Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998
Thursday November 15, 2018 vol. CXLII no. 102
Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian
{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }
ON CAMPUS
Gutiérrez calls for student action on Transgender Day of Remembrance
By Sean Horton Contributor
COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
Jennicet Gutiérrez participated in a Q&A session with University students.
most harmed by it,” Gutiérrez said in her opening statements. True to the objective of Familia, she further stated that “no one is free until everyone is free,” calling for all people to take risks and strategically challenge those in power to protect their communities. Challenging those in power, however, can be a difficult task for many, according to Gutiérrez. In response to a question from
ON CAMPUS
Students react to Cruz ’92 victory, Democratic House By Tahla Iqbal and Ned Bless Contributors
In a race closely watched both nationally and by University students, Senator Ted Cruz ’92 of Texas narrowly edged out Democratic Congressman Beto O’Rourke by 2.6 percent to retain his seat in the U.S. Senate. According to news outlets heading into Election Day, the race was essentially a “toss up.” Cruz’s victory set off strong emotional reactions on all sides of the political spectrum within both the United States and the University. When results from Texas started trickling in on Election Day, Henry Barrett ’22 — a former staffer for O’Rourke’s campaign — was feeling cautiously optimistic. “Going into Election Night, I, alongside many other people, had hope … in Congressman O’Rourke’s chances of winning,” Barrett said. O’Rourke ran a competitive grassroots campaign, visiting all 254 counties in the state and setting records for fundraising in a Senate race without accepting any money from political action commit-
In Opinion
tees (PACs), which represent special interests and corporations. Even though O’Rourke was ultimately defeated, Barrett said that he felt he and his fellow Texas Democrats had not been demoralized. “I don’t know how the future of the Texas Democratic Party will play out,” Barrett said. “There are still very many strong, younger candidates out there.” Ben Gelman ’22, a Democrat from Texas, also voiced his disappointment with the outcome of the race, but said he was not surprised. “All of the polls said that it was going to be close — that [Ted Cruz] was going to win, and that’s exactly what happened,” Gelman said. Still, Gelman said he holds much hope for the political future he wanted for Texas, believing that O’Rourke had made some headway in the race. “[O’Rourke] had a better chance than any Democrat in my recent memory. That’s exceptionally good in Texas, but you shouldn’t expect him to win,” Gelman said, citing See CRUZ page 4
Contributing columnist Avner Goldstein argues Birthright trips to Israel must engage with complicated, unpleasant IsraeliPalestinian politics, contributing columnist Katie Goldman urges students to consider study abroad, and guest contributor Micah Herskind criticizes President Eisgruber’s explanation for continuing to ask about applicants’ criminal records. PAGE 6
Chao, she identified the Trump administration’s proposal to define gender as biological and determined solely by genitalia at birth, effectively dissolving past attempts at transgender protections, as a particularly recent instance of a problem requiring such a challenge to power. Gutiérrez responded to the Trump administration’s actions by stating that she doesn’t believe “that the
government has any right to define our existence.” In a more direct and visible example of this resistance, Gutiérrez explained that Familia is working towards the goal of its “first ever national gathering” to take place in Philadelphia. In tune with this upcoming mobilization, Gutiérrez discussed the current position of the Transgender Day of Remembrance and how such an event can already
ON CAMPUS
NAOMI HESS :: PRINCETONIAN CONTRIBUTOR
Lisa Frelinghuysen speaks on the future of reproductive justice.
