November 8, 2017 by The Daily Princetonian

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Wednesday November 8, 2017 vol. CXLI no. 97

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } ON CAMPUS

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

Justin Tanner talks networking, youth activism, politics

Princeton elects school board, town council

By Linh Nguyen

Princeton played its part in the sweep of elections across the country on Tuesday night. Princeton’s own competitive race was one for seats on the Princeton Public School District Board of Education as well as the town’s council. Beth Behrend, Michele TuckPonder, and Jessica Deutsch won the three vacant seats on the board. Democrats David Cohen and Leticia Fraga ran uncontested with no Republican challengers for the town council. “I’m excited to have been elected, and I’m very thankful for the support shown to me by the voters,” said Tuck-Ponder. “I’m looking forward to serving on the school board and addressing some of the issues I’ve

On Nov. 6, former President Barack Obama’s presidential appointee Justin Tanner visited the Carl A. Fields Center as a part of University podcast Woke Wednesdays’ first event of the season. In 2015, Obama appointed Tanner as Associate Director for Legislative, Education & Intergovernmental Affairs at the Department of Commerce. Eighteen students congregated in the Class of 1985 Room in the Fields Center at 7 p.m. to engage in a small group discussion with Tanner. Tanner spoke about his experiences prior to his work for the Obama presidential campaign as well as his professional aspirations afterwards. His visit was sponsored by the Office of Religious Life and Dean Theresa Thames. A Howard University alumnus and Vanderbilt Law School graduate, Tanner credited his passion for social justice and race relations to his educational experiences and interactions with various communities. “I had never had a teacher or professor who looked like me until my freshman year,” said Tanner. “I went 12 years without having a black teacher, male or female. Howard was the most culturally enriching experience of my life; I found myself there.” During the conversation, Tanner focused on the oppor-

tunities that University students hold, and gave students pointers for maximizing success in undergraduate years. “Study up on people who you look up to,” Tanner recommended. “People pay so much for networking alone. Soak it in and take advantage of all of your opportunities. What you do now is setting you up for the next step; it all starts here.” Tanner also encouraged students to embrace failure wholeheartedly as a growing experience to enhance solidarity and collective determination. “This generation has never lost,” said Tanner. “Losing brings people down. This is a struggle, and it’s a continuous struggle. You have to work at it, because it’s not going to be roses all the time.” At the conclusion of the talk, students interviewed by The Daily Princetonian held mixed opinions about the subject matter of the talk. Nathan Poland ‘20, Multimedia Committee Head of Woke Wednesdays, found Tanner’s presence to be a much-needed voice connecting students to the reality of politics in this day and age. “I was really honored to have him speak to us because it’s not often that we get someone who actually knows what it’s like on the inside,” commented Poland. “Hearing his perspective definitely cemented the idea See TANNER page 3

COURTESY OF DEAN THERESA THAMES

Justin Tanner speaks to students at Carl A. Fields Center.

contributor

raised in [the] campaign and some of the issues already on the table.” According to unofficial sent to the Prince by the Princeton Clerk’s Office, Behrend, Tuck-Ponder, and Deutsch ran in a field of six candidates, winning with 3199, 2983, and 2773 votes, respectively, although about 800 mail-in ballots have not been counted yet. Other candidates included Jenny Ludmer, Julie Ramirez, and James Fields. “Princeton Schools are in good hands with Beth, Jess and Michele,” Ramirez wrote in an email. “Princeton is very lucky to have them and I’m sure they will each make an impact in their own way.” This school board election was of particular importance with impending decisions regarding over-

ON CAMPUS

Richman discusses power of storytelling

Hawkins speaks out against abortion

By Victor Hua contributor

Storytelling is dominated today by electronic and print media, such as television, the Internet, and magazines, said Ferris Professor of Journalism Joe Richman. According to Richman, however, radio documentary and audio storytelling offer a unique, intimate perspective to the art. On Nov. 7, Richman shared his many years of experience in audio storytelling with high school students, undergraduates, graduates, and professors at the University. Over the years, he has produced works featured on National Public Radio programs such as “All Things Considered,” and he has founded “Radio Diaries,” an NPR documentary series devoted to sharing the stories of ordinary people. “Radio storytelling is all about intimate voices and characters,” Richman said. “Because of that, it is more emotional as the listeners create their own pictures of the stories they hear.” In 1996, Richman’s series “Teenage Diaries,” which

documented the stories of various teenagers across the country using sound, aired for the first time on NPR’s “All Things Considered.” Before then, Richman had started out in the world of journalism as a freelance reporter and learned about utilizing the radio to deliver news and long-form documentaries. “The turning point in my career was in ‘96, when I started recording for ‘Teenage Diaries’,” Richman explained. “It was then that I began to turn the microphone towards other people to listen to their stories instead of focusing on mine.” To share some of his podcasts with the audience, Richman played five different recordings of conversations between people of all ages and backgrounds during the event, including the lives of a seltzer man in New York, a teenage boy living with Tourette syndrome, a female boxer who would go on to win gold at the Olympics, the granddaughter of a black man who was executed by an electric chair in the fifties, and a female teenSee RICHMAN page 3

U . A F FA I R S

Endowment to be affected by tax reforms By Audrey Spensley senior writer

“We are strongly opposed to this provision and are in the process of letting Congress know of our deep concerns,” said Director of Government Affairs Joyce A. Rechtschaffen ’75 in an email. Endowments are currently tax-exempt and are subject to few financial regulations. The government sees fit to make these endowments tax-exempt because of the ostensible

In Opinion

public good they are providing, since they are considered part of a university’s educational and charitable mission. “This proposal would overturn that time-tested policy solely to add revenues to the federal treasury,” Vice President and Secretary of the University Bob Durkee ’69 said in a New York Times article. Assistant Vice President for Communications Daniel Day said in an email that the measure could open the door to See TAX page 5

Guest contributor Joel Finkelstein calls on the CJL to foster tough discussions after it cancelled a visit by Israel’s deputy foreign minister, and contributing columnist Sabrina Sequeira critically evaluates the justice system’s treatment of drug offenders. PAGE 6

crowding and the acquisition of the Westminster Choir College campus. Just last week, the entire faculty at Westminster received layoff notices, and in March, the school board unanimously decided to allow the district to look into acquiring the 23-acre campus. A former mayor of Princeton, Tuck-Ponder says her two main priorities coming in will be to address educational equity and overcrowding. But, because she is not an educator, she first wants to learn the lay of the land. There are 10 members on the school board, as well as two student representatives. Both the town council and school board positions have a term of three years.

