The Daily Princetonian: November 18, 2019

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday November 18, 2019 vol. CXLIII no. 106

Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian

ON CAMPUS

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

U. professor holds town hall on gerrymandering with California’s Citizen Redistricting Commission

By Elizabeth Schwe Contributor

ELIZABETH SHWE / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Sam Wang, a neuroscience and molecular biology professor as well as the director of the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, hosted three members of the California’s Citizen Redistricting Commission.

Molecular biology and neuroscience professor and director of the Princeton Gerrymandering Project Sam Wang moderated a town hall panel that featured three members of the California’s Citizen Redistricting Commission on Thursday, Nov. 14.

Princeton Gerrymandering Project co-hosted this town hall, titled “Ending Gerrymandering with People-Powered Reforms,” along with the League of Women Voters and Fair Dis-

tricts New Jersey.

The California Citizen Redistricting Commission is the first independent, citizen-led redistricting commission in the country. It is comprised of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four citizens who are not affiliated with any party. Using a $100,000 grant from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, the commission is traveling around the nation to share their experiences and talk about the importance of communitycentered redistricting reform.

This Princeton town hall was See GERRYMANDER page 3

ON CAMPUS

Anita Hill, Imani Perry discuss intersectionality in law Assistant News Editor

Guest speaker Anita Hill joined Imani Perry, the Hughes-Rogers Professor of African American Studies, for a conversation on race, gender, and the law at an evening talk on Thursday, Nov. 14, in a packed Richardson Auditorium.

In 1991, Hill testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about her allegations of sexual harassment against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. Though Hill’s testimony gripped the nation, the Senate narrowly confirmed Thomas, who now sits on the Court.

Hill, who holds the title of University Professor of Social Policy, Law, and Women’s and Gender and Sexuality Studies at Brandeis University, walked out on the stage to a full minute of rousing applause. After the crowd had settled down, Perry put the audience’s palpable admiration into a playful first question: “So, how does it feel to be an icon?”

Hill responded by mentioning her “wonderful family,” who keep her “grounded” and remind her “who you’re going to be taking care of.”

Perry went on to ask how the trajectory of Hill’s scholarly work has been shaped by “that moment,” alluding to the 1991 confirmation hearings, dur-

ing which Hill accused Justice Thomas of sexual harassment.

“The trajectory of my entire life has,” Hill replied.

The two scholars discussed Hill’s 2011 book “Reimagining Equality: Stories of Gender, Race, and Finding Home” at length. Hill explained how her background in commercial and bankruptcy law allowed her to think about the impact of market collapse on communities of color in new ways. As she looked to communities reeling from the 2008 recession, she found that what had been missing from the national discourse was the economic impact on women of color specifically.

“Women of color were more

likely to be the home buyers — the sole home buyers — exploited by these bad loans,” she said. “These homes, for these communities, were more than just a place to live,” she argued, noting that home ownership constituted a means of establishing oneself within society.

“Whenever you see a race issue, always look for a gender issue,” Hill said, saying that she always uses this lens to help her law students understand the concept of bias.

Perry added that though first-year law students may find contract law to be their most boring class, she finds the field to be “at the heart of exclusion structures.”

ACT to allow students to retake individual exam sections

By Emily Perez Contributor

BRAD SPICHER ‘20 / USG

Olivia Ott ’20 and Ben Press ’20.

USG affirms language of P/D/F and exam paper referenda, discusses past changes to the Honor System Contributor

In its Nov. 17 meeting, the Undergraduate Student Government (USG) affirmed the language of three referendums regarding the Pass / D / Fail (P/D/F) system, a proposed standing Sustainability Committee, and a call to the University to investi-

gate the quality and easeof-use of the paper used in examinations. The sponsors will begin collecting signatures tomorrow.

The exam-paper referendum, sponsored by Joshua Theodore ’23, is a response to the difficulty of erasing and writing on the type of paper used during inclass examinations. In his explanation of the refer-

endum, Theodore claims that replacing the paper will allow the examinations to be more fair and reflective of the student’s knowledge, not their writing speed.

The P/D/F referendum calls for a reform of the current policy by “allowing students to remove a PDF that they have placed on a class within a week See USG page 1

In Opinion

Managing editor Samuel Aftel discusses the subversive compability between queerness and Christianity, and contributing columnist Kate Liu argues that precepts would be improved by eliminating hand-raising.

PAGE 6

See HILL page 2

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

STUDENT LIFE

By Caitlin Limestahl

Hill also spoke about one of her personal heroes, Pauli Murray, a black civil rights and women’s rights activist who Hill believes has largely been overlooked by mainstream narratives of those struggles.

Murray developed a theory later employed by Thurgood Marshall to desegregate schools and by Ruth Bader Ginsberg to eliminate workplace discrimination against women, Hill explained.