Frelinghuysen considers reproductive rights, Supreme Court influence By Naomi Hess Contributor
The Supreme Court can do serious damage to reproductive rights without overturning Roe v. Wade, according to Lisa Frelinghuysen. Frelinghuysen, a former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and current Planned Parent-
Today on Campus
hood of New York City board member, spoke about reproductive rights at an event sponsored by Princeton Students for Reproductive Justice (PSRJ) on Nov. 14. According to Frelinghuysen, reproductive justice, defined as whether or not a woman has access to reproductive rights, has become one of the most controversial
4:30 p.m.: American shoe designer and entrepreneur Stuart Weitzman will be discussing his career in the apparel industry and advice he has for graduating students. McCosh 28
issues in the country. Reproductive justice, the heart of the women’s right movement, has come under tremendous attack, she explained. In support of reproductive justice, she referenced the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, which established that a woman’s right to terminate See PSRJ page 2
WEATHER
More than three years after interrupting President Barack Obama, transgender Latina activist Jennicet Gutiérrez is once again taking aim at a White House she deems incapable of protecting her community. On Wednesday night, Gutiérrez spoke to a group of 30 students and faculty, recognizing the Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDoR) in a program titled “Power, Joy, & Mobilization,” and participated in a Q&A session moderated by Stephen Chao ’19. This discussion and vigil recalled those lost to discrimination and related violence, but continued encouraging forward movement from mourning. As the guest speaker for Princeton’s TDoR program, Gutiérrez discussed the power of community and the joy it brings but stressed most of all the necessity of mobilizing such power and joy to make a difference in the lives of transgender individuals. As an organizer for Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement, Gutiérrez said she hopes to uplift and bring forth the voices of trans women of color within the current state of U.S. politics and society to secure the future freedoms and rights of transgender people. “The only to change the system, is to listen to those
be seen changing within the context of modern activism. The “Transgender Day of Resilience” title has been considered to replace the current Day of Remembrance in order to more fully embody the heightened passion for change within the current political climate, according to Gutiérrez. Gutiérrez mentioned the partner organization “Forward Together,” a group of artists in activism working with Familia to promote this shift in framing the day’s narrative, hoping to inspire transgender individuals seeking a more welcoming community. Following Gutiérrez’s speech, the program moved to a candlelight vigil, with one candle lit as each of the 35 names of murdered transgender people were read. Candles were also lit to honor trans women in Pakistan and trans women in India. Gutiérrez ended by challenging University students to engage in this shift in narrative. She encouraged students to attend her workshop, discussing her work within Familia and how students can organize to advocate for trans and queer immigrant communities. The workshop takes place Thursday, Nov. 15, from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. in the LGBT Center’s Rainbow Lounge.
HIGH
34˚
LOW
34˚
Rain and snow chance of rain:
100 percent
The Daily Princetonian
page 2
Thursday November 15, 2018
Frelinghuysen: Supreme Court can do great damage in reproductive justice without overturning Roe PSRJ
Continued from page 1
.............
a pregnancy was a constitutional right protected by the notions of privacy and liberty under the 14th amendment. However, Frelinghuysen said that Roe v. Wade could be overturned within the next few years. The current Supreme Court with five conservative justices out of nine puts Roe v. Wade at risk. For example, Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s view on reproductive rights were not explicitly stated during his confirmation process. “[There are] a lot of questions and not a lot of answers about his views on reproductive rights,” she stated. Frelinghuysen explained that Roe v. Wade has the potential to be overturned because the right to privacy is not enumerated in the Constitution, but also emphasized that the Supreme Court can impact abortion rights in other ways. “The Supreme Court can do a great deal of damage in reproductive justice without specifically overturning Roe,” said Frelinghuysen, who added that she does not
think Roe v. Wade will be overturned right away. She noted that there are currently 13 cases about reproductive justice that could end up at the Supreme Court, but she thinks that the Supreme Court will likely wait before making any monumental changes to abortion policy. Because the Supreme Court just went through a “rocky confirmation hearing … that brought the Supreme Court down into the political muck of the country, [Chief Justice Roberts] probably wants to steady the ship and elevate the Supreme Court in the mind of the public,” Frelinghuysen said. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, the states will decide whether or not to legalize abortion. “Twenty-two states are likely to ban abortion outright. In eight additional states, including Washington D.C., the right to abortion is at serious risk,” Frelinghuysen said. She explained that if the right to abortion is left up to individual states, the country will “go back to that twotiered system that we had before Roe v. Wade where wealthy women will be able to
get a safe and legal abortion, and poor women — disproportionately women of color, young women, rural women — will very likely not.” She proceeded to enumerate several facts about abortion. “Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures that exists,” said Frelinghuysen. “One in four women in her lifetime will seek an abortion,” continued Frelinghuysen. “Ninety percent of abortions are performed in the first trimester, and most abortions are medical abortions where you take a pill. Abortion rates have decreased over the past several years.” Twenty million abortions out of an annual average of 46 million were performed illegally, according to Frelinghuysen, and countries where abortion is illegal have a higher number of abortion related deaths. “Liberal abortion laws don’t cause or increase abortions. Unintended pregnancies do,” Frelinghuysen said. “Reducing unintended pregnancies through effective contraception and education can really help to reduce incidents of abortion.” Moving towards a bigger
picture view, Frelinghuysen ended her talk on a positive note. “I always like to remember in times like these that great change is not made by presidents or their administrations, but it’s made by movements of people, of we the people, of visionaries, innovative, committed people,” she said. She concluded with a quote by Martin Luther King Jr.: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Frelinghuysen proceeded to answer questions from the audience. When asked about which level of government to focus advocacy efforts on, Frelinghuysen said, “Right now, local activism and state activism is the way to go.” She also expressed her hopes for audience members, saying, “This group right here is the group that’s going to do a number of really exciting things.” She continued, “People are really interested in the young vote. This vote is waking up, this vote is here to stay.” Frelinghuysen’s speech took place on Wednesday, Nov. 14, at 5 p.m. in East Pyne 010.
