The University, an institution that wields international prestige as one of the best and most well-known universities in the world, must also lead the ongoing fight against systemic discrimination by banning the box.
What we are living and witnessing in our present politics is highly anomalous, but more importantly, it cannot be dismissed or ignored. We must not allow ourselves to normalize the noxious. The unprecedented denial of science by many members of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate is unacceptable.
PSAFE’s mission is “community caretaking.” We are here for the community through services like transports to University Health Services, lockouts, car battery jumps, and many other activities. Our police officers, security officers and dispatchers are all interested in being helpful and serving as a resource for the community.
This piece is a response to an editorial in The Daily Princetonian by Gabe Lipkowitz ’19 entitled “There is no art of science.” I consider Lipkowitz a close friend and recognize that he wishes to promote discussion by deliberately taking a bold stance. But his latest article, in my opinion, takes a stance much closer to ridiculous.
While I understand that Bob Hugin now argues that he has changed and grown, I’d like to see him make that argument as a private citizen, not as a University Trustee. I simply do not trust him to adhere to the values that the University now espouses; he should be asked to resign as a Trustee.
On behalf of the Asian American Students Association (AASA), welcome to Princeton University!
As students who live and work in Princeton, we wish to express our grave concern about the dangers posed by the construction of Compressor Station 206 and the entire Northeast Supply Enhancement Project.
While it is tempting to lump Asian-American women in with either all women or all Asian Americans, this approach is shortsighted. Instead, we need to consider how the stereotype of Asian femininity compounds with the “model minority” myth. The complex interplay of these stereotypes generates unreasonable expectations of extreme compliance and unquestioning service for Asian-American women. And it is these expectations that can severely restrict them from moving forward.
An opinion column published by The Daily Princetonian on April 23, 2018 drew my attention. As the Director of Medical Services, I agree wholeheartedly with two of the primary points, that “the failure to disseminate knowledge about how such services work only heightens fear and apprehension in the student body,” and that there is always room for improving access to services. Therefore, I felt it important to respond by clearly communicating information about our approach to ensuring ready access to health care and a few of the specific services we offer.
In the fall of 2018, Princeton’s history department will offer sixty-four courses. Of those courses, none are cross-listed with the Program in Latin American Studies.
Imagine a crowded living space with bad plumbing, old hallways, and exposed pipes, where toilets overflow and make an unsanitary disaster, where human feces are found in the shower, urine found in trash cans, shower curtains removed as pranks, and then people of color and people of unprivileged socioeconomic backgrounds have to clean it all up. You don’t have to imagine it to believe it. This place exists here at Princeton University, the number one school in the country.
No matter how many people you try to represent or advocate for, you will never be more than one person. Individuals cannot make change alone; groups make change. I changed almost nothing. Now I am a senior. I am leaving. I am exhausted. Yet, for all the people who confided in me, I feel it would be irresponsible not to try one last Hail Mary before I graduate. This is it. I turn to you. I am only one; you could be many.
I believe that the mere potential for this process to take place will encourage the Committee leadership to think more critically about its behavior and professionalism. This referendum would help remedy an Honor Committee in desperate need of transparency and accountability, so I strongly encourage you to vote YES.
My phone-typed response soon had the length of an essay, and I’m sharing part of that here. As an engineering major focused on sustainable design, and a health-focused individual who treasures the interpersonal warmth of a great meal, I’ve long taken issue with the required meal plans at this university. The forced predetermination of one’s food and eating place is incomprehensible to my friends and family, in Germany and across the globe.
If the Board Plan Review Committee is truly concerned about flexibility, they should not make any meal plan mandatory. Affordability can be addressed by simply increasing the annual stipend or granting more free meal swipes. Quality of life should not be sacrificed for supposed efficiency, which keeps costs down for the University while the most vulnerable student populations.
If resistance to the Station succeeds, life will proceed as normal. Finding an internship will still be stressful. You will still have that 8:30 precept. Little will change. But we will know the answer to the question posed by Station 206, a question that we would do well to ask ourselves more often. What are you working for: a good world, or your own Greatness?
We are eager to share more about our recommendations with students and continue to gather their feedback. The committee is holding three focus groups on the recommendations next week. For information, visit the committee’s website, https://boardplan.princeton.edu.
Alongside my godmother and father, my mother taught my brother and me the discipline and hard work ethic that drove us to pursue our own dreams, without tightening nooses around our necks to study or completely secluding us from outside friendships. There were fights about grades and tests, but there were also fights about car privileges and party rights. My mother spearheaded the path I have taken, but she is by no means part of the club that most Asian American women are forced into as a result of the “tiger mom” narrative.
Precluding his earlier vaunted “element of surprise” (remember the election campaign?), Trump's residual policy options could lead inexorably to a direct U.S.-Russian military encounter. Among other “simple” things, the president's most capable strategic thinkers (not tactical military planners) will need to work very quickly through the unimaginably complex dialectics of virtually all possible nuclear scenarios and outcomes.
We join our peers on campuses across the country in imploring you to revoke your endorsement of Kenneth Marcus and ensure our safety and the safety of all students.
