21 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(10/02/16 3:03pm)
I, along with a significant chunk of Princeton’s student body, sat down to watch the first presidential debate in Richardson Auditorium last week. Watching the debate in this setting created a communal feeling. People reacted together, hissing and clapping as if on cue.
(04/12/16 6:29pm)
We all understand that Princeton is an obscenely wealthy institution, steeped in the kind of riches that go back centuries, but after almost three years here, I still don’t understand what rights we as students have to access that money.
(03/31/16 6:14pm)
Recently the University rolled out the second part of the We Speak survey, designed to collect data on the prevalence of and attitudes toward sexual misconduct on Princeton’s campus so that the University can more effectively respond to such cases. As well-intentioned as it is, the survey is not sufficiently randomized to ensure an accurate representation of sexual misconduct on Princeton’s campus. In order to overcome this limitation, the University should introduce a shorter but mandatory sexual misconduct survey.Last year, over half of the student population responded to the We Speak survey. The results of the survey were disheartening, to say the least — 20 percent of students reported that they had experienced inappropriate sexual behavior last year, 13 percent of students reported that they had experienced nonconsensual sexual contact and four percent of students reported that they had experienced nonconsensual sexual penetration.It is entirely possible that these statistics are an accurate reflection of the rate of sexual assault on campus. However, that is not necessarily true. Since the sample size is self-selecting, Princeton students might have their own reasons for taking the survey, and this bias could potentially be skewing the results. For example, it seems likely that those who care most about the issue — who may personally have experienced sexual assault or know someone who has — will be most likely to take the survey. Other factors related to students’ personal circumstances could influence them to take or avoid the survey, meaning that the results are not necessarily representative of the entire student body’s experience.The University should respond to this challenge by introducing another survey about sexual misconduct, which would be mandatory for all students. Of course, were the survey to become compulsory, it would have to be shorter and less exhaustive, because the students taking the survey would not necessarily be interested in spending time on it and so therefore might answer untruthfully just to rush through the answers. However, the benefits of having an understanding of the entire student body’s experience would outweigh the disadvantages of a truncated survey.The University could easily incorporate a brief survey on sexual misconduct into either the academic check-in at the beginning of the year or one of the course evaluations given at the end of each semester. At both of these times, students already have to log in and fill out forms, so an additional survey would not be unreasonable. Additionally, by tying the survey to either course evaluations or to the check-in at the start of the fall semester, the University could ensure that everyone is required to participate. At the same time, the survey could remain anonymous, as it is under the current system.The We Speak survey is an admirable attempt by the administration to understand the climate of sexual misconduct on campus. However, as long as it remains a voluntary survey, it can only provide an incomplete picture. The self-selecting nature of the survey respondents is a fatal flaw in its design. While the in-depth nature of the survey ensures that it still has a place on campus, the addition of a much shorter survey to be taken by all students on campus would help the administration and the rest of the Princeton community have a fuller understanding of the reality of the true experiences of the student body as a whole. Policies should be created or refined with an accurate understanding of the scope and nature of sexual misconduct on campus.Zeena Mubarak is a Near Eastern Studies major from Fairfax, Va. She can be reached at zmubarak@princeton.edu.
(02/23/16 7:00pm)
Last weekend, I saw Raks Odalisque’s show "Dawn." Raks O is Princeton’s belly dance company. Unfortunately, its interpretation of belly dancing relies on and reinforces outdated Orientalist stereotypes. The group is dangerous not only because it perpetuates those stereotypes but also because it misrepresents the varied cultures of the Middle East.
(02/14/16 4:48pm)
Last spring, college students nationwide discovered that they had the right to view their college admissions files. Word quickly spread through Buzzfeed and many college newspapers, including “the Prince.” This new information meant that, for the first time, students at Princeton and elsewhere could find out exactly why they were accepted into their respective schools.
(11/18/15 7:00pm)
On Wednesday, the Black Justice League presented to the student body and the administration a list of three demands, designed to make Princeton more welcoming to black students. The first of these demands was to problematize the legacy of former University president Woodrow Wilson and remove his name from the Woodrow Wilson School and Wilson residential college, and to remove the mural of his face from Wilson dining hall. Problematizing his legacy is an important and worthwhile goal. However, removing his name and picture from Princeton’s campus, although well-intentioned, is short sighted and detrimental to real debate and discussion.
(04/20/15 6:00pm)
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. Although these causes are important and worthwhile, and the passion of the students running them is commendable, the repeated use of the same tactic has strongly decreased efficacy.
(04/06/15 3:35pm)
Princeton Urban Congo is a joke dance group made up of members from the Princeton Men’s Swim and Dive Team. Their most recent performance was at Saturday’s eXpressions show. A video of one of their performances can be viewed online. Everything about the group from their name to their costumes to the way they dance is offensive and perpetuates stereotypes of Africans.
(03/23/15 3:14pm)
This year, as I entered my second year writing for the ‘Prince,’ I have noticed a lot of articles discussing and criticizing the comments section below our articles. I am talking about articles like Sarah Sakha’s “Just Keep Scrolling,” Newby Parton’s “Thoughts on Freshman Columnists,” and Will Rivitz’s “Snark’s Inefficacy.” The most recent of these was published just this month.
