1000 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
I had thought that the debate about free speech on campus had settled after the protests concluded last fall, but I was proven wrong by the flyer incident in late March. A hacker remotely sent anti-Semitic flyers to campus printers. I believe that the University can limit particularly threatening hate speech, while still maintaining the individual right to freedom of speech.
Princeton University is not like Columbia. We do not have a core curriculum, and all distribution areas cover a large number of classes, creating a good ecosystem of competition.
*This piece is satirical.
Last year, when the candidates for president were still beginning to line up, a very popular candidate emerged in the North Carolina, Iowa and Minnesota polls. He polled at about 9 percent. I am, of course, talking about Deez Nuts.
The Editorial Board “reaffirmed” its support for nearly unlimited freedom of expression last week following the appearance of anti-Semitic flyers streaming from printers across campus, the contents of which the Board unequivocally denounced. They justified this position by highlighting that the purpose of a college is to be a “place for open discussion of arguments and ideas.”
As Marni Morse argued in her most recent column, a substantial barrier to many Princeton students pursuing internships or jobs in the nonprofit sector isn’t a lack of will, but rather a lack of access. Within the specific context of arguing for subsidized NJ Transit tickets for students, she wrote that it would especially benefit students who have to travel to New York or Philadelphia for interviews with nonprofits, since these organizations often can’t reimburse the cost of transportation. In turn, applying for those jobs and internships would become more feasible for low-income students and more palatable for students of all income levels.
I wasn’t expecting to agree with much of the talk on pornography and sex trafficking given this past Thursday by University of Pennsylvania psychology professor Dr. Mary Anne Layden at an event sponsored by the Anscombe Society. I went anyway, hoping I’d be exposed to new ideas or perspectives about how porn affects individuals in our society as well as in Western culture as a whole. The statistics shown were sobering: according to Layden, men exposed to porn are more likely than those not exposed to view rape as something that women “deserve,” are more likely to have unrealistic expectations as to who has what kind of sex and so on.
Princeton University is entangled in a love affair with the status quo. Like someone who’s been in a bad relationship for decades, the University consistently pretends that it will leave. But we all know how this story ends, from countless novels and soap operas: nothing will change. Princeton will refuse to let go of this status quo lover, which — despite promises of stability, prestige and privilege — fails to offer real benefits and ultimately harms all those who have warned against this relationship.
At 9:30 Monday morning, an email from President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 reached the Princeton community announcing that the Trustees had come to a decision regarding Woodrow Wilson’s name. Within the hour, the Prince had published a story on the non-change (followed shortly thereafter by articles from the NY Times to BuzzFeed). As of this writing, the Prince’s Facebook post carrying this breaking news story had precisely one comment: “meh.”
Recently the University rolled out the second part of the We Speak survey, designed to collect data on the prevalence of and attitudes toward sexual misconduct on Princeton’s campus so that the University can more effectively respond to such cases. As well-intentioned as it is, the survey is not sufficiently randomized to ensure an accurate representation of sexual misconduct on Princeton’s campus. In order to overcome this limitation, the University should introduce a shorter but mandatory sexual misconduct survey.
I am tired of reading New York Times Opinion articles titled some permutation of “The Humanities Are Important.”
This week Western media has been firmly fixed on the Brussels bombings. In her most recent “Prince” column, Sarah Sakha ’18 laments how coverage of the Brussels bombings has completely eclipsed coverage of attacks in Pakistan, Yemen, Turkey, Iraq and Ivory Coast. She writes, “Terrorism may not discriminate based on geographical location, but the mainstream media does.”
The first time I listened to “Work,” I was ridiculously excited. I was happy primarily because its release meant Rihanna’s highly anticipated eighth album was soon to follow. I also enjoyed the Caribbean dancehall style of the single and hoped that the other album tracks would draw on her Bajan roots.
Because I love seeing Broadway shows so much, I find myself shelling out upwards of $16 for a NJ Transit ticket to New York City a couple of times a semester. Round trip that’s more than$30, or roughly $100 a semester after three trips. It adds up.
It’s 2016, and that means there’s a presidential election happening in November. Even at Princeton, notorious for our lack of civic engagement compared to the other Ivy League institutions, the competition for the next President is apparent.
Before John F. Kennedy was a candidate for President, he was an applicant to Princeton. His 1935 application essay was handwritten; it was all of five tepid sentences. Hoping to ramp up some enthusiasm at the end, he concluded, "To be a ‘Princeton Man’ is indeed an enviable distinction."
There’s an unwritten rule about small talk as March tips into April: do not ask seniors about their theses. We retreat into Firestone in sleepless hibernation or hide away in our rooms to write. But I wondered — what happens to the seniors who, due to extenuating personal or familial circumstances, do not finish on time?
When terrorists struck France, Facebook rolled out a filter for profiles pictures of the French flag. When terrorists struck Belgium, the Eiffel Tower, Trevi Fountain and the Burj Khalifa lit up with the Belgian flag’s colors. In the aftermath of both attacks, the media provided ceaseless coverage.
There will never be a World War III— at least, not the way I have imagined it. Some of us may envision an upcoming World War as one that features the drafting of our boys to far-flung Pacific islands or small towns in Europe or Northern Africa. We may even worry that WWIII will mean food rationing, or hope that it would spruce up the U.S. economy the way the second World War did.
I was fortunate enough to do some traveling abroad over spring break, particularly spending time in art museums. As I walked into the room of the Louvre that displays the Mona Lisa, perhaps one of the most famous pieces of artwork in the Western canon, I was struck first not by the painting’s beauty, nor by its famous smile, but instead by the sea of selfie sticks around the painting, all in spite of the Louvre’s ban on selfie sticks inside the museum.