VICTOR HUA :: DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Joe Richman discussed some of his most meaningful radio interview series in a lecture on Tuesday.

Today on Campus 12 p.m.: NYU historian Ben Kafka presents “The Work of Interpretation” at 12 p.m. at 301 Julis Romo Rabinowitz.

By Neha Chauhan contributor

“Abortion is and always will be the opposite of empowerment,” said Kristan Hawkins during her pro-life lecture Monday night. Hawkins was invited to speak by Princeton Pro-Life. She has been the president of the Students for Life of America since 2006 and is the organization’s official spokeswoman. In introducing her role as spokeswoman to her audience, Hawkins emphasized that conversations around the life of a fetus are hardly ever easy. “We [often] can’t even have a rational conversation about [abortion] because it’s personal,” she said. Nevertheless, these conversations are happening with greater frequency with students nationwide, as exemplified by Hawkins’s lecture itself. Hawkins’ talk at the University was a part of an national tour, “Announcing the Lies Feminists Tell.” As part of the tour, Hawkins will also speak at UC Berkeley, Dartmouth, Harvard, University of Kansas, the Benedictine University of Kansas, UC Irvine, and University of Southern California. At the University, Hawkins lectured for approximately 90 minutes before playing a video promoting defunding of Planned Parenthood and answering her audience’s questions. Throughout its segments, Hawkins’s talk was anchored in an examination of feminism. According to Hawkins, a discussion of abortion is judicious in the current U.S. political climate. Abortion, she said, is being brought up more and more, especially with the election of President Trump. In this climate, said Hawkins, it is important to analyze what See HAWKINS page 8

WEATHER

contributor

By Ivy Truong

HIGH

52˚

LOW

31˚

Cloudy. chance of rain:

10 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Wednesday November 8, 2017

Richman reflects on career in radio journalism RICHMAN Continued from page 1

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

ager living in Saudi Arabia. According to Richman, he looks for details in people’s lives that resemble unique issues that can be shared when searching for subjects to record. Occasionally, the recording process can be quite therapeutic for subjects, even though it is not intended to be, Richman said, referring to the subject of his second shared recording. “Josh, who was living with Tourette’s, had the first long conversation of his life because I’d constantly ask him to record conversations with his classmates and family,” Richman explained. “It changed the way he saw himself.” Many storytelling documentaries also represent the struggles of different groups in society, according to Richman. The third shared recording, featuring the female boxer Claressa Shields, revealed the female standards she had faced as a child when she first brought up the idea of boxing. In the recording, her father had admitted that he originally told her that “boxing is a man’s sport.” In a similar fashion, to highlight the social standards of Saudi Arabia, Richman documented the conversations between Majd, who was 19 at the time of the recording, and her brother, who, in the fifth recording, indicated that he expected

The Daily Princetonian

her to marry early. Richman explains, however, that Majd’s goal was to study the sciences at a university. The process of recording a person’s story can take anywhere from a few months to over a year, according to Richman. To compensate for the time spent recording their personal lives, Richman pays his subjects, but he says that it isn’t an important factor. “Even though I pay the people I record, money has never really been the incentive for any of them,” Richmond explains. “People just love to tell their stories, and that’s a beautiful thing.” Sophie Gregrowski, a junior at Lawrence High School, found the event informative. “There’s a lot of pressure to decide on a career really early on nowadays, so being able to attend Richman’s lecture was helpful in helping me make that decision,” Gregrowski said. “Hearing from such an accomplished journalist inspired me to commit to the humanities as a major.” Richman is planning to continue recording and releasing podcasts of “Radio Diaries” and historical documentaries, and also plans on exploring inequality as the theme of his next diaries. The event took place on Tuesday, November 7, at 4:30 p.m. in Aaron Burr Hall. It was sponsored by the Humanities Council’s Ferris Seminars in Journalism and the Department of Anthropology.

Tanner speaks at first Woke Wednesdays event TANNER Continued from page 1

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

in my mind that change isn’t achieved through one avenue, but through multiple.” David Liu ‘21 echoed Poland’s sentiments while also pointing out that he wished Tanner had focused more on student questions. “I enjoyed Tanner’s talk,” said Liu. “While perhaps he wasn’t the best at answering the group’s questions, he did us all a favor by imparting the knowledge that he came to disseminate. What I took away from this encounter is the importance of networking, and that’s a lesson that I’ll hold with me in my professional career.”