“She was one of the first to talk about how it feels to not feel like you’re in the right body,” Hill added of Murray. “We didn’t have the word ‘trans,’ but she was the person

On Oct. 8, the ACT, which designs an aptitude test often submitted in college applications, announced changes to the standardized test to be implemented beginning September 2020. The most significant of these changes is the introduction of section retesting, which, according to the ACT, will allow students who have taken the test previously to “retake individual sections of the ACT test instead of the entire exam.”

In previous years, students who wished to improve their score on a single section had to retake the entire test, which costs $46 and takes three hours to complete.

The ACT is comprised of four mandatory sections — English, math, reading, and science — along with an optional writing section.

Each section is scored separately on a scale of one to 36, with the composite score being an average of all four sections.

The new change will allow students to retest “only in areas needing improvement.” ACT believes this is a better test of students’ abilities, as it “showcases [students’] skills and accomplishments gained over a lifetime and not only their test-taking abilities on one particular day.”

Section retests will be administered on the same days as the entire

Today on Campus 4:30 p.m.: Arm-Twisting the Devil: Lessons on How to Limit Harm to Civilians During Times of Conflict Friend Center 101

test. The ACT has yet to make an announcement regarding the cost of section retests.

ACT section retesting arrives as part of a growing movement to overhaul the current standardized testing system, particularly amid concerns that current testing practices may privilege students with the means to afford test-specific tutoring. According to The Washington Post, from September 2018 to September 2019, 50 accredited universities and colleges dropped the testing requirement from their application process, a record number to do so.

The SAT’s “adversity score” — a proposed, but later abandoned, addition to SAT test results, which would rate a student’s school and neighborhood environment on a 1–100 scale — represented another attempt to combat the issues with the current standardized testing system.

University first-years said they remember test-taking season well and reacted positively to the news of section retesting.

“I feel like that’s fabulous,” Benjy Jude ’23 said. “It will reduce stress for other teens who are thinking of taking it twice … and who A, don’t want to spend 75 billion dollars and B, don’t want to spend their whole Saturday morning and three weeks before studying everything.”

“It would be nice if the SAT did See ACT page 4

WEATHER

By Marie-Rose Sheinerman

HIGH

43˚

LOW

33˚

Rainy chance of rain:

70 percent

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Monday November 18, 2019

Hill: There are reasons to believe that things can be better; the 2018 elections are one of those reasons HILL

Continued from page 1

.............

who was trying to deal intellectually and physically with her own experience of not feeling that she was a binary woman.”

Hill then spoke about the fight against gender violence in the Trump era. She said she had felt hopeful during the inaugural Women’s March, as well as during the #MeToo response to Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Yet she also expressed concern that momentum may have dissipated. “[The Access Hollywood tape] was this wake-up call,” she said. “And I’m just wondering today … did people wake up? Do they continue to be awake — or woke, as they say — into this election cycle?

Will they continue to participate based on those issues? Because they’re not being talked about in the primaries, in the debates.”

The Access Hollywood tape, brought to light by The Washington Post in October 2016, captured Donald Trump, on a hot microphone, in 2005, bragging about groping women.

“When we look at something like the Kavanaugh hearing, and we see echoes of what happened 28 years before, and we realize that our leadership — at least on that particular committee — has not advanced beyond 1991, what does it say about the value of our civic participation and whether or not the government is really ready to address these issues?”

Hill continued.

In September 2018, Hill authored a column in The New York Times urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to address accusations of sexual

impropriety against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who was ultimately confirmed, despite the testimony of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. Kavanaugh’s confirmation is often compared with Thomas’.

With regard to gender-based violence, Hill said she is most concerned with ensuring that “we don’t lose interest in the system.”

“We need to address these issues as public issues, as opposed to private or personal, or sporadically attending to them one location at a time,” she said. She later added that the press has a role to play, particularly by addressing #MeToo activists as potential voters and highlighting their concerns.

Hill continues to publicly participate in such conversations. In December 2017, she was named chair of the Commission on Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace, formed to combat sexual harassment across the entertainment industry.

Earlier, in her introduction of the speakers, V. Mitch McEwen, a University professor of architecture and member of the University Public Lectures Committee, which organized and sponsored the event, likened Hill’s work to an architectural project design that may be completed, important, and capable of changing realities, and yet remains unbuilt.

“Professor Hill completed one of the most successful projects in American democracy, though as we know from recent years, it remains largely unbuilt,” McEwen said, going on to describe Hill as someone who has “taught U.S. law to U.S. senators” and sparked a “radical shift in the national

Recycle your paper!

JO DE LA BRUYERE / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Anita Hill and Imani Perry spoke in Richardson Auditorium.

understanding of sexual harassment in the workplace.”

