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.
By Uwe Reinhardt
It is always to be welcomed when students give written or spoken expression to their moral sentiments on issues outside the University’s comfortable cocoon and debate these sentiments in a manner that befits a great university.
At the same time, it is less heartening when these expressions lead to facile and morally empty policy recommendations for the operation of the University at large.
From the viewpoint of an economist, for example, having the University’s investment arm, PRINCO, rid itself of the stock certificates on a set of companies whose role in Israel and the West Bank is deplored by the advocates of disinvestment strikes me as such an empty gesture.
One certainly can debate this issue from a strictly partisan basis, favoring one side or the other, as different factions on this campus have amply done.
One can also debate whether it is reasonable to force upon the University community a general policy on which that community is as sharply divided as it is on this issue.
ByCourtney Buoncore '18 and Gwyndolyn Goldfeder '18
Most Princeton students operate under the assumption that our campus promotes intellectual and moral integrity, as well as academic transparency.
When I first saw the Lawnparties announcement video, my initial reaction was, “What a tasteless and offensive early April fools joke.” When I found out that the man rapping about a “little stupid-ass bitch” would, in fact, be the headlining act in May, I was not shocked or horrified.
This year multiple photo campaigns were launched and executed by a variety of different groups. Just this semester, we have had the USG Body Image campaign, the SHARE Consent campaign, the Hidden Minority photo campaign and more.
By Lina Saud '15
We grew up in a world intimately tied to the land of our parents and grandparents.
By Caroline Snowden '17
When we signed "Rights, Rules, Responsibilities" at the beginning of our freshman year, we committed ourselves to creating a “community in which all members can participate fully and equally.” As Princetonians, we are both honored and compelled to be part of this effort for positive impact in our school, our country and the world.
It is therefore imperative that, when our Princeton community is challenged to respond to a complex and divisive issue, we remember our promise.
An Egyptian-American activist, Mohamed Soltan, was recently sentenced to life in prison by an Egyptian court.
Initially, I did not understand the rage in response to Urban Congo. I was indifferent to the performance and found it nothing more than slightly amusing.
At least, someone who isn’t affiliated with the University, scouring Yik Yak or recent press coverage, would think this.
What does “free speech” mean? Recent campus events have shown that campus is split: columnist Newby Parton writes without qualification that “silencing offensive speech... solves nothing that can’t be solved by growing thicker skin,” while students protest the chapel meeting with signs lambasting the administration’s weak response to Urban Congo and claiming that President Eisgruber wrote, “[Racism] may not be suppressed.” These events, as well as the mixed responses to the University’s new statement on academic freedom, demonstrate that students have very different conceptions of free speech.The two sides of this campus debate basically fall in line with the two competing theories of free speech on the world stage.
In the aftermath of the Urban Congo fiasco and the Big Sean controversy, many of my fellow students have expressed disdain of a perceived boom of liberal sensitivity and outspokenness.
We would like to thank columnist Reva Abrol for her recent article, “A vicious cycle of weak civic engagement,” published last month.
By now, almost all of those reading this will have seen University President Eisgruber ’83’s campus-wide email regarding the recent social media explosions of former student group Urban Congo’s performance last week and of the student-led protest of rapper Big Sean’s upcoming Lawnparties appearance.
On a student panel I was on a few days ago, I was seated before three dozen impressionable young men, ranging from the ages of 11 to 15.
What is home? According to the famous American poet Maya Angelou, it is, “the safe place where we can go as we are and not be questioned.”
As the semester comes to a close and many students have begun to solidify their summer plans, I have repeatedly asked myself this question.
There is perhaps no way to accurately convey the experience of living with an eating disorder, but over the course of the past seven years the best way I have discovered to (concisely) convey the point has been to describe a pernicious “voice” that is simultaneously mine and not mine that whispers self-loathing offers of faux control into my consciousness.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE, rates universities on their commitment to free speech.
This year, I enrolled in the Humanities Sequence, a year-long class that seeks to examine canonical Western literature — from Homer to Virginia Woolf — in an interdisciplinary manner.
My brother and I were on the airplane, the two of us next to each other in a three-person row.
As a recent re-adopter of Yik Yak and a (not so) proud Facebook procrastinator, I, like the rest of campus, have witnessed the explosion of social media discussion of racism on campus over the last few days.