Bicker keeps us from accessing Princeton's diverse student body

Princeton has taken great strides in recent years to shed its traditional elitist image. Providing financial aid through grants along with the admission's increasing emphasis on diversity and nonacademic experiences are both indicators of the administration's intent to changing Princeton's reputation as a predominantly white-upper-middle-class institution. Over the past several years, faculty, administrators and students alike have debated self-segregation, cultural understanding, and social tolerance on campusissues that are central to successfully transforming Princeton into a truly open and diverse campus.

The Princeton student body is certainly not lacking in diversity, providing a cross section of the best the world has to offer. What concerns me is not the student population itself but rather the social environment that the Bicker system on campus creates.

I am certainly not the first to criticize the role of the Street in Princeton's social atmosphere, nor am I the only one who sees the Bicker system inherently detrimental. Many other students who choose not to go to the Street on weekend nights or who decide not to bicker would agree with me. However, I want to go further and suggest that Bicker and the elitism that stems from it is the greatest obstacle that diversity faces at this school. Despite all efforts made to foster a diverse and open community, Bicker continues to perpetuate elitism at Princeton.

This criticism is in no way an attack on the Street itself. I see many virtues in the eating club system and the potential it has as a social meeting ground for the various members of the Princeton community. Yet, this potential is rarely met because the Bicker system perverts it. Bicker fosters elitism on campus. For those who have successfully completed the process, it can create a false sense of superiority and status over others.

It produces an unnatural social environment. The competitive nature of Bicker encourages an atmosphere based on networking and often disingenuous self-presentations. In an environment where conformity can be a sign of membership, people are encouraged to abandon themselves in order to follow social standards. As a result, Bicker homogenizes the school, molding a diverse population to fit traditional Princeton.

Finally, the Bicker system does not allow for an open-minded community. It segregates the population between those that Bicker and those that don't. People within the system tend to alienate themselves from others different from them while those outside this environment presume stereotypes and unfounded judgments on those within. In other words, the Bicker system makes it difficult for people to meet others on campus and greatly limits the student population from accessing its own diversity.

Certainly this does not hold for all who bicker. But what if the Bicker system was rid of entirely? Would the social life better healthier if all club memberships were determined by lottery or some better nonexclusive selection process? Would clubs lose their identities?

Probably not, as groups of students can still sign in together. However, the identities of each club would change constantly. Rather than having certain perpetuating stereotypes, each club will be defined by its current members. Some will be overwhelmingly popular while others will suffer from low membership. But over time the membership numbers will prove to be cyclical. Proponents of the bicker system will argue that Princeton already has this in its non-bicker clubs. However, I believe very strongly that the unhealthy social environment created by Bicker affects the mindset of every Princetonian; the existence of non-selective clubs alone will not solve this problem.

Imagine a street where you can go into any club, meet people not with the intent of networking or obtaining membership but rather with the sole purpose of truly getting to know someone. We know that the Princeton community is plenty diverse, we just need to foster the environment that would allow this diversity to express itself. This may sound too good to be true but isn't that what a truly diverse and open campus should feel like? Kyle Meng is a civil and envionmental engineering major from Chappaqua, N.Y. He can be reached at kmeng@princeton.edu.