The best place to Write Edit Opine Design Produce Illustrate Photograph Create on campus.
join@dailyprincetonian.com
Thursday November 15, 2018
The Daily Princetonian
T HE DA ILY
News. Opinions. Sports. Every day. join@dailyprincetonian.com
page 3
The Daily Princetonian
page 4
Thursday November 15, 2018
COURTESY OF MICHAEL VADON VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
Cruz ‘92 secured another six years in the Senate during the midterm election in Texas.
Bruno ’22: Cruz did not have great deal of support on campus CRUZ
Continued from page 1
.............
Texas’s strong ties to traditionally Republican values as the cause. Sebastian Quiroga ’22, a former intern for the Texas GOP, said he was surprised to see the race come down to the wire, as he had been expecting a 5–7 point victory for Cruz. However, he never saw O’Rourke as having reasonable shot at victory. “There were certain issues, that were so far left, that are just not electable in the state of Texas,” Quiroga said. “You cannot say that you want to vote to impeach Donald Trump and run for office in the state of Texas and expect to win. You also cannot say that you want to abolish [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], in a state like Texas that loves law enforcement, and expect to win. So, for me, a lot of what [O’Rourke’s] campaign was about was posturing himself for a Presidential run.”
Quiroga considered the Senate race to be O’Rourke’s first attempt at proving he can win over typically conservative voters. However, he added, “For him, the goal has always been to win the Democratic ticket in 2020. I don’t think he was very serious about winning Texas.” He noted, however, that he sees the tight margin as representing the possibility of change coming to Texas politics. “I think if you are on the right, you should be concerned. There are shifting tides. Texas is no longer a certainty to be red,” he said. The next step for Texas’s conservative politicians, to Quiroga, is figuring out what issues are important to Texans and finding ways to express their alignment with Texans on those issues. Students from Texas, however, were not the only ones following this race. For politics professor Christopher H. Achen, Cruz’s victory was expected, but O’Rourke’s defeat by less than
Have opinions? Join the opinion section! Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com
three percentage points came as a surprise. “This election shows that with a substantial nationwide swing to the Democrats, a charismatic Democrat like O’Rourke can be very competitive in Texas,” he wrote in an email to The Daily Princetonian. Achen added that midterms typically challenge the party in power and often are not “very predictive” of the next presidential race. Looking ahead to Democrats’ bid to reclaim the White House in 2020, Achen said, “Much depends on whether the Democrats nominate … someone who can reduce the Republicans’ enormous margins among less-educated whites, especially males and rural voters.” Whig-Clio co-president Justin Wittekind ’21 from California expressed strong concerns about voter registration during Texas’s midterm elections. “The Republican Party in Texas has made it hard both to register and to vote in the state,” he wrote in an email
to the ‘Prince.’ “They have no concern for having full participation in the election.” This issue has also been echoed on news networks such as CNN, which have cited instances of voter suppression around the country. Kion Bruno ’22, who closely followed races near his home state of Connecticut, was still intrigued by the campaign in Texas. “It seemed as though, if anyone could really pose a threat, [O’Rourke] was doing the right things to do so,” said Bruno, who described himself as someone who leans “very slightly conservative.” On election night itself, Bruno was studying, so he wasn’t able to pay attention to the minute-by-minute returns coming in. But when he did get a notification on his phone about Cruz’s victory, he, too, wasn’t surprised. “It seemed like it would be a decently close race — but it’s Texas and Cruz is the incumbent, so at the end of the day he really is the one that’s expected to hold the seat,” Bruno
explained. Bruno said he felt that Cruz did not have a great deal of support on campus and that students were more likely to support O’Rourke. American Whig-Cliosophic Society Vice President Aoife Bennett ’20, who is from New York, highlighted that there has not been a lot of political change since Democrats have been in power. However, she believes that the lack of political change persists in Texas as well, which has typically remained a red state in an increasingly polarized political climate. Yet, despite the trend of polarization in the United States, Bennett said she felt reassured that some balance was restored with the Democrats in the House “It is essential to remember that Democrats now have the House, so even though it might feel like this was even more of an indication that things are going wrong, I view it as things beginning to change — just slowly,” she said.