Much of the audience agreed, with multiple members expressing during the Q&A portion of the talk that Hill had been a personal hero and inspiration to them for much of their lives.

When asked how she can remain optimistic after Trump was elected, even after the Access Hollywood tape, Hill noted she may not necessarily be “optimistic,” but she is hopeful.

“There are reasons to believe that things can be better. The 2018 elections are one of those reasons,” she said.

“We exposed a kind of ugliness with the election of Donald Trump that we thought

didn’t exist or that some didn’t know [about],” she added.

“That exposure is worth something.”

Another audience member asked Hill where she stands now with regard to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. Biden, a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic nomination, was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee during Thomas’ confirmation hearings in 1991.

“He needs to prove that he should be president. Prove that not only does he regret what happened, but that he takes responsibility for what happened,” Hill responded.

Hill also fielded a question about to whom women should look to be at the forefront of

such conversations.

“First of all, we need to start looking at the women running for president. Are they ready to do this?” Hill asked.

“They’re not talking directly about these issues of women’s empowerment. One of the reasons, I think, is because they’re not sure the voting population values that conversation. So they’re playing it politically very safe.”

“I am just stumped. You stumped me,” she continued.

“Who that individual should be, right now, to inspire women? I don’t know ... Of course, I look at the courts — I think Ruth Bader Ginsberg … If we’re gonna look for inspiration, I think we can start there.”

Monday November 18, 2019

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

Wang: There is a positive feedback loop where politicians get to draw their own lines GERRYMANDER Continued from page 1

.............

one of their stops.

Wang set the stage by recounting one of the nation’s worst gerrymandering experiences in the 1980s, during which Phillip Burton, a congressman from California, skewed the congressional maps so brazenly that he garnered five additional seats for his side.

This led to Proposition 20, which removed elected representatives from establishing congressional districts and transferred this authority to a citizen-led redistricting commission, called the California Citizen Redistricting Commission, in 2010. California became a leader in the movement against gerrymandering practices.

“The fundamental problem in gerrymandering is legislators at the state levels who draw lines for themselves. There is a positive feedback loop where they

get to draw their own lines, run for office under those lines, get elected, come back 10 years later and draw their own lines again,” Wang said.

“That vicious cycle of being able to just hoist yourself up into office and insulated from voters — that’s the fundamental vicious cycle that needs to be broken to make legislators more responsive to voters,” he added.

Wang introduced California Commissioners Jeanne Raya, Dr. Gil Ontai, and Andrew Parvenu.

Each explained why they joined the commission.

“I wanted to be a part of something bigger and have an opportunity to influence California’s political landscape, and this was it,” Raya said.

Parvenu grew up during the civil rights movement, when he witnessed voter suppression and intimidation. Those experiences gave rise to his civic engagement. After hearing about the Redistricting Commission, he quickly applied to become a

member.

“Civic engagement, to me, is the constant price we pay for freedom,” he said. “Democracy needs to be inclusive and move towards the goal of one man, one woman, one vote, under districts we can proudly say are fair and as rationally drawn as possible.”

Public input, ranging from emails to hand-drawn maps, quickly piled up on the commissioners’ desks.

“We received more than 20,000 emails alone, forget the paper stuff that came to us as well,” Raya said. “I’m sure the next commission will have the advantage of greater technological advances.”

Wang talked about how the Princeton Gerrymandering Project is working on software that would make it “seamless” for New Jersey citizens to draw their communities of interest online. It would then enter that information into a database for New Jersey commissioners to

consider.

Since New Jersey doesn’t have a citizens’ initiative process like California does, Wang asked the commissioners if they had any suggestions for states like New Jersey that are trying to effect redistricting reform.

“Find champions in your legislative houses that find some way in which ordinary citizens can participate directly or as a partner in the election process for your next commission,” Ontai responded.

Daya believed that sustained outreach to the public was of utmost importance.

“It is one thing to have your champions lobby and work on your behalf, but numbers mean a lot to an elected official,” Daya said. “So, if a lot of people become aware of this and want to do something about it, then you have [many] more voices engaged, and that’s really fundamentally what’s behind the California’s Commission; it was a citizen driven initiative.”

Wang opened up the floor to the audience for questions.

One asked about how the commission incorporated a diverse range of voices.

“We reached out to minority community leaders, such as church and school leaders, who are able to dialogue with [people] in their own languages. That’s how I got involved, because my friend is a minority Latina, and she reached out to people who she thought would make a good candidate,” Ontai said.

“If you really want minorities to participate,” Ontai continued, “you need to go into those communities and get that message across through people they trust and understand.”

The town hall was hosted in McCosh 28 on Nov. 14 at 4 p.m.

