I remember meeting him through rush. We did not have much in common at all. I came from an all-boys high school, so I knew I wanted to join a fraternity to have the same type of camaraderie I had experienced there. I was awkward as a freshman, overwhelmed by Princeton, and through the whirlwind of freshman rush I became great friends with this guy. When things got rough for both of us sophomore year, we bonded and became best friends. I have no doubt that this friendship will last forever.
I had enough gripes with Princeton as a student that I left the place telling people I would probably never donate money to the University. But most of that was personal stuff. I would have gotten over it, eventually.
But I will not get over the latest blow from the administration: its decision to ban freshman rush. Not only because I think it is damaging the culture of Princeton, but because the administration will not even be honest with us about its motivations.
The University claims that the decision is aimed at reducing elitism and exclusivity; they do not want people segregating themselves into cliques until they have had time to experience Princeton for a little while first. But there is no doubt that Princeton is shrouded in elitism. If you are a student and you do not think this is true, then it is probably because you benefit from it first-hand. Unless something dramatic has changed over the last year and a half that I have been gone, Princeton remains a place where you learn the art of social-climbing — the hard way.
I want the University to tell us that the real motivation behind this shift is that they just have it in for Greek life.
I know that this is true because I called the administration to hear their thoughts and listened to them contradict themselves several times. I asked, “What might stop me from starting the ‘Jeff Kirchick Club,’ rushing freshmen for my elite group, and having drinking parties together?” The answer — and I kid you not — was that because my organization would not be tied to any national chapter, this would be perfectly acceptable. So it does not seem that the University really thinks that this is a matter of self-segregation.
The administration believes that Greek organizations really do not do much. I know this because they told me so. I politely explained how I felt that pretty much any organization — an athletics team, a dance club, a Greek organization — typically fed into an eating club, and by nature of that, established cliques. But what I was told in return was that “an organization like the football team has a purpose.”
Whether or not the social purposes of being in a fraternity are valid is a debate that will exist for a long time. I happen to think that the social experience of my fraternity was what kept me from transferring to another school. But what is indisputable is the tremendous good that could come from Greek life if it had the support of the administration. Look at any southern school and you will see what I mean.
I also repeated many times how I understood that the University must be worried about all these avenues through which underage drinking may occur and would probably want to cut the one that would offend fewer alumni. This was about dollars and cents. I said this several times, with a pause, in the hope that I might be interrupted and given a different motivation behind the decision. I was never interrupted.
What I found most amusing was that the University mentioned eating clubs in their analysis of all of this, claiming that they wanted to support this culture of staying in your residential college and maybe joining an eating club.
My senior year, I tried to join an eating club. Everyone in this particular club had approved me, except for someone at the very end who crafted a lie and slandered me. This resulted in my not being accepted by the club.
I pleaded with the University to help restore my name. This was an issue about my well-being, as I no longer felt comfortable being around many of the people I typically hung out with. Suddenly, they looked at me differently. The University insisted that they had no tie with the eating clubs and could not help me.
Eventually, the person who shaped the lie wrote an apology email to the entire eating club for misleading them about me with false information. Several members of that club spent the next few days apologizing to me for what had happened.
The University seems pretty happy to change teams when it is convenient for them. I want them to be honest when it is convenient for me.
Jeff Kirchick is an alumnus of the Class of 2010 and a member of a fraternity. He can be reached at jeff.kirchick@gmail.com.
Read More
Why do two-thirds of your summer research wages go to Princeton, anyway?
Isaac BarsoumThe income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?
The income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?
Seniors deserve better than Jay Shetty
Izabela Konopka and Joshua YangWe are writing to express our strong disapproval of the selection of Jay Shetty as the 2025 Class Day speaker. We deserve better than a self-help guru and repeated plagiarist who runs a “school” that an expert claims exhibits “similar patterns” to a multi-level marketing scheme.
We are writing to express our strong disapproval of the selection of Jay Shetty as the 2025 Class Day speaker. We deserve better than a self-help guru and repeated plagiarist who runs a “school” that an expert claims exhibits “similar patterns” to a multi-level marketing scheme.
The CPUC must not gut its Judicial Committee
Bill HewittEnding the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.
Ending the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.