The varying opinions on Tanner’s talk emulate the goals of Woke Wednesdays, whose members encourage communication and contention. “Woke Wednesdays is centered around discourse and dialogue related to issues of race and politics and gender ideology,” said William Pugh ‘20, co-founder and president of Woke Wednesdays. “Basically what we’re trying to do is offer a platform and springboard to have these conversations and serve as a means to facilitate conversations on campus about difficult things.” Woke Wednesdays will release their first podcast of the academic year on Nov. 8 at 8 p.m. on Soundcloud.

page S2

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

T HE DA ILY

Revealing the truth, one news story at a time. join@dailyprincetonian.com

Wednesday November 8, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

Wednesday November 8, 2017

page S2

U. officials raise concerns over new tax TAX

Continued from page 1

the taxation of public charities, as the bill would signal the government’s ability to tax institutions pursuing charitable missions, according to a University statement. The University relies on the endowment for over half of its annual operating budget, according to Day, who also expressed concerns that the tax would impact its priority initiatives. Both Day and Rechtschaffen noted that the University is currently no-cost for students whose families have an annual income of $60,000 and under. Even for students who receive no financial aid, however, the endowment is important in lowering costs. “Endowment earnings help pay for academic programs and student services, for libraries and laboratories,” Rechtschaffen wrote in an email. “Any expense the endow-

ment covers is a cost that does not need to be charged to students — even to students who pay full tuition,” Day added in an email. An amendment approved on Monday, Nov. 6 narrowed the original scope of the tax from endowments valued at $100,000 per full-time student to $250,000. The bill’s provision would increase federal revenue by $3 billion between 2018 to 2027, according to the joint committee on taxation. The University’s current endowment — the largest in the country on a per-student basis — stands at $23.8 billion. It earned a 12.5 percent investment gain in the fiscal year over this past June. According to a Washington Post article, roughly 60 to 70 colleges — including the University — would be affected by the tax. The University joins a wave of other elite colleges that have criticized the bill, including Cornell and the University of Southern California.

T HE DA ILY

Enjoy drawing pretty pictures? Like to work with Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator or InDesign? Join the ‘Prince’ design team! join@dailyprincetonian.com The Daily Princetonian is published daily except Saturday and Sunday from September through May and three times a week during January and May by The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., 48 University Place, Princeton, N.J. 08540. Mailing address: P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542. Subscription rates: Mailed in the United States $175.00 per year, $90.00 per semester. Office hours: Sunday through Friday, 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Telephones: Business: 609-375-8553; News and Editorial: 609-258-3632. For tips, email news@ dailyprincetonian.com. Reproduction of any material in this newspaper without expressed permission of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., is strictly prohibited. Copyright 2014, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

Wednesday November 8, 2017

Opinion

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

It should be easier to get to New York City Rachel Kennedy

contributing columnist

“

I feel so removed from everything.” “There is nothing here.” “I’m so stuck in the Orange Bubble.” I often hear these grumbles while walking to class or sitting in Frist. We are removed, and as lovely as Nassau Street is, there is not much here in Princeton. But I don’t think Princeton students should have to be stuck in any bubble. Taking trips to New York City could be a way to pop it. Going to the city provides the chance to explore, as well as engage with an endless number of communities and experiences. At less than 60 miles away, it is close enough for a day or weekend trip and provides as good break in someone’s weekend routine. That said, the current options available to get Princeton students to the city are unreliable or expensive enough to deter students from making the trip. Princeton has the resources

to provide a convenient bus or shuttle to New York City and should invest in providing that service for its students. Currently, the most popular mode of getting to New York is by using the Dinky and then connecting to the main New Jersey Transit line. Bless its quirky heart, but the Dinky train never quite works when you need it to. Students who get opportunities to work or have interviews in the city often worry about its reliability. Lexi Quirk ’18, a campus representative for Red Bull, has wanted to involve more Princeton students in their events tailored for college students, such as shows and concerts, but says, “It can be pretty hard to get people to the events, even though I know people are interested.” She has had her own difficulty staying involved in the job, as the Dinky is unpredictable to the point that she and other Princeton students that work in New York or need to get to Princeton

Junction often Uber or take a cab. Experiential learning opportunities such as a jobs or internships should be encouraged, and providing a consistent means of getting to New York would be a clear sign of support for working students. Expense is another concern of Princeton students interested in getting to the city. The Dinky costs three dollars to get to Princeton Junction. Then, from Princeton Junction to Penn Station is another $16 one-way. This comes out to be a $38 round trip to get to New York, which is not a reasonable amount for some students to spend on a day or weekend trip. Another not-so-wellknown option is using Megabus to get to New York. There is a bus that leaves from Palmer Square (across the street from The Bent Spoon) roughly every two hours and usually costs $12-14 per ride, occasionally offering a onedollar trip. This is a much less publicized and talked

about form of transportation at Princeton, and the standard prices of $18-$24 round trip do not provide a significantly more accessible price point than the Dinky. With these being the two clear options for mass transportation to New York, getting to the city is not as accessible as it should be. Some classes offer extra credit for visiting museums such as the Museum of Natural History or the Museum of Modern Art, and not all students can make their way into the city. Professors can urge their students to take advantage of nearby resources, but if students can’t access them, what’s the point? The University has no control over the fares of New Jersey Transit or Megabus, but it could facilitate a more cost effective and efficient way for students to get to the city. Rachel Kennedy is a freshman from Dedham, Mass. She can be reached at rk19@princeton. edu.

Putting federal sentencing on trial Sabrina Sequeira

contributing columnist

e often forget those citizens who spend months, decades, even entire adult lives behind bars. Over 2.2 million U.S. adults are incarcerated, and nearly 25 percent are questionable candidates to be serving time in prison because they committed non-violent crimes. For instance, unlike many other crimes, offenses rooted in drug use and mental health disorders are often viewed as non-violent in nature. Because of this distinction, it is important that the U.S. prison system differentiates between treatment of violent and non-violent offenders, at all levels of government. According to FiveThirtyEight, about 48 percent of those held in federal prisons are incarcerated for drug offenses, and 16 percent of those in state prisons are held with a drug crime as their most serious offense. As of 2014, around 356,000 people in jails and state prisons were suffering from severe mental illnesses, according to Treatment Advocacy Center. “Alternative-to-incarceration court programs” have been introduced into the U.S. judicial system in response to overcrowded prisons and are most widely used for non-violent criminals. According to the United States Sentencing Commission, these programs began almost thirty years ago at the state level but still struggle to be incorporated into the federal system. They are most widely used for

