163 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
On April 12, 2011 — seven years ago today — a much-loved senior Spanish lecturer at the University killed himself. The University had suspended him without due process, and in seeming violation of its own procedures. In the time since, there has never been an independent investigation of what the University did. Whenever I think of my Princeton experience, the University’s actions around the death of a beloved community member is what I remember most of all.
Believe it or not, there are people who have to clean up after us. A real-life human person wakes up at 5 a.m. on Monday morning, takes public transportation from Trenton, arrives on campus, walks into a bathroom and is welcomed by a toilet full of of two-day-old vomit. Then, that person has to clean it up.
Under this umbrella, just because we come from the same continent and many may be disadvantaged, does not mean we all vote Democrat. There is an immense socioeconomic diversity in Latin America, and despite popular assumptions, Latinos hold different views and ideologies in politics.
Gun violence takes lives. But it also takes some life away from the living. I’ve heard it said that our generation won’t stand for this kind of violence to continue once we are in power. Surely, our generation will do something. Please, my dear classmates and leaders of the future, let that be true.
Please join me in imploring the university and the town to make the walk signal automatic before, rather than right after, the inevitable tragedy.
We write to provide an update on the process by which we are reviewing the recent referenda regarding the Honor Constitution. As explained in a letter sent to students on Jan. 4, three of the four proposed amendments were remanded for consideration by the faculty Committee on Examinations and Standing.
Should there necessarily be violent resistance in order to prove it is unwelcome? Does silence in a career-threatening situation imply that it was welcome? If I had not reported that Sergio Verdú sexually harassed me in fear of losing my research career, would it not have been sexual harassment?
Have the lives taken by suicide at our school not been enough of a red flag? This is our call to action.
Sexual misconduct, and the University's inadequate response to it, has become a much needed topic of discussion, in part because of Yeohee Im’s bravery to discuss it. As was reported this week in the Daily Princetonian, I was one of the people who gave reports to the University surrounding this incident. Notably, the reports began even before Yeohee’s unfortunate incident.
I would like to respond to a recent article in The Daily Princetonian detailing “new allegations'' against my colleague and mentor, Professor Sergio Verdú. It is troubling how this article constructs its narrative by enveloping Verdú, as well as all the women associated with him, in a fog of rumor, suspicion, and supposition. By publishing an article with such sensationalism and general lack of concrete facts the ‘Prince’ appears to be driven by a tunnel vision desire to vilify Verdú, and not by journalistic integrity, duty to inform the public, or concern for the women involved.
Remember that eating clubs are only one potential aspect of your upperclassmen life. Decisions are scary, but they also lead to exciting changes!
In the end, credulity remains America's worst enemy. Our still willing inclination to believe that personal and societal redemption can somehow lie in politics describes a potentially fatal disorder.
Students who remained missed the opportunity to join their fellow students outside the classroom, to be curious about the histories and lived experiences that make this one word so intolerable.
As an anthropologist teaching in the Princeton Writing Program whose courses regularly involve offensive material, I would like to weigh in on the recent controversy surrounding Lawrence Rosen’s use of the N-word in his class. In short, I write in support of the students who walked out on Rosen.
Letter to the Editor: I am hereby skipping my morning run to write a brief response to Professor Rouse's Feb. 8 letter.
In her February 8th letter to the editor, Professor Carolyn Rouse offered a pedagogy for Rosen’s class as contextual background for why certain students should not have walked out. Unfortunately, her letter entirely misses the point as to why the students walked out of class.
I write to provide important context to the events reported on Feb. 7 in the Daily Princetonian story “Students walk out of anthropology lecture after professor uses the word “n****r.” Like every semester, professor Lawrence Rosen started the class by breaking a number of taboos in order to get the students to recognize their emotional response to cultural symbols. Rosen was fighting battles for women, Native Americans, and African-Americans before these students were born.
Princeton Pro-Life (PPL) is a campus group. The President may be reached at email@example.com.
At Princeton, another year has come and gone, and with it the cycle of all our peculiar rituals. This week, a significant portion of the junior and senior classes gather in big mansions behind locked doors (they’re locked: I’ve checked) to cast judgment on a significant portion of the sophomore class. They will display the sophomore’s names and photos, hear the case for and against the social merits of each, and then, one by one, vote on whether or not to admit the sophomore in question into their mansion.
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.