For more information on how New Jersey redistricting commissioners are selected, visit http://gerrymander.princeton.edu/newjersey/.

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Monday November 18, 2019

The ACT has yet to make an announcement regarding the cost of section retests ACT

Continued from page 1

.............

that as well,” Madeline Buswell ’23 added.

According to an email statement from Deputy University Spokesperson Mike Hotchkiss, the University is currently reviewing the change and how it will affect admissions, if at all. Alongside section retesting, the ACT announced the implementation of online testing, which will allow students to receive their results within two days, rather than two weeks.

The ACT additionally announced that students will be able to send their test superscores — the combination of their best section scores across multiple ACT tests and section retests — to universities. These changes will also take place beginning in September 2020.

COURTESY OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS

Morrison Hall, where the Admissions Office is located.

Work for the most respected news source on campus.

E-mail join@dailyprincetonian.com

Work for the most respected news source on campus.

join@dailyprincetonian.com

Monday November 18, 2019

The Daily Princetonian

page 5

Theodore ’23: Replacing the paper will allow exams to be reflective of students’ knowledge, not their writing speed USG

Continued from page 1

.............

of the end of the same semester,” according to the meeting informational packet.

USG voted to change the language of the proposal to create a standing Sustainability Committee with an elected chair who

will be a voting member in the Senate and will create a charter for that committee to lay out the direction for its functions.

Olivia Ott ’20, Academic Chair, and Ben Press ’20, UCouncil Chair, discussed recent key changes to the Honor System in the past two years, including updates to the Honor Committee’s website, and addi-

tions of a dean on call and professional investigators to Honor Committee proceedings.

USG confirmed Matthew Weatherhead ’23, Anne Grinder ’23, Dylan Shapiro ’23, and Yujin Angolio ’23 to the Honor Committee. According to Dina Kuttab ’21, there were 17 applications this year, almost double that of years past.

There was a brief discussion with Director of Gender Equity and Title IX Administration Regan Crotty and Head of Butler College and Stuart Professor of Psychology Nicole Shelton about the University’s recently released Title IX reports. The possibility of SHARE peers for graduate students was raised, and there was also

conversation on the CPUC ad hoc Committee on Sexual Climate, Culture, and Conduct.

USG also raised concerns about the new voting platform Election Runner, which was utilized in the 2023 Class Council election, and its functions.

The meeting was held at 8 p.m. in Lewis Library 138.

Lorem Ipsum.

Dolor sit amet?

Join the ‘Prince’ design team.

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

The best place to Write Edit Opine Design Produce Illustrate Photograph Create

on campus.

join@dailyprincetonian.com

Opinion

Monday November 18, 2019

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

‘The only Heaven I’ll be sent to’

vol. cxliii

editor-in-chief

Chris Murphy ’20

Sam Aftel

Managing Editor

In the gloriously queer “Take Me to Church,” Hozier intones, “The only Heaven I’ll be sent to / Is when I’m alone with you / I was born sick, but I love it.” In terms of lyrical expressions of erotic liberation, it’s hard to beat.

The line has been on my mind over the last several days after seeing posters, some of which are religiously oriented, in Frist Campus Center — and elsewhere on campus — advocating for sexual diversity and acceptance of queer people; presumably, the posters were in response to a campus event, “Sexuality, Integrity, and the University,” facilitated by the Love and Fidelity Network, which occurred on Nov. 8 and 9.

The event aimed to “[bring] together hundreds of students, scholars, and experts from across the country to equip the college students with the best academic resources and arguments they need to bring the message of love and fidelity back to their campuses.” (I will not opine on the event itself, or its alleged heterosexist undertones, as I did not attend.)

Many of the protest posters conceptualized Christianity as a justification for queer liberation, rather than as a mechanism of condemnation. One poster, hung

on a flag pole in the McCosh courtyard, fittingly adjacent to the University chapel, asserted, “JESUS WAS A brown queer socialist,” and urged others to “Open the Book [the Bible].” Others cited religion as well: one called for the separation of “CHURCH and HATE.” Another argued that “QUEER JOY IS A SACRED REVOLUTIONARY CHOICE.” Amen to them all.

On a personal note, I was raised Catholic and continue to embrace many of the teachings of Jesus.

Ever since high school, though, I have been disgusted by the Church’s sustained homophobia, sex-negativity, and basic ideological cowardice — as well as its tragic failure to confront sexual abuse. But I have been heartened by the progressive Christian activism, as well as the progressive activism rooted in a host of other faiths, I have witnessed at Princeton — including, of course, the protest of the Love and Fidelity event.

