Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of ' archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
1000 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
I propose the establishment of Mental Health Peers. Mental Health Peers will provide a concrete service in the University community by training students how to be friends in mental crisis. We will train our friends, classmates, and peers how to talk about mental health.
Poetry has been good to me in this: It is language, and perhaps one day I will speak. I do not know if time will reincarnate my voice into its own entity, or if one day my old age will legitimize my words and open up an unbridled spot for my voice.
The question is how to use the advantages of the scope and scale of the support for the referenda. The mass of the student body is critical. Utilizing the popular support of the referenda to start a collective bargaining process is our strongest position.
Three weeks is enough time to see the important people in one’s life, but not enough to fully slip into the routines of home again.
On-campus activism is highly needed and noble, but only a synthesis of on-campus and off-campus activism can destroy deep-seated inequality, exclusion, and hardship.
Instead, the administration has offered no timetable, writing only that the referenda “cannot take effect at this time.” Such oblique language makes me doubt that anything will be done.
Raising the standard of evidence plus lowering penalties seems to encourage cheating more than anything else. Honestly, the administration saved students from themselves.
Since it is almost certain that the University will not reverse its decision on the three referenda, students should move on and focus on how they can play a role in the formal process taking place to review the Honor System.
I only learned what “Netflix and chill” meant after I once suggested to a guy I liked that we do so sometime. He quickly texted me back to say that he was shocked by my honesty. “You’re usually pretty shy,” he said. “Are you sure?” I couldn’t understand why he was so hesitant. “What do you mean?” I responded. “I’m only inviting you to watch a movie.”
I hate doing laundry at Princeton. The fact that basic respect for another student's time and property is severely lacking in Princeton laundry rooms isn’t a “first world problem”; rather, it’s indicative of a universal crisis of character, community, and integrity.
Around this time every year, it is a solemn and holy tradition for Princeton Undergraduates to start complaining about a peculiarity of the Princeton academic calendar. Exams after break? Ew. But I argue that if you closely examine the arguments for both having exams before break, and having exams after break, it is clear that having exams after break is the superior (if counter-intuitive) choice. Princeton Students should not be so hasty to wish away one of the great structural advantages Princeton gives us.
For many, being vegetarian or vegan means more than a dietary restriction – it’s a lifestyle that dictates not only what an individual puts in their body, but also what an individual puts on their body. Many vegans and vegetarians choose to eliminate animal skins and furs from their wardrobe and instead wear synthetic alternatives.
Everyone has a right to arms under the Second Amendment. It is therefore immoral and illegal to deny our most vulnerable citizens their right to self-protection. Squirrels, who are people too, live in a precarious balance of life and death. We can only improve the balance on life’s side by providing more firearms.
Here at Princeton, some go so far as to allege that the University has become a haven of left-wing groupthink. For its part, the left seems like it will tear itself apart over ideological differences — just look at the Ta-Nehisi Coates and Cornel West feud, or the continued battles in the Democratic Party between the Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton wings.
Princeton undergraduate students and alumni: You should be absolutely furious right now. We just had our (honor-) constitutionally-endowed rights obliterated by a short email sent by several administrators. These rights were guaranteed to us 125 years ago with the establishment of the Honor Constitution and yet, one well-timed email was enough to dismantle them.
The inclusion of sophomore and junior class presidents on the Honor Committee doesn't make sense. Class senators should replace them due to their work on school policy and representation of students’ opinions. Class presidents should be focused on bringing fun and unity to their classes. Suspending a student for cheating is the exact opposite of that.
The administrators who wrote the email did not do anything untoward. The erroneous, careless, and irresponsible actions of the USG and the USG subcommittee unnecessarily constructed this ignominious debacle.
I write in response to Sarah Sakha’s response to my opinion piece demonstrating that Title IX proceedings are far less fair than those of the Honor Code. I have nothing to add to my original argument, which was based on an undisputed, factual comparison of the two sets of procedures. As Sakha herself wrote: “Ultimately, I agree with Berger’s overarching argument. Yes, the Honor Code Constitution presents stipulations far stricter than those presented by Title IX regulations.” In response to Sakha’s piece, I have three additional points.
Incoming Undergraduate Student Government President Rachel Yee has promised to improve USG’s communication with the student community at large. Sadly, far too many students live under the mistaken impression that USG “doesn’t do anything.” My fellow columnist Jan Domingo Alsina went so far as to argue that our Undergraduate Student Government members were nothing but “glorified social event organizers” — and that there was nothing inherently political about the position.