___ (gender) __ (prep.) ___ (noun)

I believe this to be problematic for reasons similar to those of the signatories of today’s Letter to the Editor.

The campus conversation about __________ (noun1) ceases to be productive and is now redundant and prohibitive. The contributing voices have gotten confused, their purpose has lost meaning and the discussion has become __________ (adjective), __________ (adjective) and often devolving into stone-throwing.

Most of this has sprung out of reactions to the Steering Committee’s Report on Undergraduate __________ (possessive noun1) ___________ (noun3, noun for someone who defines or clarifies goals for a group and mobilizes the energies of members of the group to accomplish those goals), which identified disparities between the numbers of __________ (noun1) and __________ (noun2) in high-profile campus __________ (noun3) positions and encouraged more mentorship programs between ________ (sex) upperclassmen and freshmen and more encouragement from professors for ________ (sex) students to pursue __________ (noun3) positions.

The group published the results of the survey of __________ (gender) in __________ (noun3) here on campus and found that __________ (gender) are underrepresented in ______ (noun3) positions such as _____________ (student group type) _____________ (leadership position), ______________ (student group type) ____________ (leadership position) and ______________ (student group type) ___________ (leadership position).

The study concluded that we need to break the stereotypes of what __________ (noun1) and ______ (noun2) can do. However, those taking up this charge seem to have simply created a highly ___________ (adjective) cacophony of ideas, articles and speaker series that reinforce an innate idea of ______________ (gender) as incomplete. In efforts to empower __________ (gender), some have focused on the argument that __________ (gender) can be like __________ (gender). That is part of the idea — that __________ (gender) can do the things that were once reserved for __________ (gender) — but an unfortunate side effect of this sentiment is that classically _________ (adjective) traits and roles are disparaged. Care ought to be taken not to change the voice that tells _______ (gender) “You can’t do what ________ (noun) do” so much that it turns into “You must do what __________ (noun) do.”

But wouldn’t a still better voice advocate that “You can do anything anyone else can do”? Why bring __________ (noun) into this at all?

The idea for this column grew out of a feeling I had that every story published on the subject of women on campus has begun to take on the same rubric, using the same buzzwords and reiterating the same points. As I said, I find this to not only be useless and distracting, but also detract from any true accomplishment of the stated goals of the Steering Committee on Undergraduate Women’s Leadership and the University more generally. Months ago, I myself contributed to the number of columns published on the matter of gender and sexism. It was a response to what I saw as an active affront to women on campus, not a description of trends. Here, I don’t intend to discourage conversations of equality on campus; however, I think it can be done more productively.

Like the signatories of today’s Letter to the Editor, I wish to discourage the uninformative rhetoric the discussion has adopted — percentages, minorities and majorities are meaningless. It’s no longer a question of the gender makeup of departments or organizations, but a question of why they are the way they are.

This is a fault in the coverage of the ‘Prince’ and is also a major fault in the Steering Committee’s report; they both intentionally draw boundaries and frame stories so that a point about gender distribution will arise. The point has become to produce sensational percentages. We must move beyond this.

But, I don’t believe — as the Letter to the Editor suggests — that a solution to this is subjecting men’s involvement on campus to the same divisive scrutiny. Instead, I think the solution is to move forward and break from the stale conversation style and buzzwords that have come from the Steering Committee’s report. What we lose as a result of the rut we have fallen into is a deeper, meaningful discussion of what statistics mean, rather than their mere numerical significance. It’s equally unproductive to dwell on unequal representation of men in any field. If we could engage in a movement of “people-ism” and not force gender into conversation, we would make more productive gains in the pursuit of our egalitarian goals.

Lily Alberts is an economics major from Nashville, Tenn. She can be reached at lalberts@princeton.edu.