Queering the Bible, and other religious texts, is a revolutionary exercise and an assertion of true love. Embracing the (rather obvious) queerness of the Bible and the life of Jesus allows Christianity to be a source of radical liberation, which I believe it was meant to be, rather than a philosophy rooted in shame, oppression, and antierotic authoritarianism. Queer-

ing the Bible, in short, redeems Christianity, and it is high time for the religion’s redemption.

At the same time, I can’t help but wonder if queer activism should consciously subvert heteronormative principles — Christian or otherwise — instead of attempting to reconcile queerness with these principles.

Leo Bersani’s canonical queerstudies text, “Is the Rectum a Grave?,” published in 1987, may provide a blueprint for solving this dilemma.

Bersani memorably argued that “if the rectum is the grave in which the masculine ideal (an ideal shared—differently—by men and women) of proud subjectivity is buried, then it should be celebrated for its very potential for death.”

Bersani was not referring to religion here — in other words, he was not examining the “Christian ideal.” Rather, he was arguing that during anal intercourse, a man loses his subjective claim to normative, masculine power and control. Bersani thought this supposed emasculation should be embraced, and that gay intimacy should not be reconciled with oppressive heterosexual, monogamous, patriarchal, antifeminist mores.

Perhaps Bersani’s scholarship can inform queer Christian activism.

The notion that Jesus was queer or that “QUEER JOY IS A SACRED REVOLUTIONARY CHOICE” are empowering messages. Yet the sociopolitical rights and erotic liberation of queer Christians should not be contingent upon Jesus’ sexual orientation or to what extent queer joy is expressed within the normatively constructed bounds of sacredness. Even if Jesus were straight, and even if queer joy manifests in blasphemous fashions (whatever that means), queer people should still be free, loved, and embraced for their queerness.

More broadly, queer Christian activists should not be obligated to intellectually prove that their queerness and Christian identity are not in moral contradiction.

The beautiful existence of queer Christians already confirms that queerness and Christianity are indeed compatible. There’s no need to dignify homophobic ideologies rooted in pseudo-Christian orthodoxies with effortful responses.

To borrow Bersani’s logical framework, if some consider queerness a sin, then it should be celebrated for its very potential for sinfulness.

Samuel Aftel is a senior from East Northport, N.Y. He can be reached at saftel@princeton.edu.

Don’t raise your hand: a new solution for an old problem Kate Liu

Contributing Columnist

The 12 of us are wedged in small chairs, arranged in a casual semi-circle, facing the lecturing professor. Finally, he turns to us, asking a question. A few hands rise up into the air, and then one of us speaks. The hands go back up. Someone replies. The hands go up again. Someone else chirps in.

The “discussions” never last very long.

Since our very first days in orientation, faculty and peers alike have lauded Princeton’s toptier liberal arts education, a hub where diversity meets intellectual curiosity. In many respects, Princeton has delivered on this promise, offering a spectrum of limitless opportunities, from funded trips abroad to leading research on campus.

However, this ideal also envisions classrooms as bridges between countless disciplines, brimming with enthusiastic, focused discussions that widen all of our mindsets. In this ambitious regard, the liberal arts dream falls short. The resultant conversations often feel forced, limited, and disconnected.

In my view, the solution lies in the smallest of changes: eliminating hand-raising from precepts and seminars.

All too often — from my experiences and those of my peers — we stick to a predetermined agenda, leaving little room for genuine exploration. Professors often speak significantly more

than students, and each topic only receives a few comments.

Hands remain outstretched in the air even while others are speaking, and comments jump between entirely different topics.

Conversely, ignored hands and potentially insightful additions are passed over. We rarely listen to or build off each other’s contributions.

Given the current state of our precepts and seminars, what can we do to revive the intellectual conversations so often touted by the University? How can we reform our discussions to achieve a liberal arts education, engaging full-heartedly with our fellow peers? What we need most is for professors to take a step back in discussions, mediating instead of leading or dictating.

Rather than propose an elaborate system, I believe a simple, yet powerful, solution exists: let’s eliminate hand-raising. Discussions should be free-flowing exchanges — raising our hands creates an obstacle. Discussions should be shaped by curiosity — but raising our hands grants that power to the professor. Discussions should be spontaneous — but raising our hands stagnates any conversation.

Without hand-raising, we would begin to learn from each other. Instead of patiently waiting for our raised hands to be recognized, focusing on our own future comments, we would concentrate on our peers. The invaluable insights, otherwise passed over as an unseen hand, would add to the conversation’s complexity and nuance.

Most intuitively, the conversation would flow more smoothly, focused in scope as we would engage in a natural back-andforth. We would be excited again, knowing that our ideas would be fully considered by our classmates, and that all perspectives could contribute equally.

Understandably, there is the risk that certain students might overshadow the discussion.

In order to foster collaboration and diversity, we must ensure that such collective endeavors do not descend into chaos. Such a worry, however, neglects the conversational collaboration in which we engage every day. From board-room conferences to dinner discussions, we never raise our hands.