offenders that present substance use or mental health disorders. However, the rate of use of alternative sentencing in appropriate cases has decreased recently. Because of this, many have pressed for the United States Sentencing Commission to amend the Guidelines Manual that dictates qualification for these non-incarceration programs. The Alternative to Incarceration Programs (ATI) should focus more attention to such programs and extend them to the federal level. The ATI Programs feature problem-solving court programs, most notably drug courts, that utilize a non-adversarial approach to justice. With a team of workers, the court uses a process of admitting, treating, monitoring, and discharging of the offenders. These participants are often those that have been convicted of drug abuse but do not present violent crimes. Upon completing their 1224 month program, most offenders enter a probationary period or serve a very short time in prison, due to the expansion of “a downward departure to a non-incarceration sentence for defendants who successfully participate in them.” With a downward departure, a person may ultimately earn a less severe sentence than that which was originally given by a judge. With these programs, they may even be able to earn a sentence without any period of formal incarceration. Such programs provide for rehabilitation efforts with a pursuit of minimizing recidivism. These problem-solving courts are helpful institutions that both minimize

people in the overcrowded U.S. prisons and provide for the offender’s recovery. Usually, over half of the participants in these courts “graduate” from the programs. However, only a very small percentage of substance-use offenders participate in drug and other problem-solving court programs. More problematic is the fact that the overall reduction in recidivism is minimal, yielding a mere eight to fourteen percent reduction. I believe this is largely due to the lack of attention, usage, and therefore minimal funding for these programs. With a greater emphasis placed on these programs in the judicial system, it is likely that they will yield more favorable results. These programs can be expanded by extending them to the federal level. Federal offenders, especially those with drug-related crimes, often exhibit substance use and mental health disorders; in fact, according to the United States Sentencing Commission, 45 percent of federal prisoners exhibit substance-dependency or histories of substance use. Because they are rooted in recovery and treatment rather than in penalty and chastisement, these ATI programs could be beneficial to federal offenders whose crimes are rooted in substance abuse and mental disorders. Like those with mental disorders, substance abusers are ill due to their dependency and could benefit from treatments catered to their needs. Additionally, in viewing abusers not as evil criminals but as patients, addicts will not feel antagonized by the system’s efforts.

Though Supreme Court decisions, most notably United States v. Booker, led to the notion that drug courts are unnecessary in the federal criminal justice system, it can hardly be refuted that many federal offenders exhibit clinical drug-reliance and engage in criminal activity to fulfill their drug dependency. Therefore, the downward departure option offered at the state level should also be extended to the federal level: A federal offender’s free life should not be valued less than that of a state offender. If the non-violent criminal is deemed to have successfully completed the treatment program, he should be able to earn a non-incarceration sentence for his crime. Though there has been an emergence of such federal ATI programs, thanks to the Court’s decision in Gall v. Unites States and Pepper v. United States, it is very limited and seen in only 17 districts in the United States. Additionally, the federal system does not yet offer a type that only enrolls all nonviolent offenders. To achieve a universally comprehensive criminal justice reform, the federal judicial system should assume its role in the effort to differentiate the treatment for violent and non-violent offenders. Aside from saving space in overcrowded prisons, these programs could save lives, sans bars. Sabrina Sequeira is a freshman from Springfield, N.J. She can be reached at sgs4@princeton.edu.

vol. cxli

Sarah Sakha ’18

editor-in-chief

Matthew McKinlay ’18 business manager

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Kathleen Crown William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Lisa Belkin ‘82 Francesca Barber trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73

141ST MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Garfinkle ’19 Grace Rehaut ’18 Christina Vosbikian ’18 head news editor Marcia Brown ’19 associate news editors Kristin Qian ’18 head opinion editor Nicholas Wu ’18 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Emily Erdos ’19 head sports editor David Xin ’19 associate sports editors Christopher Murphy ’20 Claire Coughlin ’19 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Lyric Perot ’20 Danielle Hoffman ’20 web editor Sarah Bowen ’20 head copy editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Omkar Shende ’18 associate copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 design editor Rachel Brill ’19 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19

NIGHT STAFF copy Christian Flores ’21 Elizabeth Parker ’21 Ally Dalman ’20

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

On Hotovely and the dangers of moral panic in response to AJP

nder pressure from a coalition of left-leaning students and groups such as the Alliance of Jewish Progressives, the Center for Jewish Life cancelled an address by Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Tzipi Hotovely on Nov. 5, a day before her scheduled appearance at the University. The coalition seized on process as an instrument of protest and argued that the CJL violates its own Israel Policy in the instance of Hotolevy. Hotovely, they contend, never entered the review process that CJL’s Israel Advisory Committee oversees in order to prevent sponsorship of speakers who might “foster an atmosphere of incivility, intend to harm Israel, or promote racism or hatred of any kind.” Rabbi Julie Roth, the executive di-

rector of the center explains in the cancellation letter to the Israeli consulate that the CJL was not “consistent in the application of our process for program sponsorship,” but adds, “We look forward to continued robust and healthy debate around Israel in our community.” It strains credulity here to attribute AJP’s ire to violation of process – “Hotovely is a racist,” they spit. She causes, “irreparable damage” to the peace process, they argue. And she is using the CJL to “legitimize her goals.” These comprise naked displays of rejectionism and kneejerk moral panic. Yet when we sponsor a speaker, does that mean that we endorses their values in full? To penetrate into morally difficult domains with opponents that our primitive ancestors

would have simply killed belies the entire purpose of the academic enterprise and the apotheosis of Western civilization. How can we possibly expect to engage in difficult conversation when we rush to displace all of those we despise in the “inhuman box” every time someone hits our moral panic buttons? Hardly unique to Princeton, this creep of moral panic emerges at a time of clear and present danger for public dialog nationally. Ben Shapiro requires nearly half a million dollars in security to speak at Berkeley. Riots and cancelled events well up across universities to afflict honest conversation. In the modern era, a specter of mutual delegitimization now threatens to caricature us into the permanent isolation of non-concentric political bubbles.

