female hero, suggesting that Wonder Woman deserves feminist creds for being both “attractive and

loving.” It may well be empowering for some women to see a female character who is paradoxically stunning and kind, as well as brilliant, physically buff, or any other superlative combination of qualities depicted on screen. But, I cannot agree that all women who wish to self-identify as feminists should be force fed the misleading notion that objective sexiness or beauty is a prerequisite quality for being a hero: that to be a hero, you have to be superhuman. As a feminist, I certainly don’t. When first watching the film, I wondered — no pun intended — would Wonder Woman be the same if she were not a six-foot goddess, or if she couldn’t command a room full of men with her spunk and charm? I simply cannot identify with Gal Gadot or Jenkins’ vision of a hero. I question, what if I, with no makeup two weeks before finals, played Wonder Woman? What if Melissa McCarthy in her Sean Spicer get-up or Caitlin Jenner played Wonder Woman? What if a suburban soccer mom in f lats and a baby food-splattered blouse or a crippled grandmother with a cane played Wonder

Woman? Would the film still be a hit? Perhaps Cameron’s biggest criticism of the film that I see as vitally true is that it sends an unrealistic message to women given the grim truth of what our sex faces in reality. Unfortunately, we have not yet evolved into a postfeminist society. Instead, today, we women still face the dangers of sexual assault, the threats of government policies seeking to control our bodies, and inherent sexism at school and work that impedes our abilities to achieve equality every single day. We struggle to reconcile our sense of femininity with our knowledge that appearing more conventionally masculine will help us survive and thrive at the top ranks of male-dominated fields. I myself can tell the difference in reaction at Princeton that I get in a f loral dress verses a black tee shirt and jeans. This discrepancy is no mystery to women past a certain age, and thus we shouldn’t allow the next generation to be deluded by fictitious, idealized films such as Wonder Woman. If there truly is no “right and wrong powerful woman” as

vol. cxli

Sarah Sakha ’18


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 William R. Elfers ’71 Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Joshua Katz Kathleen Crown Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Randall Rothenberg ’78 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Annalyn Swan ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Jerry Raymond ’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 Claire Lee ‘19 head opinion editor Nicholas Wu ’18 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 head sports editor David Xin ’19 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Claire Coughlin ’19 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Andie Ayala ’19 Catherine Wang ’19 web editor Sarah Bowen ’20 head copy editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Omkar Shende ’18 associate copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 chief design editor Quinn Donohue ’20 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19


Jenkins says, then we shouldn’t discredit all the women who came before us and the women today who struggle to feel pretty and yet intellectually accomplished, strong and yet soft, loving and yet emotionally f lawed. As Cameron’s words suggest, the takeaway of a feminist film should be to unlearn the association between physical beauty and one’s sense of self-worth and to recognize that it’s okay to be a feminist icon who shows a little less perfection and a little more grit. Hayley Siegel is a sophomore from Princeton, N.J. She can be reached at

Thursday September 14, 2017

Recycle your paper! T HE DA ILY

The best place to Write Edit Opine Design Produce Illustrate Photograph Create

on campus.

The Daily Princetonian

page 9


Thursday September 14, 2017

page 10


No. 20 Princeton Starts 6-0, Faces No. 6 WVU in Epic Weekend Matchup By Grace Baylis staff writer

The Princeton women’s soccer team is currently 6-0, having conceded only one goal, and has been ranked 20th nationally in the United Soccer Coaches Poll, the best record Princeton has held since 2004. The Tigers faced off against Rider and New Hampshire last week, winning both 2-0 and 3-1, respectively. Sophomore Courtney O’Brien scored twice in both games to help the Tigers continue their undefeated streak. In the matchup against New Hampshire, rookie Carolyne Davidson scored off a pass from senior captain Vanessa Gregoire. But this record has been very much a team effort; six different players have scored so far this season, and all the class years are represented. The Tigers have depth on the team, allowing them to play freely without being