In discussing new strategies or the latest impeachment scandal, we ought to listen carefully and discuss respectfully. Our academic discussions should mimic the conversations we will encounter for the rest of our lives.

They should teach us how to disagree agreeably, how to consider all perspectives, and how to build off each other without intervention from any outside agent.

In a classroom without handraising, the conversations can naturally form without any one professor deciding the direction.

Any bias or preference the professor may have, especially towards certain opinions or contributors, will not dominate the discussion.

Instead, the conversations would allow students to form genuine relationships with each other, understanding and fully considering the experiences of

Have opinions?

Join the opinion section!

Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

their peers without any external influence. The discussions will be created by — and for — students.

This is not to say that the roles of professors should be disregarded; the faculty at Princeton are leading scholars, and, as such, their research and teaching are undoubtedly valuable towards furthering our education. Their lectures and insightful comments always push us to reconsider our own views, often fundamentally challenging our most intrinsic beliefs.

But Princeton is also a liberal arts institution, and as much as we spend our days learning new content and being pushed by our professors and preceptors to consider new views, we are also encouraged to think for ourselves. We’re encouraged to build from the incredible diversity of our peers on campus and discuss from our varied perspectives, preparing us for discussions and conversations that will occur well beyond our four years here. When professors guide and facilitate, they serve as resources — as opposed to interrogators or lecturers — in a genuinely collaborative endeavor.

Though the balance between challenging us with new theories and giving us the opportunity to truly engage in genuine discourse is delicate, it must be met. Let’s create a pedagogy that places the student at the center.

Let’s stop raising our hands.

Kate Liu is a first-year from Princeton, NJ. She can be reached at kateliu@princeton.edu.

business manager

Taylor Jean-Jacques’20 BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 trustees Francesca Barber David Baumgarten ’06 Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Kavita Saini ’09 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Abigail Williams ’14 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 William R. Elfers ’71 Kathleen Kiely ’77 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73 trustees ex officio Chris Murphy ’20 Taylor Jean-Jacques’20

143RD MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Aftel ’20 Ariel Chen ’20 Jon Ort ’21 head news editors Benjamin Ball ’21 Ivy Truong ’21 associate news editors Linh Nguyen ’21 Claire Silberman ’22 Katja Stroke-Adolphe ’20 head opinion editor Cy Watsky ’21 associate opinion editors Rachel Kennedy ’21 Ethan Li ’22 head sports editor Jack Graham ’20 associate sports editors Tom Salotti ’21 Alissa Selover ’21 features editors Samantha Shapiro ’21 Jo de la Bruyere ’22 head prospect editor Dora Zhao ’21 associate prospect editor Noa Wollstein ’21 chief copy editors Lydia Choi ’21 Elizabeth Parker ’21 associate copy editors Jade Olurin ’21 Christian Flores ’21 head design editor Charlotte Adamo ’21 associate design editor Harsimran Makkad ’22 head video editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 associate video editor Mark Dodici ’22 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20

NIGHT STAFF copy Chloe Searchinger ’22 Rachel Posner ’22 Isabel Rodriguez ’23 Genele Hua ’23 Ellie Chang ’23 Andrew Tang ’23 design Sophie Li ’23 Anika Maskara ’23

Monday November 18, 2019

Sports

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S HOCKEY

Men’s hockey falls to Union College 2–1 after overtime goal

By Tom Salotti Associate Sports Editor

Men’s hockey (1–3–2, 0–3–1 ECAC) lost in overtime on Saturday night after Union College (3–11–0, 2–4–0 ECAC) scored with 15.4 seconds left in the sudden death period.

The Tigers scored first in the game after junior defender Matthew Thom knocked one in a few minutes into the second period. During a power play later in the second period, Union tied the game 1–1, after sophomore forward Christian O’Neill was sent to the penalty box for slashing.

Neither team scored in the competitive first period. The Tigers outshot the Dutchmen 24–15, but Union maintained a slightly better percentage of shots on target, hitting 67 percent on goal to Princeton’s 62 percent. Neither team committed a single penalty in the period.

Though Princeton senior forward Jackson Cressey was handed a two-minute penalty for boarding 21 seconds into the second period, Union was unable to capitalize on the power play. A minute after Cressey was let back in, Thom scored his first goal of the season, assisted by first-year defender Pito Walton and Cressey.

The Tigers stayed up 1–0 until 6:20 left in the period, when Union’s Dylan Anhorn got the puck past Princeton goalie Ryan Ferland on a power play. The game remained tied through the final minutes of the period and saw penalties on Thom for tripping and Union’s Brandon Estes for interference. The Dutchmen outshot the Tigers 20–16 in the second period and had 13 shots on target to Princeton’s seven. Ferland was busy in goal with 12 saves.