In this environment, to withdraw sponsorship from a foreign dignitary because of cognitive dissonance precisely fails the environment for healthy dialogue that the AJP purports to protect. Simultaneously, these actions villainize, as racist, students who perceive that a visiting dignitary from Israel, a key American ally, deserves the right to speak at its highest institution of learning and free thought. The AJP argues that they will “not be silent as members of our Princeton community further these hateful and racist policies.” Indeed, they will not. It seems the moral panic of the AJP demands the silence of all others instead. The ability to endure fraught moral conversation comprises a value that we as a community must protect,

because a value like this deteriorates when we fail to protect it. In the interest of fair and open conversation, I challenge members of the AJP to an open debate on the importance of hard conversation on campus and invite the CJL to sponsor a dialogue about this. Moving forward, let us hope that we as a community seek to invite the hard conversations rather than flee from them. Let us aim to to move conversation forward rather than undermine it through bureaucratic censorship. Let us aim to deploy arguments rather than unilaterally force outcomes. Joel Finkelstein is a Ph. D Candidate in the Princeton Neuroscience Institute. He can be reached at letterstojoel@ gmail.com.

Wednesday November 8, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page S2

#MeToo, but what about everybody else? Madeleine Marr

contributing columnist

brief background on current events regarding sexual assault in Hollywood: Harvey Weinstein was exposed for rampant, repeated sexual predation that had been allowed for decades because of his money and influence — color me shocked. After an initial exposé published by the New York Times, other actresses have come out and revealed their own experiences with sexual predation by Weinstein, or with dozens of other men who got away with this behavior not-so-secretly. Opeds about sexual harassment and assault in film have been written (or dredged up from the last time an incident like this became newsworthy) and the fury has trickled down to social media. The #MeToo campaign began on Twitter, but has since expanded to include Facebook posts using the same hashtag. Alyssa Milano, an actress and activist, spurred the momentum by tweeting, “If all women who have been sexually harassed or assaulted wrote ‘Me too’ as a status, we might give people a sense of the magnitude of the problem.” Milano’s intention was to galvanize the social media community,

prompting action through education about how often sexual harassment, like that perpetuated by Harvey Weinstein, really occurs. I do not have a problem with the posts themselves — I support going public as a way for women to remove the stigma of being a victim of sexual harassment and assault, and I think owning that experience through public statements can be empowering. However, women should not have to expose themselves to the voyeurism of social media and perform the emotional labor of publicly owning and explaining their past trauma in order to show men the “magnitude of the problem.” The magnitude should be clear by now. It has been happening for LITERALLY ever. This is a problem. Most women who have had any experience as women are not shocked by the Weinstein accusations because they have seen and/or lived this all multiple times before. This is far from the first time this has happened. Countless famous men in the film industry (or in tech, or in the Fortune 500, or in the White House) have been exposed for sexual harassment or assault, causing an uproar about gender discrimination and a seeming downturn in apathy only to return to previous

levels after the news cycle has moved on. Casey Affleck won a Golden Globe and an Oscar for his performance in “Manchester by the Sea” despite a concurrent social media-based push to hold him accountable for accusations of sexual harassment. Woody Allen continues to produce hit films despite similar claims made about him (he also commented on the Harvey Weinstein case, denying knowledge of the assaults despite years of working together, and expressing pity for Weinstein’s life being “so messed up”). Sexual harassment is not only prolific, but it also tends to be seen as a disappointing but not disqualifying behavior of otherwise successful men. Because our society does not view such blatant disrespect for women as career-ruining, we allow men like Weinstein, Affleck, and Allen to believe that their sexually predatory actions are acceptable. What is unique about the Weinstein case is that he is actually facing repercussions for his actions. He has been fired from the company he founded and has had his membership to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences revoked. The question of whether he will face criminal charges is still up in the air. This is new, for in the past, similar accusations

against prominent figures have made only a minor dent in the accused’s fame and success. Roman Polanski, criminally charged with raping a minor, has won an Oscar and a lifetime achievement award in the decades since he escaped to Europe to avoid incarceration, to name just one example. Weinstein’s charges represent a positive step towards justice for the women who have been demeaned through sexual harassment and assault in the workplace. However, the scarcity of other examples like this one indicates a glaring need for reforms in the justice system and in the society that has, up until now, allowed these perpetrators to evade consequences. Various measures have attempted to further this goal, including online educational campaigns. These operations spring up whenever sexual assault again becomes newsworthy. In 2012, #EverydaySexism trended as a way to document widespread, daily discrimination. Two years later, #YesAllWomen popped up after a mass shooter cited his hatred of women as a reason for his attack. The #MeToo hashtag of present is the obvious contemporary example. These examples are plentiful, but somehow people still aren’t convinced that this is a problem. A person who hasn’t already

been convinced that sexual assault and harassment are real and widely prevalent will not change their mind after seeing another viral social media campaign. The facts are out there, and the stories continue streaming in. While #MeToo has its merits as a method of personal empowerment, it is not going to be the campaign that finally convinces the world that women deserve respect in the workplace. Harvey Weinstein is just another in a long list of powerful men who have taken advantage of women. After repeated attempts to convince nonbelievers of the prevalence of sexual harassment, continued effort is a waste of time and energy. Those who still refuse to acknowledge the obvious truth need to be abandoned in favor of direct political action. Stronger legal options and protections for the women who have been victimized, as well as the establishment of more empowered women’s groups in the vein of consciousnessraising groups of the 1970s, would do more to push forward in combating men like Harvey Weinstein. Madeleine Marr is a freshman from Newtown Square, Pa. She can be reached at mmarr@ princeton.edu.