dependent on one player. This could definitely help later in the season and the postseason when injuries are more frequent. It would be wrong to neglect the incredible defensive performance that the Tigers have shown, having conceded just one goal in a total of 540 minutes. This is not just stellar goalkeeping, but an overall organized and efficient defensive effort, something that will be crucial in the next two games to come against top 10 opponents. Looking forward to this weekend’s matchup, the Tigers will face No. 6 West Virginia, which will be quite the test. West Virginia leads Princeton 2-1 overall but having played few games against each other, it will be hard to predict a score line for the game. The Mountaineers are coming off a win against Richmond and are currently 5-2 overall. They

certainly have more experience facing nationally ranked teams than Princeton, having beaten then-No. 1 Penn State, but they will have to travel to Princeton to face the Tigers on home turf. The game is at 4 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 15th and will be broadcast on ESPNU, so get out and support your Tigers! Then, it’s a quick turnaround for the Tigers this weekend as Delaware comes to Princeton’s Roberts Stadium on Sunday, Sept. 17th at 4p.m. The Blue Hens were carrying a four game win streak until UPenn put an end to the party with its first minute goal, which proved to be enough to take a slim single goal win. Delaware will be hungry to get back to winning this weekend when it faces Princeton, but here is to hoping that the Tigers can maintain their perfect start, especially as conference play begins next weekend.


Senior midfielder Vanessa Gregoire (left) and sophomore forward Tomi Kennedy (right) have been critical in the Tigers’ hot start.


Tigers Draw versus No. 8 Syracuse, Stumble in Next 2 Games By Jack Graham staff writer


Sophomore midfielder Benjamin Martin hopes to help Princeton earn their first win of the season.

As the rest of the student body returned to campus this past week, the Princeton men’s soccer team commenced its season with a series of non-conference games. The team failed to pick up a win, but its performance leaves much room for optimism for the coming season. Princeton began its season with a tough road matchup against a nationally ranked team, No. 8 Syracuse. After a first half in which neither team was able to convert a goal, freshman Frankie DeRosa, in his first collegiate game, scored Princeton’s first goal of the season at the 69:36 mark to give the team a 1-0 lead. Despite losing a player to a red card midway through the second half, Syracuse tied the game with a long-range shot from John-Austin Ricks at the 83:32 mark. Neither team was able to score again in the end of regulation or overtime, so the game ended in a 1-1 draw, a relatively favorable outcome for

Princeton’s road debut. Later that weekend, the team remained in upstate New York for a match against Colgate. Princeton was unable to generate enough offense to bring home a win, losing 1-0, with the lone goal coming courtesy of Troy Moo Penn in the 65th minute. The offense cobbled together a handful of scoring opportunities in the second half, but were stifled repeatedly by the Colgate goalkeeper. Finally, the Tigers returned to Roberts Stadium to make their home debut against Seton Hall. This match featured considerably more offense than either of the previous two, with Princeton falling in overtime 4-3. The Tigers leaped out to a 3-0 lead, with all three goals coming within seven minutes of each other. Senior James Reiner scored two goals, and Junior Jeremy Colvin added another. However, after shutting down Seton Hall in the first half, the Princeton defense lapsed in the second, conceding three goals. The first came off a defensive mistake on a corner

kick, and the game-tying goal came on a late set-piece free kick at the 89:58 mark. In the second overtime, Seton Hall would score yet another goal off a set piece to secure a 4-3 win and hand Princeton a disappointing loss. Despite the losses and draw, the opening week bodes well for a Princeton team that finished in the middle of the pack in last year’s Ivy League standings. The team faces the daunting task of replacing graduated seniors Greg Seifert, last season’s leading goal scorer, and Patrick Barba, both members of the Ivy League First Team. They will benefit from, among others, the return of Junior Midfielder Sean McSherry, a member of last year’s Ivy League Second Team and the addition of Frankie DeRosa, who made his presence known with a goal in his first match. Princeton will continue its non-conference schedule this Friday at home against South Illinois University, as it seeks to continue to improve and prepare for the all-important gauntlet of Ivy League matches.

Which Princeton team has the best record? Know the answer? Join the ‘Prince’ sports department. Email Tweet of the Day “#1 in the classroom and on the football field! @ USNews ranks @Princeton as the best national university! #40YearPlan Pri nceton Football (@ PUTigerFootball), Football

Stat of the Day

No. 20 The women’s soccer team is currently ranked No. 20 in the latest NCAA poll, the highest ranking in team history.

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

September 14, 2017  
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you