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.
Sophomores make two important decisions during their spring semester. They choose their eating club and their concentration. Statistics derived from Tigerbook, the University meal exchange website, and the Office of the Registrar indicate that socioeconomic status may affect both decisions.
If Princeton’s campus were a book, what stories would a visitor read in its stones?
When sophomores enter eating clubs’ doors this week, they may get the gut feeling that nothing they do or say matters in Bicker. Rumors about affiliations’ role on the Street have swirled for years and haunt Real Talk Princeton posts. But there’s never been definitive evidence to prove any of this gossip.
If past years’ statistics are any indication, around 70 percent of the Class of 2021 is now bickering for acceptance into the Street’s six selective eating clubs (Cannon Dial Elm Club, Cap & Gown Club, Cottage Club, Ivy Club, Tiger Inn, and Tower Club). Later this week, sophomores will nervously await the result of their Bicker and, consequently, their social fate for the next two-and-a-half years.
Each night, likely while you’re sleeping, we send our page files to a printer in Philadelphia. A few minutes later I get a call — usually from Mike or Leo — to tell me the pages are good to go.
Today, there are more female students, more FLI students, more students of color, and more students who identify as LGBTQ+ than there have ever been at the University. In covering this changing community, The Daily Princetonian has not kept pace.
In his Jan. 6 opinion piece in The Daily Princetonian, Jon Ort ’21 underscores the importance of academic freedom that is the lifeblood of the University, but incorrectly suggests that Google’s recently announced plans to open an artificial intelligence research lab in Princeton undercuts that freedom.
In 1991, a brutal video of police officers beating motorcyclist Rodney King was released to the general public. Across the country outrage surged, with anger towards King’s assailants crossing racial and political lines. As critical theorist Kimberle Crenshaw describes, the video represented an “easy event for the entire mainstream of American culture to abhor, it did not present any of the hard questions of nineties’ controversies over race.” Disgust over the beating united left-leaning and conservative politicians alike; who, after all, couldn’t condemn a clear example of “old-style … racist power” that was caught on tape? Of course, Crenshaw wasn’t insinuating that the beating of King shouldn’t have been thoroughly condemned. The scholar merely points out that overt examples of racism, such as the King videotape, “[gave moderates] the opportunity to oppose clear-cut racism,” thus supposedly demonstrating that an ignorance on more nuanced racial issues was not “linked to interests in racial supremacy.” Though I diverge from Crenshaw, I begin my piece with echoes of her ideas.
A student project this semester, which I saw advertised by email, sought “to come up with a way to help mitigate the feelings of loneliness on Princeton’s campus.” To do so, these students solicited student feedback on one building: Frist Campus Center. Their idea, as they explained, is “to build upon the current student center (Frist) in a way that fosters interactions and brings meaningful connections back to the center of campus so that students will encounter one another more naturally.”
Malcolm X once said, “The most unprotected person in America is the black woman.”
Museums are more relevant now than ever. In a country that is so increasingly divided, where we have a president who uses fear-mongering tactics and hateful rhetoric to divide us even more, it is so important to go forth and seek out knowledge for yourself. Lack of knowledge about other cultures and other people breeds hostility, anger, and fear.
The author was granted anonymity due to his kinda rational fear of being murdered by radical feminists.
Recently, there have been objections raised to the punitive structure of the Honor Code of our grand institution. Critics contend that punishment is not only rigid and often excessive, but also is antithetical to the spirit of the code.
The winter is the most dangerous time of the year — not just for chapped lips, bitter finger tips, and icy ground, but for a University student’s pride. Whether it’s applying to internships and spring classes or approaching someone on the Street to initiate cuffing season, rejection looms in the air. Hearing “the applicant pool was more competitive than ever” and “it’s not you, it’s me” hit similar soft spots.
It took me far too long, but I recently acknowledged an experience of sexual assault while at the University. It was a textbook incident: the type that almost every University student hears about in campus-wide trainings or orientation programming. It was “typical” in that way, but I have come to learn that coping with a sexual assault is not nearly as simple as some programming makes it out to be. What they don’t tell you in the trainings is that the processing that has to occur in order to truly heal goes far beyond the moment at which the assault is reported, if it is reported at all.