Thursday November 15, 2018
The Daily Princetonian
page 5
Thursday November 15, 2018
Opinion
page 6
{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }
The world is bigger than the United States: Why American students should study abroad Katie Goldman
Contributing Columnist
Over fall break, I traveled to Europe with my mom to visit my brother, who is currently studying abroad at King’s College in London for a semester. We also went to Ireland to see Maynooth, the town where my mom studied abroad. After a week of hearing my brother talk about his current life and my mom reminisce about her past, I realized that studying abroad has the ability to challenge one’s American assumptions. Any University student who, like me, has never lived outside of the United States should more strongly consider spending a semester abroad. At the University, we pride ourselves in the diversity of our student body, including those students from outside of the United States. In the 2017–18 school year, international students comprised 13 percent of the undergraduate student body. While University students from the United States can learn about different parts of the world from these international students, it is a different experience to
be completely immersed in a new culture. From minor inconveniences such as needing an adapter to charge an iPhone to bigger challenges like having math class taught in Italian, studying abroad forces U.S. students to adapt. Every country has its unique cultural norms that teach students how to temporarily assimilate. By spending a semester abroad, you realize that the world is much bigger than the United States. Studying abroad is significantly different to spending a few weeks as a tourist in a foreign country. In joining a different society, you are forced to attempt to live life normally. My brother and my mother experienced intense culture shock, as people who study abroad often do. My brother’s abroad experience has not gone without its challenges. When my mom and I visited him, he begged us to bring him Little Bites Brownies, a rarity in the U.K. He also has gotten used to carrying around a few pounds in order to use public bathrooms, a concept unknown to most Americans. The lack of garbage cans on the city streets also shocked him; he says you can sometimes go a few blocks without seeing a garbage bin. My mom also had similar
difficulties adapting to life in Ireland. She was surprised that her house there had a mini refrigerator rather than a full-sized one. Used to the American concept of buying groceries for the week all at once, she could not fathom purchasing a small amount of food every day; it was difficult for her to get used to this seemingly small change. She also had to adjust to lukewarm water at restaurants, as very few offered ice in Ireland. All these small “inconveniences” that my brother and mom had to adapt to only seemed like inconveniences due to their American expectations. Before studying abroad, neither one of them had lived anywhere other than the United States for an extended period of time; they were used to certain U.S. societal norms. By experiencing a different society, they realized that the world is much bigger than the United States, and it helped them better appreciate other cultures. Spending a semester studying outside of the U.S. can also be a worthwhile experience for Princeton’s international students. While international students have already experienced the benefits of studying abroad by leaving their home country to study at Princeton, there
are always more cultures to explore. Studying abroad can seem difficult at the University. With sophomore spring bicker, junior independent work, and the senior thesis, it appears that there is never an ideal time to spend a semester abroad. Nonetheless, the Office of International Programs offers students an immense amount of opportunities abroad. The Office’s website also explains that studying abroad is possible, even with the aforementioned obstacles. While studying on campus can be amazing and it is understandable to want to be here for as long as possible, the world is much larger than our 600 acres here in New Jersey. Spending a semester abroad might not be a viable option for every student for a variety of reasons, whether those be finances, disabilities, or major requirements. Students who are able to study abroad, however, should at least consider it. Living abroad for a semester can open your eyes to the world outside of the United States, and make you realize the U.S. way is not necessarily the “right” way. Katie Goldman is a first-year from Western Springs, Ill. She can be reached at kpg3@princeton.edu.