Friends with (emotional and health) benefits Leora Eisenberg

columnist

ccasionally, in our efforts to be students, we forget to be friends. In a place as stressful as Princeton, we surround ourselves with difficult classes, meaningful extracurriculars, and abundant internship applications. But, beneath it all, so many people on campus have turned to me and said that they feel as if they haven’t really set aside time for their friends this year. One friend put it well when she said that “friendships are the one extracurricular they haven’t really focused on.” We’ve probably had a friend text us to come have dinner, or see a movie, or go to a show. And we’ve stared at the pile of work next to us and politely declined. It certainly doesn’t make us feel like good friends — but they’ll understand,

right? Of course they will. A good friend understands that you’re up to your ears in work and that you’ll come next time. You’ll definitely come next time. But will you, really? Chances are you’ll think about it. But the workload doesn’t change, and you’ll probably be too busy next time. We find ourselves in this cycle of “friendship” — where we continually promise each other to catch up and then don’t. In this kind of “friendship,” neither party feels valued. Friendship has proven physical benefits. It has been linked to lower blood pressure later in life, and healthier weight among adolescents. Conversely, a lack of friends (social isolation) is associated with a 30% risk of early death. It’s even believed that socially integrated teens have stronger cardiovascular systems. And this is all in addition to the more obvious emo-

tional benefits that come with having a friend: stress relief, social support, and so on. Often, friendships are what you take with you out of college — more so, even, than classes and grades. The hope is always that the people you build relationships with are those who will follow you throughout your life. Knowing this, why do we neglect those people in favor of the grades and letters of recommendation which won’t help us out during breakups, be at our weddings, and have lunch with us when we need to see a friendly smile? If an individual matters to you, make time for them. This is easier said than done, but having a meal — one where you really pay attention to what they say and don’t look at your watch every ten minutes — is a compromise you might consider making. Watching a movie together occasion-

ally is a reasonable thing to do together, and isn’t considered procrastinating, even if you’ve done some work ahead of time and get to spend quality time with your friend. There’s definitely a balance to be struck; almost no one can be as social they would like. In an effort to be more social earlier this semester, I was having very long lunches and dinners with friends every day and found myself drained. I was going to everyone’s events and inviting everyone over to my room to chat. It was too much; I couldn’t be everyone’s friend all the time. I had to be a student, too. That said, quality time doesn’t even have to be limited to the non-academic; part of the beauty of collaboration is that you have the opportunity to work with people whom you like while lessening your workload. Working on problem sets with friends is often the

Double Entendre tashi treadway ’19 ..................................................

T HE DA ILY

News. Opinions. Sports. Every day. join@dailyprincetonian.com

only thing that makes work tolerable; or, more broadly, doing homework with friends is often the only thing that makes academic life itself tolerable. If I want to retain the friendships I’ve already worked so hard to create, there are choices I have to make: to eat a quick lunch alone, or spend time with someone who ostensibly cares about and wants to spend with me? To do my problem sets alone, or work with a classmate? We each have to create our own worksocial life balance and must then make our own decisions about how social integration and interaction plays a role in our lives. But we must also remember that friendship, if fostered and nurtured, will help keep us emotionally and physically healthy for years to come. Leora Eisenberg is a sophomore from Eagan, Minn. She can be reached at leorae@princeton.

The Daily Princetonian

page 8

Wednesday November 8, 2017

Princeton Pro-Life brings Hawkins to campus for talk on abortion HAWKINS Continued from page 1

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

feminism means as well. “I am way more than the sum of my parts,” Hawkins said, referencing a view with which she disagrees: that limiting women’s access to contraceptives and abortion limits to women’s rights. “My main points tonight are

that the mainstream feminist movement has lied to women,” Hawkins said. She explained that she does not refer to herself as a feminist, and that she instead breaks with the modern movement over one issue: what she called the “violent act of abortion.” According to Hawkins, abortion is a violent act that ends the life of a distinct, living person. Because of this, Hawkins holds that en-

couraging abortion is contrary to feminism’s goal of promoting equality between men and women. “I think mainstream feminism has been used [to spread] lies of the abortion industry,” she said. “I reject the lie that I must kill my unborn child in order to be free or in order to be equal to the men in my life.” In her talk, Hawkins expressed her view that abortion

NEHA CHAUHAN :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Kristan Hawkins delivered a talk on pro-life and feminism.

does not improve the situation of a woman who has an unwanted pregnancy. “She’s having a problem…. You haven’t cured her poverty, you haven’t stopped the abuse, you’ve prolonged it. In fact, you’ve compounded her struggle,” Hawkins said. Building upon her discussion of abortion, Hawkins also expressed that she does not support the use of contraceptives. “Every decision, every action we make has a consequence — that’s just the reality of it,” Hawkins said regarding the responsibility accompanying sexual activity. “When sex is trivialized, when sex is just a part of the hookup culture, of course the second lie of feminism had to be … that contraception is necessary for the advancement of womanhood.” According to Hawkins, prolife movements are bastions of support for women. Hawkins expressed her view that pro-life movements support women by preserving the lives of their children instead of “shipping her off” to have an abortion. To this point, Hawkins also specifically explained why she believes abortion should not be an option. “I’m not telling you what to do; I don’t care about your body,” she said. “I believe that human beings have the right to live. Human beings should never be subject to the will of other human beings because of how one person views their worth.” Moreover, Hawkins said encouraging abortion discourages women from trying to have both a family and a career. “Abortion tells women in our

country that we [women] can’t. [It tells women] no, you’re not strong enough to be a student and be a mom,” Hawkins said. In Hawkins’s opinion, modern feminism does not appropriately address the difficulties of motherhood — and therein lies her break with the movement. Women should be focusing on creating and re-assessing priorities as they juggle motherhood with other goals, Hawkins said. These conversations, according to her, are not happening often enough, which she says contributes to the number of abortions. “It’s gonna be really hard…. You’ve been told your whole life, like, ‘oh, yeah, women can do it all; it’s easy,’” Hawkins said. “It’s not gonna be easy. You’re gonna have to sacrifice more than you ever thought you were gonna have to sacrifice before.” After her lecture, Hawkins and PPL played a video titled “Meet Jocelyn: Planned Parenthood Victim” that discussed a woman’s emotionally distressing experience with an abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic. “They [Planned Parenthood] send money furthering an abortion culture,” she said. “They [Planned Parenthood] are the driving force of proabortion legislation in Washington, D.C., and state capitols across the country.” Hawkins said she thinks that Planned Parenthood is “selfinterested” and “inhospitable” and that Federally Qualified Health Centers should receive funding in its place. The talk took place on Monday, Nov. 6, at 7 p.m. in Guyot 10.