The third period was scoreless, as the teams jockeyed for a winning goal, which sent the game into sudden death overtime.

“We had some great looks and a couple open backdoor opportunities in the third period,” said Princeton’s head coach Ron Fogarty. “There were a couple of times we were backpedaling in the neutral zone instead of attacking.”

Union outshot Princeton 9–4 in the OT period and snuck in a goal off a rebound with 15 seconds left. The play was reviewed and confirmed, handing the Dutchmen a 2–1 win.

“We worked hard for 64 minutes, and it was unfor-

TOM SALOTTI / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Matthew Thom ’21 shooting at Union’s net. The goal was Princeton’s only in Saturday’s matchup.

tunate for that one to get in at the end,” said Fogarty.

Saturday’s loss against Union capped a disappointing home-opener weekend at Baker Rink, after a 2–2 draw against RPI on Friday. The results notwithstanding, the games still showcased some

of the team’s strengths, according to Ferland.

“In our own zone we’re really good at boxing out, not giving up too many tips or too many screens, and even our gapping’s been really good this year,” he said.

“As we play more teams our

younger guys will get more adjusted and things will start going our way.”

The team heads to New York this weekend for games against Colgate (3–6–3, 2–2– 0 ECAC) and Cornell (6–0, 4–0 ECAC) in Hamilton and Ithaca, respectively.

Like sports? Write for the sports section!

Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

Keep yourself informed on the go!

Follow us on Twitter:

@Princetonian

Tweet of the Day “FINAL! We’re going to the #NCAAFH Final Four!!!”

Princeton FH (@ TigerFH), field hockey

Stat of the Day

Follow us

6 touchdowns

Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!

Yale QB Kurt Rawlings threw six touchdowns against Princeton football, a Yale single game record

Monday November 18, 2019

Sports

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S HOCKEY

Princeton football crushed 51–14 by Yale

By Jack Graham

Head Sports Editor

In their four years on the team Princeton football’s seniors have won two Ivy titles, gone on a 17-game winning streak, and blown out plenty of opponents. After all that success, Saturday’s lopsided loss against Yale on Senior Day was certainly not the farewell to Princeton Stadium they wanted.

Yale (8–1 overall, 5–1 Ivy) beat Princeton (7–2, 4–2) 51– 14, handing the Tigers their second straight loss and denying them a second straight bonfire.

The most impressive senior on the field was Yale quarterback Kurt Rawlings, who has won four Ivy League Offensive Player of the Week awards in 2019 and may have more hardware coming his way this week. He completed 22 of 34 passes for 338 yards, and six touchdowns, including four touchdowns in the first half. He also made plays with his feet, scrambling nine times for 36 yards.

Meanwhile, Yale held senior quarterback Kevin Davidson to 164 yards passing, no touchdowns, and an interception.

Princeton also turned the ball over twice, succeeded on only one of four fourthdown conversion attempts, and allowed 30 first half points. The 37-point defeat was Princeton’s worst since 2014, when they lost 49–7 to Harvard.

“We practiced well, we had enthusiasm, [but] we didn’t play as well as I would have liked,“ said head coach Bob Surace ’90. “Like anything else, you watch the film [and] you hope to make adjustments and be better.”

It didn’t take long for a seemingly competitive game to turn into a Bulldog rout.

Yale scored the first 10 points of the game, but junior running back Collin Eaddy ran for a 15-yard touchdown early in the second quarter to cut the deficit to 10–7.

After that point, things quickly went south for Princeton. The Tigers stopped Yale on the following drive, but junior wide receiver Jacob Birmelin muffed the punt.

Yale recovered, and Rawlings threw a 27-yard touchdown pass to Reed Klubnik a few plays later, putting Yale up 17–7 with 6:05 remaining in the first half.

On its next drive, Princeton failed on a fourth-down conversion in Yale territory, and it took the Bulldogs just three plays and 25 seconds to score another touchdown, with Rawlings finding Klubnik again, this time on a 47yard touchdown catch.

Princeton started its next drive with little more than a minute left in the half, but the Tigers quickly went three-and-out, and Yale got the ball back with 46 seconds left. That turned out to be enough time for the Bulldogs to score again, as Yale receiver JP Shohfi made an acrobatic catch in the back of the endzone with nine seconds left.

Suddenly, the score was 30–7 as Princeton retreated to the locker room for halftime.

“We were making mistakes in key opportunities,“ Surace said. “We struggled with our rush lanes, [and] the turnover hurt us. We had some opportunities in the pass game, and whether it was protection, the route, [or] the throw, we were a little bit off on those.”

