“No brothers?” is the typical first response, when I tell people that I have four sisters, followed by condolences for my dad. Often, these comments came from other parents, especially those with sons.
The men of Princeton need to be conscious of their habits of entitlement, taking it upon themselves to do better and stop interrupting the women in their classes. Clearly, the women at Princeton are qualified to contribute in precept. Stop getting in their way.
Indeed, throughout much of the Christian tradition, it was commonplace to refrain from eating all meat during the 40 days of Lent (which commemorate Jesus fasting for 40 days in the desert), as well as for even married couples to abstain from sex. In many other religious traditions, vegetarianism and celibacy were seen as two facets of the jewel of asceticism.
If the student body stopped feeling guilty for spending time in ways that are traditionally “unproductive,” this campus would foster a stronger community with a more holistic sense of what defines learning.
While I have been impressed by the academic advising options, I do acknowledge that some students feel they have not had the experience I have had.
We must emphatically embrace a world where — out of desires for peace and cooperation — the strong do what they should.
We should exit every course feeling excited about the subject and grateful for the challenge, not happy to be alive and eager to sleep for a week.
As we celebrate a multitude of cultures this Asian American Heritage Month, let us not forget that heritage itself embraces not only traditions instilled but also stories created. While I may not have a strong affiliation to the customs of my family’s homelands, the values formed by my ancestors in and out of those cultures have shaped who I am today.
In order to reduce the whitewashing and irresponsible consolidation of different cuisines from countries all around Asia, we must actively maintain an open mind to change our perception of what food is “disgusting” or “weird.”
Very few students study abroad during their four years at Princeton, in either the academic year or the summer. Why is this the case?
It’s clear that being an exceptional individual isn’t enough to get into Princeton. Almost everyone has had some sort of exceptional privilege, in their financial situation or a more specific admissions booster. A “real” Princeton student is a product of privilege, luck, and money, and I do think that needs to change. There are broader, systemic inequities in the admissions system, like the over-representation of certain races and income groups, and faculty and legacy preferences. When people question the legitimacy of my admission, it usually comes from a feeling of personal injustice.
Given this University’s historical legacy in public interest and its embedded tradition of service to humanity, why did 33 percent of undergraduates from the Class of 2016 go into financial or professional and technical service jobs, while less than 2 percent went into public service? What can the University do to encourage more undergraduate students to pursue a rewarding career in public service after graduating?
In the past, I’ve been all too guilty of contributing to the silencing of conservatism. These actions come at a cost.
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.
My blood ran cold as I watched the man smash his fist into his victim’s face. The other man crumpled to the floor, but the assailant continued to strike. I was terrified. This was neither a scene from an action movie nor a training simulation. It was real-life violence, unfolding before my eyes.
In the Class of 2018 and 2019 combined, there are currently a total of 682 juniors and seniors concentrating in engineering. Of the 682, only 240 of those concentrators are women — only 35 percent. Why did this initial 44 percent of female students drop down to 35 percent?