Wednesday November 8, 2017

The Daily Princetonian

page S2

Special Feature: Men’s Basketball

Key Players

Amir Bell: Senior captain Amir Bell was awarded the B.F. Bunn 1907 Trophy, which is the team’s MVP award. He has helped lead the Tiger offense every year of his career and last year Bell surged during Ivy League play. He shot .581 from the field, the best of any Tiger player with more than three attempts in Ivy games, and Bell provided one of the highlight moments of the league season when his one-on-one left-handed drive to the basket put Princeton up two on Harvard with 1.1 seconds to play in an eventual 73-69 win. Will Gladson: Last year, rookie Will Gladson proved to be one of the team’s strongest facets. He was the second freshmen in Princeton history to win the Class of 1959 Bob Rock Sixth Man Award. Gladson earned the honor after playing in each of the team’s last 28 games of the 2017-2018 season and 29 in all, seeing double-figure minutes 15 times. Gladson was one of only seven players on the team, and the only freshman, to play in as many as 29 games on the season. Devin Cannady: Junior Devin Cannady will most likely be holding down the fort in the backcourt. He is the League’s premier catchand-shoot three-point and free throw shooter, ending last year’s season with 81 3-pointers—the fifth-most in a season in program history. He also set a program record with a .938 free throw percentage (min. 40 attempts), going 76 of 81. He was the team’s secondleading scorer on the season at 13.4 points per game and is sure to be a strong presence on the court for the Tigers. Myles Stephens: Junior forward Myles Stephens is essentially the team’s renaissance man. He was the team’s leading scorer in the Ivy season last year but was also named the Ivy’s Defensive Player of the Year. He led the team in blocked shots, with 22, and was third on the team overall in scoring at 12.5 points per game.

GRAPHICS BY DAVID XIN ”KEY PLAYERS” BY CLAIRE COUGHLIN

Done reading your ‘Prince’? Recycle

Coach Banghart: ‘What a difference a year makes’ W B-BALL Continued from page 10

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

day we stepped on campus to today, we’ve grown so much, and from now until March, we plan to get better every single day,” noted Robinson. “I think that our consistency will drive us forward. Our eagerness to learn and get better and win championships is only going to drive us.” Fortunately for the Tigers, they retain a few of their top players from last season. Besides Robinson and Weledji, the Tigers kept junior Sydney Jordan – who can play both guard and forward – and sophomore forward Bella Alarie, who was last season’s Ivy League Rookie of the Year. These players, along with a strong new freshman class, have the Tigers entering 2018 with as much, if not more, talent on the court. “What a difference a year makes,” said Banghart during Ivy League Media Day. “We have a lot of improved pieces and a lot of young talent that will contribute immediately to what we’re about. I give a lot of credit to our senior class. The energy with this group is palpable and consistent. It’s been a really fun team to coach. They’re focused and committed to getting better.”

“I think our energy has been really good,” noted Jordan. “We all came in, ready to learn, ready to win and ready to work hard. Bringing energy every day is going be really important for us and is going to help us be great.” This season, Princeton will be hoping to start the regular season better than they did last season. The non-conference slate was rough for the Tigers, filled with long road trips and even some back-to-back games. This season, they will be looking to start on a higher note; they will have many familiar faces on tap, including Rutgers, Seton Hall, UMBC, Georgia Tech, and Villanova, who they faced in last season’s Women’s National Invitation Tournament game at Jadwin. Once again, the Tigers will open their Ivy League schedule against Penn, a highlight to their Ivy League schedule. Princeton kicks off its season this Friday at Jadwin against George Washington. The Tigers are anxious for this year to begin and show what they’ve got to the world. Jordan confirmed the hype, stating, “I think we can really put on a show this year – and show people who Princeton women’s basketball is and how much we’ve grown.”

Sports

Wednesday November 8, 2017

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S BASKETBALL

Women’s basketball preparing for a strong 2018 season By Chris Murphy associate sports editor

With only 11 days left in the 2017 offseason, the women’s basketball team is putting the finishing touches on an offseason which saw the team get stronger on both sides of the ball and develop what head coach Courtney Banghart called “a new sense of purpose.” After a season in which the Tigers finished second in the Ivy League standings and advanced to the inaugural Ivy League Tournament final, the team looks for loftier goals this year in their quest to return to the Big Dance. Last season was a mixed bag for Princeton. The Tigers finished with a strong conference record of 9-5 and many of their players had career years in a Tiger uniform. Finishing second in the regular season and tournament to the undisputed Ivy favorite UPenn last year was an effort that should be applauded. Yet, there were times where things just didn’t seem to click

for the Tigers. Big-time statement wins were followed up with head-scratching losses, and school records in offense or defense were preceded by days where the team struggled just to get a basket or a stop. Going into the offseason, the Tigers were set on developing more consistency on both sides of the ball; they knew the talent was there, and now it was about putting it all together. When asked about the comparison of this year’s team to last year’s, Banghart replied, “I think this program has always incredible chemistry off the court. It’s been a team top-tobottom and side-to-side that’s really prided itself on being one. Last year, we weren’t quite as cohesive in terms of how we played the game together on either end. This particular group has transferred that cohesion and collection to the court. They share the ball, they’re skilled off the dribble, they’re skilled off the catch-and-shoot. We can shoot the ball better, we’re faster, and defensively,

they’re light years better than they were.” Princeton entered the offseason knowing that it would have to fill in the big holes left by departing class of 2017 players. Losing their two starting guards, Vanessa Smith and

Taylor Brown, left a gaping hole in the Tigers’ backcourt as well as a need for new players to step up as leaders. Anchoring this year’s team will be the senior captains: guard Tia Weledji and forward Leslie Robinson. Both players were

critical in the success of last year’s team and will look to carry over the culture and energy they’ve encountered with the program over the last four years. “I think even since the first See W B-BALL page 9

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Seniors Tia Weledji and Leslie Robinson were named the team’s captains last week.