A Response to President Eisgruber: Why we can’t reformulate the box Micah Herskind
Guest Columnist
It’s no small thing to throw the symbolic weight of Princeton University behind a cause. As such, it’s been deeply encouraging to see President Eisgruber’s recent advocacy on behalf of the trans community and his leadership in the university’s challenge against President Donald Trump’s DACA decision. President Eisgruber’s actions have shown that in some cases, he is willing to put resources and reputation on the line for justice, and that he is an effective advocate when he chooses to do so. These developments make President Eisgruber’s recent statements on Students for Prison Education and Reform’s (SPEAR) Ban the Box campaign all the more disappointing. After a Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) presentation from several SPEAR members on Monday afternoon, President Eisgruber announced that he, as the final arbiter of whether the University bans the box, was largely opposed. The Ban the Box campaign at Princeton began in 2012, and asks the University to remove the question regarding an applicant’s criminal record from its application. Now that the Common App itself announced that it would be removing the box from its application altogether, it is an individual university’s decision whether to ask the question on its supplemental applications. President Eisgruber offered two justifications for his inclination against banning the box. Because his reasons represent frequentlyoffered objections, I want to consider them both in turn. First, in response to the fact that 50 colleges and universities (including the SUNY and UC systems and the University’s own graduate school) have removed the box entirely, reporting no increase in cam-
pus crime, President Eisgruber stated, “We have a process that … looks at values and leadership characteristics generally, that’s a different kind of admission process … from the one that’s used in the graduate school and it’s also different from the one that’s used in many of the schools that you used as reference points.” In addition to considering positive evidence of leadership and values, Eisgruber explained, “I don’t see a reason to ignore — although there may be times when it’s appropriate to mitigate or take into account countervailing factors — entirely evidence that somebody has engaged in criminal activity.” We gather from this statement that the University believes “evidence that someone has engaged in criminal activity” is an appropriate indicator of leadership and values. But when we use information from the box, we are not simply measuring who has made the decision to “[engage] in criminal activity.” Instead, we are measuring who has been caught for committing what has been labeled a crime. For example, while people of all races use marijuana at similar rates, New Jersey arrests black people at three times the rate it arrests white people for marijuana possession. So when we use the box, we’re actually measuring who has been most policed, surveilled, and caged. The idea that we can objectively gauge who has committed a “crime” rests on the assumption that those who are convicted of crimes are the same group as those who have committed crimes. This assumption is, quite simply, dead wrong; researchers at our very own university and elsewhere have continually shown that our very definitions of criminality were shaped around blackness — indeed, the origins of many of our criminal laws quite explicitly criminalized the mere fact of blackness and poverty, both of which are often
encountered in tandem. The box draws information from a prison system that is 40 percent black, 60 percent people of color and composed of people who have an average income 41 percent lower than non-incarcerated people of similar ages. How could such a visibly racist and classist system be a valid indicator of “values and leadership?” Again, if those convicted of crimes were placed on a pie chart of all those who have committed crimes, they’d be a relatively small slice. For example, I had friends who were high more often than not, but the police never came for them, and certainly never charged or incarcerated them. No, our private school credentials were enough to protect us from daily policing. Nor did acquaintances who got drunk and committed what we would certainly identify as acts of sexual assault ever get charged; no, my wealthy white communities were content to talk it out, sweep it under the rug, or perhaps — at worst — restrict car privileges for the rest of the week. Just as importantly, if we truly want to evaluate leadership and values, we should consider the sheer determination and ability to overcome adversity marked by a formerly incarcerated person’s application for university. President Eisgruber’s second justification for opposing banning the box involves risk: “I do think that there are some kinds of … serious criminal activity that may be related to risks that would occur on campus. And we take those kinds of risks seriously.” It makes sense to worry about students’ safety. However, as stated, the box is not an accurate metric of who commits crimes. As data from the fifty colleges and universities that have banned the box completely have shown, there was no difference in crimes rates between universities that had and had not banned the box. And if we
really want to take harm seriously — such as sexual assault — we can start by targeting the most common sites of sexual assault (eating clubs), toxic drinking culture, and toxic masculinity, not those who have been overpoliced their entire lives. President Eisgruber ended by indicating his openness to not remove, but reformulate, the box in such a way that “mitigates some of the determinants and disadvantages that [SPEAR] referred to.” I appreciate President Eisgruber’s willingness to compromise. The problem, however, is that the harm of the box emerges even before one checks it and opens himself or herself up to discrimination by admissions officers. Instead, research shows the presence of the box alone is enough to deter students from applying. In a study of SUNY schools, for each denied applicant who checked the box, 15 other applicants who also checked “yes” failed to complete the application. By keeping the box — regardless of its form — we communicate our willingness to let racism and classism inform our admissions process. By keeping the box, we forgo the chance to marshal education toward reducing recidivism. And by keeping the box, we indicate our willing complicity to be an additional arm of the criminal justice system, contributing to the ongoing punishment of those who have putatively already “served their time.” One thing is clear: it’s time to ban — not reformulate — the box. The box is a proxy for race and poverty, not criminality, and therefore stands in direct contrast to the University’s stated values of diversity and inclusion. Micah Herskind is a senior African American Studies major from Buffalo, New York. He is also the president of Students for Prison Education and Reform (SPEAR). He can be reached at micahh@ princeton.edu.