The start of the second half made it clear there would be no comeback. On Princeton’s first possession of the half, Yale’s Kyle Ellis made a diving interception off Davidson. The Bulldogs drove right back down the field to score again, with Rawlings throwing his fifth touchdown of the day to make the score 37–7.

“I think it just started getting away from us,“ senior receiver Andrew Griffin said.

“We needed at some point to make a stand, make a score, [or] hit a big play, and none of those things happened.”

Princeton managed to score a touchdown in the third quarter on a short rush from senior quarterback Zach Keller, but Yale was able to run out the clock, cruising to the 37-point win.

Cornell upset Dartmouth on Saturday, so Princeton remains in Ivy League title contention, but they’ll need both

Dartmouth and Yale to lose next week to have a chance.

Princeton will finish off its season next week against Penn in Philadelphia.

“Obviously as seniors, we want to go out [on Senior Day] and have a good performance in front of our friends and family,“ Griffin said. “This is not ideal, but we have a [game] next week, we’re still seniors next week, and we can finish off the season how we wanted to.”

PHOTO CREDIT: JACK GRAHAM / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Yale QB Kurt Rawlings threw six touchdown passes against Princeton.

WOMEN’S HOCKEY

No. 9 field hockey upsets No. 2 UConn, returns to NCAA Final Four

By MoIly Milligan

Senior Sports Writer

No. 9 Field Hockey (15–4, 7–0 Ivy) upset the second-ranked UConn Huskies on Sunday afternoon in Storrs, Conn. to advance to the NCAA Final Four.

The 2–0 victory was the sweetest form of revenge for the Tigers, who lost to the Huskies in overtime at home in September.

The first period was a defensive standoff, with senior goalie Grace Baylis making two huge saves to preserve the scoreless tie. Midway through the second quarter, two shots by the Tigers were denied before they were awarded a corner. Junior striker Clara Roth played a ball in to sophomore midfielder Hannah Davey, whose shot was deflected into the net by junior midfielder MaryKate Neff. At the half, Princeton led 1–0, though each team had recorded four shots.

Princeton would again rely on its defense in the third quarter. Late in the period, Baylis and Neff combined to save three shots off a UConn corner.

Princeton pressed into the fi-

nal 15 minutes in search of an insurance goal. With 13 minutes to play, Davey rebounded her own shot and slipped it by the UConn goalie to put Princeton up 2–0.

UConn pulled their goalie with seven minutes to play, but could not convert a score in the game’s waning minutes.

The Tigers outshot the Huskies, 10–8, and also came away with the advantage on corners.

Princeton’s 2–0 win sends the team to its third NCAA Final Four in four years.

Princeton’s 5–1 victory over 13-ranked Syracuse in the NCAA Tournament’s first round on Friday set the Tigers up for their Sunday rematch with the early-round hosts, UConn.

Princeton’s attack got started with two consecutive corners in the fourth minute, but the Tigers didn’t convert a goal until the end of the first quarter, when Davey hit in a corner from Neff. In the second period, Roth forced a turnover, then dribbled the length of the field before playing the ball past Syracuse’s goalie to give Princeton a 2–0 lead at the half.

Tweet of the Day “FINAL! We’re going to the #NCAAFH Final Four!!!”

Princeton FH (@ TigerFH), field hockey

The second half opened with another score for the Tigers.

This time, it was sophomore striker Ali McCarthy who got her stick on a high ball sent in by junior midfielder Julianna

Tornetta. Davey then added her second goal of the day off a corner, putting the Tigers up 4–0.

Less than two minutes later, Roth became the second Princeton player to score her second

PAUL NEFF / GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Princeton field hockey advanced to the NCAA Final Four after beating UConn.

goal of the day. She collected a bouncing ball after a misfired corner shot and whipped it into the net. Though Syracuse made it on the board late in the third, the Tigers overpowered them, easily claiming a spot in the national quarterfinals.

The Ivy League also announced its annual awards this week. First-year midfielder Sammy Popper and Head Coach Carla Tagliente were unanimous selections for Ivy League Rookie and Coach of the Year, respectively. Popper is the 17th Tiger to be named Rookie of the Year, following teammate Julianna Tornetta in 2017. This is Tagliente’s second Coach of the Year honor.

Clara Roth, Hannah Davey, Julianna Tornetta, and Popper were all First Team All-Ivy selections. Ali McCarthy and MaryKate Neff were secondteam All-Ivy, while Grace Baylis earned an honorable mention.

Princeton is now off to the NCAA Final Four. The Tigers will face No. 3 Virginia in the national semifinals on Friday at Wake Forest University’s Kentner Stadium in WinstonSalem, North Carolina.

Stat of the Day

Follow us

6 touchdowns

Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!

Yale QB Kurt Rawlings threw six touchdowns against Princeton football, a Yale single game record