MEN’S BASKETBALL

Men’s basketball looks to reload, defend Ivy League title in 2018 By Chris Murphy associate sports editor

230 days ago, the door closed on Princeton’s magnificent 2017 season when Devin Cannady’s shot rang off the iron and fell into the hands of the Notre Dame center. Now a junior guard on the team and central pillar of leadership for the Tigers, Cannady recognized that as a moment that has stuck with this team since last March and has fueled them in their preparation for 2018. “We remember the game” Cannady stated at Ivy League media day last week. “I specifically remember the shot and that’s just been fuel to the fire in the off season”. It has been 230 days since Princeton took the court in a game that counted towards the NCAA season. This weekend, that moment they have been anticipating since they departed Buffalo last season will finally be here; the time to prove to the world they are back better than ever is almost upon them. “I think the guys and myself and the staff are starting to feel ready to go” noted head coach Mitch Henderson. “It’s time to play somebody else that’s wearing a different color jersey and to get into that, so I’m excited about it.” The Tigers come into this season so close to continuing the Ivy League’s trend of knocking off big name teams in the first round of the NCAA tournament. From Harvard in 2014 over Cincinnati to Yale in 2016 over Baylor, the Tigers looked to join the ranks of recent Ivy League representatives that upset big time basketball programs. Now, Princeton hopes to get their shot again to make some noise in the tournament. “coming into this year, knowing where we’ve been - we were one shot away, one

COURTESY OF MILES HINTON

Junior Myles Stephens will look to be a key contributor this season for the Tigers.

play away - the goal is to get back there to win games in the tournament” said Cannady. But long before any tournament aspirations are met or lost comes the regular season. And before that comes the offseason; 230 days of work and preparation for the Tigers to reload for 2018. After losing notable seniors like Spencer Weisz, Pete Miller and Steven Cook (just to name a few), the Tigers were tasked with reloading their roster with both talent and leadership in preparation for the 2018 campaign. Junior forward Myles Stephens, senior guard Amir Bell and junior guard Devin Cannady will provide the core leadership and experience for this season; fresh off a win in the inaugural Ivy tournament, their experiences in a winning culture will prove vital for the team as they look to repeat their success. “I just love watching them

Tweet of the Day “On this day in 1869, 25 #Tigers played the first game of college football against Rutgers. 148 years later, the #Tiger tradition lives on!” princeton football (@PUTigerFootball)

grow and it’s great having them with me in leadership and they’ve been a great help” Bell said about his teammates. “With these two (Cannady, Stephens), I feel like I’m really confident, especially knowing that they’re going to have my back and that they’re going to lead the team to where we need to be.” “I don’t think, for Myles and I, it’s pressure at all” said Cannady”. “Honestly, we’re stepping in a role, that, as juniors, where we see that our actions on the court, how we play, we give max effort every practice, and I think that in itself is the kind of leadership, and that’s something that we’ve grown together learning how to do”. “I like the direction things are going right now” noted Stephens. “We’re just pulling guys along, getting them used to how we know how to play and how we want to imprint games, so

I like the way things are going. The pressure (to lead the team), it may or may not be there, but at the end of the day, it’s just a game, we’re just playing basketball, and when you’re playing, you’re just locked in and all that goes away.” All three captains are excited for the upcoming season, which will feature a sensational freshman class headlined by Elijah Barnes from Middletown, NJ. Coach Henderson spoke highly of the freshman class, commenting “As far as freshmen go, it’s as good of a group as we’ve had since I’ve been here, and we’ve had some really great groups, but as a whole, what I like about what they’re doing is, they’ve made themselves coachable. They’re listening, they’re asking for input from these guys, which is all you can ask for.” All signs point to another strong campaign for the Tigers

Stat of the Day

114 poll points Princeton men’s basketball received 114 poll points in the Ivy League preseason poll, 4 less than Harvard.

in 2018. But if last year’s schedule was considered challenging, this year’s can be called downright brutal. Princeton’s nonconference schedule is highlighted by at least two matchups against current top 25 teams (Miami, USC), a game against Butler - a Big East powerhouse - in Indianapolis, and a date with another Tournament cinderella Middle Tennessee. All of this comes within the first two months of the season. In the Ivy League slate, Princeton finishes the season with 6 of their final 8 games on the road, including a 4 game road trip in February and a date with Yale in New Haven on the final day of the season. However, Henderson noted the team was ready for the gauntlet, noting “We wanted to be challenged. Last year, we played a difficult schedule, and this is even more difficult. I think it’s one of the most difficult schedules we’ve played in over 20 years. Non-conference, we’re on the road in some really difficult places to play. This is a goal of ours, is to use, obviously, the non-conference season as an opportunity to get better do prepare us for the league, but this group has bigger goals in mind, which I really like.” 230 days since their last NCAA game, Princeton has to wait just a few more days until their season begins again. Their chance to prove to everyone they deserved higher than 3rd place in the Ivy League preseason poll will come in due time. But for now, the Tigers are excited to see all their hard work pay off and tip off a brand new season sure to be filled with excitement, unpredictability and madness. Said Cannady, “There’s going to be a lot of fans, a lot of alums, we’re just looking forward to just playing Princeton basketball.” And we are looking forward to another season of Princeton Hoops.

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