vol. cxlii
editor-in-chief
Marcia Brown ’19 business manager
Ryan Gizzie ’19
BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 trustees Francesca Barber David Baumgarten ’06 Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Kavita Saini ’09 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Abigail Williams ’14 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 William R. Elfers ’71 Kathleen Kiely ’77 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73 trustees ex officio Marcia Brown ’19 Ryan Gizzie ’19
142ND MANAGING BOARD managing editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Sam Parsons ’19 head news editor Claire Thornton ’19 associate news editors Ariel Chen ’20 Ivy Truong ’21 associate news and film editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 head opinion editor Emily Erdos ’19 associate opinion editors Jon Ort ’21 Cy Watsky ’21 head sports editors David Xin ’19 Chris Murphy ’20 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Jack Graham ’20 associate street editors Danielle Hoffman ’20 Lyric Perot ’20 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20 chief copy editors Marina Latif ’19 Arthur Mateos ’19 Catherine Benedict ’20 head design editor Rachel Brill ’19 associate design editor Charlotte Adamo ’21 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19 head photo editor Risa Gelles-Watnick ’21
NIGHT STAFF copy Ava Jiang ’21 Esther Levy ’22 Jade Olurin ’21 Elizabeth Parker ’21 Lydia You ’22 design Irina Liu ’21
Thursday November 15, 2018
Opinion
page 7
{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }
A better birthright
Avner Goldstein
Contributing Columnist
Over fall break, I travelled to Israel and the West Bank with fellow classmates and professor as part of a seminar on the history of the region. While on the trip, I was able to do something that, for some reason, had been oddly missing for much of my life and education: I interacted with Palestinians. I was able to challenge my own politics and narratives and was forced to see them in a broader context. I began to question why that up to this point my Jewish education and upbringing allowed almost no way for me to engage with Palestinian voices, despite my plethora of opportunities to engage with Israel in an “apolitical” way. For example, each year, the University’s Center for Jewish Life sends students on Birthright trips to Israel. Birthright is an educational program on many college campuses that provides Jewish students with a free, 10-day trip to Israel in order to foster a connection with the Jewish state. In many ways, I appreciate Birthright’s efforts to help cultivate Jewish youth’s relationship with Israel. However, amidst the camel rides, nights out in Tel Aviv,
and frequent falafel runs, there is one glaring component missing from the Birthright itinerary: Palestinians. Palestinians are a large group of people living under Israeli occupation, and ignoring them does a disservice to any program claiming to provide Israel education. Birthright policy prohibits Palestinians — even Arab Israelis — from speaking on campus trips, thereby omitting and erasing any kind of Palestinian narrative on the 10-day educational program. Many will argue that Birthright is an apolitical trip, saying that the trip seeks to provide engagement with Israeli and Jewish culture rather than its politics. For participants and even many trip organizers, including the Center for Jewish Life, Birthright is a trip that stimulates Jewish religious and cultural connection to Israel. While it might appear easy to dismiss any political concerns surrounding Birthright, we must realize that Birthright is very politically motivated, and that claiming to be apolitical is an inherently political gesture. Apoliticism accepts the nature of politics as they currently are and allows rightwing actors to perpetuate the Israeli occupation. In other words, any discussion of Israel that relates to the occupation is considered political and divisive, yet ignoring the occupation, or even accept-
ing it, can be falsely deemed apolitical. For example, when J Street U Princeton brought the Israeli organization Breaking the Silence to campus almost two years ago, J Street student members were labeled disruptive and upsetting. Further, when students do not hear from Palestinians, it becomes more difficult to imagine Palestinians as human agents. Instead, we Jewish students are forced to imagine Palestinians as they are presented by right-wing actors. Birthright’s “donor-centric model” serves many explicitly political donors who fund many right-wing groups and other right-wing powerholders. Such donors include Sheldon Adelson, a casino magnate who made nearly $83 million in donations to Donald Trump and other Republicans and is a strong supporter of the right-wing Netanyahu government in Israel. So long as Jewish youth are not interacting with Palestinians, things like demolitions of villages will more easily take place under the radar. The Palestinian village of Khan Al-Ahmar continues to face the threat of demolition by Israeli forces and forced eviction from their homes. The demolition has consistently been delayed due to public pressure from the international community and student activists, yet the Jewish community’s silence