(03/02/15 5:49pm)
Black History Month has just ended, so I believe now is the perfect time to look at the goals and intentions of the month, and how they fit into the history of the University.
(02/16/15 6:45pm)
Last Tuesday, a gunman entered a private residence and shot and killed three students of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Their names were Deah Barakat, Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha and Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha. All three of the victims were Muslims, the two girls visibly so, because they chose to wear hijab, the traditional Muslim head covering.
(02/03/15 5:36pm)
There has been a lot of talk recently about GirlCode, and the ramifications it has caused on campus. GirlCode was an app, created by three University freshmen, which aggregated all the campus bathroom codes onto one easily accessible app. The app was available for anyone to download on their phones, including people who are unaffiliated with the University. Because of the security risk posed by this disclosure, the University proceeded to change all the bathroom codes on all the women’s bathrooms around campus.
(12/10/14 6:55pm)
On Dec. 5, a few Princeton students revived an old Facebook page that started last semester called “Tiger Microaggressions.” The purpose of the page is to call out the microaggressions Princeton students face on a daily basis in an anonymous and safe way. The term “microaggression" in its modern use was popularized by Columbia professor Derald Sue to refer to “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.” It has now been generalized to include other minorities as well. Calling out these microaggressions could be hugely beneficial for Princeton’s campus. Unfortunately, the current page is severely undermining its own cause by mixing the harmless with the offensive.
(11/18/14 6:55pm)
In 2007, the University started its expanded residential college system, which entails that freshmen and sophomores must live in the residential college assigned to them in the summer before they arrive at the University. Additionally, they must buy the associated meal plan (although anyone with a meal plan can eat in any college). The intention of this system is to foster a sense of community among smaller subdivisions of the Princeton population. It is my belief that allowing people to change residential colleges before their sophomore year would help to realize this goal more effectively.
(11/04/14 6:46pm)
Last week, I saw "Dear White People," a movie that follows the adventures of a group of black students at Winchester University, a fictional Ivy League school. The movie details the existence and rationale behind a blackface party put on by some of the school’s white students. The film is a comedy, and it is wickedly hilarious. More importantly, however, it starts a dialogue on several often ignored, incredibly important racial issues on today’s college campuses. It also does the useful service of presenting black characters that are allowed to be difficult and sometimes unlikeable without being cartoonish villains. It gives us black characters taking center stage, for once, not bobbing their heads sassily in the corner as the white protagonist leads the movie. For these reasons, I believe that everyone should go to the free screening of "Dear White People" at the Princeton Garden Theatre on Wednesday night, presented by the Fields Center, Princeton Latinos y Amigos, the Black Student Union and Princeton Asian American Students Association.
(10/07/14 7:05pm)
At the University, and in Western culture at large, it is very common to take a very myopic viewpoint of international affairs. I believe it is important to correct this viewpoint, especially at Princeton, because the people who are learning to look at the world in this limited way are the same people who will soon be leading it. We can start by knowing when to step back and stop talking.
(09/23/14 6:11pm)
This past week, all members of the Class of 2017 received an email from the class council telling us about this year’s class gear. The chosen product? Traditional-looking sweaters from Hillflint, a company that started selling sweaters in 2012 and was founded by two students from Dartmouth and Princeton. To be very blunt, the product is expensive, traditional sweaters from Hillflint. The decision to sell these sweaters as class gear is classist and exclusionary. The class council has two price options: $75 or $55, depending on the material you select. Our school has a student population where 60 percent of students are on financial aid. These prices are bound to be unaffordable for some students. The purpose of class gear is to build spirit and unity among members of the class. What does it say when some students are completely shut out of this experience with no way to get in?
(09/16/14 6:16pm)
It will not surprise anyone to hear that the majority of the freshmen whom I have met so far have been extremely —and understandably —anxious. I expected that they would be; I know it was certainly difficult and overwhelming for me to make the transition to college and to being surrounded by unfamiliar faces after years with the same people in middle and high school. What was interesting to me is that most of the freshmen I met would only admit to feelings of less than 100 percent glee with Princeton while speaking with me one-on-one or in a group with only other sophomores. Once the group expanded to include other freshmen, things shifted and everything became all sunshine and roses. That is why one of the most important aspects of Princeton is the way people from different class years can meet and mix because it gives freshmen in particular someone to talk to.
(04/22/14 6:10pm)
This spring, we Princetonians are experiencing what has been called “easily the worst lineup of all the Ivies.”I am referring, of course, to USG’s disappointing decision to subject us to GRiZ and Mayer Hawthorne this Lawnparties. Picking two acts who are generally unknown to the Princeton population is bad enough, and that decision was made even worse by the April Fool’s joke that preceded it.
(04/08/14 6:50pm)
Ah, the eating clubs, that uniquely Princeton institution; those sleek, elegant buildings that are the destination of a stately pilgrimage by a huge portion of Princeton Tigers every Thursday, every Saturday and some Fridays too. The eating clubs are tucked neatly out of the way on Prospect Avenue but they loom large in the collective consciousness. They dominate the social scene and whether you decide to join one or you decide to opt out of the system, every Princetonian has to deal with the eating clubs at some point. Keeping that in mind, I think it is important to think about how the eating clubs might appear to prospective students.