regarding Khan Al-Ahmar remains deafening. That silence is aided by the fact that Jewish students, who could be in a position to challenge that silence, have never meaningfully connected with Palestinians or heard their narrative, and Birthright is enabling such an erasure. Not only are Palestinian narratives erased on Birthright, but Palestinian homes are physically erased as demolitions in the West Bank and East Jerusalem continue. With this in mind, how can we make Birthright a program that properly connects Jewish youth with Israel, including its politics? We can start by calling for the University’s Birthright trip to have a Palestinian speaker, specifically someone from Area C of the West Bank, which is the region under complete Israeli control, and can speak to the realities of military occupation. The organization J Street U Princeton, of which I am a leader of on campus, has begun a campaign that calls for this addition to trip itineraries, including a petition that calls on the Center for Jewish Life to add such a speaker. The Center for Jewish Life provides alternative trips to Israel that allows students to connect to Israel in such a way, such as the upcoming Inside Israel trip led by Wilson School professor Daniel Kurtzer. I am excited to be a part of this trip’s delegation, but I must also question why
this trip – one that allows students to politically engage with Israel – is the exception to the regular (and free) Birthright trips. Right-wing politics will make us feel like there is nothing we can do – that we are powerless. In the past, I and many others have chosen to accept the politics as they currently are. We are made to feel alone in our politics, which makes it easier to label us as divisive. This feeling can eradicate any hope for political change a student might have – I speak from experience. Yet, when we organize our own personal anger into a shared anger, politics can be moved. Just a few weeks ago, Lara Alqasem was freed from detainment after many students and activists organized around her. Khan Al-Ahmar continues to enjoy relative peace so long as we continue our organized efforts to prevent demolition. We also have the power to make Birthright better. We need to push back against the dominant politics of the right and ensure that the Jewish community’s largest educational program in Israel does not seek to deny or obscure reality, but instead, meaningfully engages with the conflict and with Palestinians. Avner Goldstein is a sophomore from Greenville, S.C. He can be reached at amkg@princeton. edu.
Hiya, Edmund! chris huh ’21
..................................................
Like sports? Write for the sports section! Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com
Sports
Thursday November 15, 2018
page 8
{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S SOCCER
Men’s soccer wins Ivy title, set to face Michigan in NCAA tournament By Ethan Li
Contributor
Men’s soccer (10–5–2 overall, 5–1–1 Ivy) will begin its NCAA tournament run with a first-round matchup against the University of Michigan (12–5–2) Thursday night. This marks the Tigers’ first appearance in the tournament since 2010 and their tenth time overall. The game is set for 7 p.m. at the U-M Soccer Stadium, and live broadcast will be provided online by the Big Ten Network. If they win, Princeton will face No. 7 Notre Dame (10–6–2) Sunday at 5 p.m. The team earned the NCAA tournament bid by winning the 2018 Ivy League title. Princeton topped the Ivy League with an impressive 16 points, closely followed by second and third-place finishers Columbia and Dartmouth with 15 and 14 points, respectively. The team’s only loss came in its match with Yale last Saturday. Even before the match, Princeton had clinched the Ivy League championship, since Columbia, its closest competitor, had fallen earlier in the day to Cornell 2–1 in overtime. Princeton’s dominance in the league is reflected in its game stats: the Tigers led the Ivy League in shots and also conceded the fewest number of
COURTESY OF JACQUELYN DAVILA
Bobby Hickson and the Princeton defense will face a high-powered Michigan offense Thursday.
goals — 11 — in the season. “I’m so proud of this team,” says men’s soccer head coach Jim Barlow ’91. “The goal every year is to win the Ivy League championship and get to continue playing at this time of year, and we’re really excited
for the opportunity to go out there and compete.” There is no doubt that the team is resilient. The nonconference season began with a difficult 1–3–0 record, but Princeton was able to bounce back. Barlow comments that
after overcoming the strenuous start and numerous injuries, the “best reward is getting to extend the season.” One key player in Princeton’s lineup is sophomore midfielder Kevin O’Toole. Ivy League head coaches voted
him the Offensive Player of the Year for his four season goals and three assists. Along with senior forward Sean McSherry and sophomore defender Richard Wolf, O’Toole was selected as an All-Ivy First Team honoree. Princeton’s offense has four players who have all scored four or more goals in the season. O’Toole, McSherry, senior forward Jeremy Colvin, and sophomore forward Gaby Paniagua comprise this star-studded offense. NCAA opponent Michigan also has a notably dangerous offense, with an average of 1.84 goals per game, the second highest in the Big Ten. Conversely, Princeton’s defense is at an impressive 0.617 goals against average, the ninth best in the nation. Michigan is coming off of a strong run for the Big Ten Tournament championship two weeks ago; they finished third in the Big Ten regular season. The clash between Michigan’s offensive spark and Princeton’s staunch defense will be interesting. Overall, the NCAA tournament is densely packed with powerful college teams. The 48-team field is comprised of 24 conference champions and 24 selected teams. Among them are three-time defending champion Stanford (11–2– 4), No. 1 Wake Forest (17–2–0), and No. 2 Indiana (17–2–1).
CROSS COUNTRY
Men’s, women’s cross country teams qualify for NCAA championships By Sam Shapiro Staff Writer
In the capstone race of the season, Princeton men’s and women’s cross country will compete at the 2018 NCAA Cross Country Championships at the University of Wisconsin this Saturday. Based on their stellar finishes in the NCAA Mid-Atlantic Regional Championship last weekend, both teams earned bids to the championship race.
Nationally, only 31 teams are granted bids; in order to guarantee a bid, a team must finish top-two in their region (13 teams are also given at-large bids.) Princeton women’s cross country placed second in the Mid-Atlantic region, securing a bid to the championship race by beating out Penn State. The Tigers were projected as underdogs, but in an epic race, they came out on top. With a less than 20-second spread
between the top five scorers (all of whom earned all-region honors), Princeton’s finish was nothing short of a full-team effort. “We put ourselves up at the front from the beginning and tried to hold on for most of it,” said sophomore Melia Chittenden. Chittenden, who finished first amongst the Tigers at Ivy Heps, has been instrumental to the team’s success this season. “At the end of the race, we were in awe. That was what we
were waiting to do all season.” Going into Saturday, women’s cross country plans to approach the race in the same way, looking at what lead them to success. “We’re going to try to do exactly what we did last week — we’re going to try and put ourselves up and the front, run like we’ve got nothing to lose, and stay together as a pack,” said Chittenden. “If one of us can make it up to the front, we all can. We’re such a deep team
COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM
Women’s cross country finished second in the Mid-Atlantic to earn a spot in the NCAA championships.
Tweet of the Day “O’Toole named @IvyLeague Player of the Year; Barlow Coach of the Year” Princeton Men’s Soccer (@ TigerMensSoccer),
this year, and we know that if any one of us can run a certain time, the rest of us can too.” The women’s team is bolstered by its strong senior class, four of whom will be travelling to Wisconsin. The team is ranked at 17 nationally; this will be the team’s first appearance in the championship race since 2015. After capturing the Heps title, Princeton men’s cross country continued its winning streak, coming in first at the Mid-Atlantic regional championships. Four runners (sophomore Matt Grossman, junior Conor Lundy, junior Gannon Willcutts, and junior Viraj Deokar) received all-region honors. The team is ranked at 25, but is confident that it can finish higher and hopes to place in the top 15. In 2017, the team finished 28th overall. The race is forecast to have brutal conditions, with temperatures reaching the twenties. This certainly won’t faze Princeton, and may be even be an advantage over their competitors, many of whom hail from the West Coast. Princeton has become accustomed to racing in terrible conditions, as Heps and the regional championships were rainy, cold races. The NCAA championship race can be streamed on flotrack.com. Women will race at 11:45 a.m. and men will race 12:45 p.m. EST.
Stat of the Day
Follow us
2004
Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!
The last time Princeton field hockey did not make the NCAA tournament was 2004.