The Daily Princetonian - Mar. 5, 2019

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Tuesday March 5, 2019 vol. cxliii no. 22

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

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

STUDENT LIFE

U. places restrictions on eating club pickup times

By Ivy Truong & Benjamin Ball Head News Editors

In the daylight of Friday, Feb. 8, crowds of students paraded down Prospect Avenue to their new homes in the Bicker clubs — Tower Club, Cottage Club, Tiger Inn, Ivy Club, Cap & Gown Club, and Cannon Dial Elm Club — from 1879 Arch.

But that night, many students who had signed into clubs walked to their new homes from their dorms.

In different ways, these students experienced their eating club pickups, the tradition in which students are introduced to the clubs as members.

This year, however, the University indirectly prohibited sign-in clubs from participating in on-campus pickups. In emails obtained

by The Daily Princetonian, the University claimed they could not accommodate on-campus pickups after 5 p.m.

As all sign-in clubs pick up new members at night, this de facto rule kept signin clubs from having oncampus pickups.

Sign-in clubs wanted to host their pickups at night in order to accommodate as many students as possible and avoid time conf licts, according to Interclub Council (ICC) adviser Jean-Carlos Arenas ’16 in an email obtained by the ‘Prince.’

Bicker clubs, however, conducted their pickups during the day and could only meet in 1879 Arch to take new members back to their clubs.

“Unfortunately, at this

point there is not an option to accommodate on-campus pickups after 5 p.m.,” Assistant Dean Bryant Blount ’08 wrote in an email obtained by the ‘Prince.’

This decision was made after Blount had a 30-minute conversation with Assistant Director of Support Services for University Public Safety Duncan Harrison to make a compromise between the University’s desire for on-campus daytime pickups and the sign-in clubs’ desire for pickups at night, according to Blount.

Harrison deferred comment to Blount.

The reasons Blount gave were “timing” — claiming that he wished the conversations about clubs’ pickups preferences could have happened earlier — and “the university’s goals.”

Blount wrote in an email to the ‘Prince’ that the University “prioritizes the safety and well-being of all our students.”

In an email to the ‘Prince,’ ICC president Hannah Paynter ’19 wrote that the sign-in clubs voiced their concerns about the University’s decision and that the ICC would be engaged in “extensive dialogue” going forward.

“The Sign In Club presidents wanted to hold pickups at night to be as accessible to as many students as possible, acknowledging conf licts with both academic classes and extracurricular activities,” Paynter wrote. “The University has its own considerations that has made them prefer that on-campus pickups happen in the daytime.”

Arenas discussed the concerns sign-in clubs had with Blount, writing that the sign-in clubs believed the University’s praise of their inclusivity was hypocritical, given that the University was unwilling to accommodate their desire to make their pickups more inclusive by having them at night. “[The sign-in club officers] get the feeling that the University is not being consistent in its messaging (praising the open clubs for their inclusiveness) and its actions,” Arenas wrote in an email obtained by the ‘Prince.’

Arenas deferred comment to Lisa Schmucki ’74, adviser to the Graduate Interclub Council, who reiterated Blount’s emphasis See PICKUPS page 2

ARIEL CHEN :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

From left to right, the five sign-in clubs: Charter, Cloister, Terrace, Quadrangle, and Colonial.

U . A F FA I R S

ON CAMPUS

U. called for delayed Romero ’87 denounces Trump opening until 10 a.m. administration, family separations Associate News Editor

On Monday, March 4, the University delayed opening due to severe weather until 10 a.m. with classes “held as scheduled,” according to a Tiger Alert sent around 5 a.m.

Only essential employees were required to report for shifts that began before 10 a.m.

“Individual faculty members who decide to cancel their classes based on the guidance offered on the Dean of the Faculty website should notify their students through Blackboard in advance of the scheduled class time,” read the Tiger Alert.

This was the second time in the past two weeks that the University closed campus due

to inclement weather, the first time being Feb. 20.

Frist Campus Center and all residential dining halls ran on normal schedules while Mudd Library and athletic and recreation facilities opened at 10 a.m.

Essential personnel comprise staff from numerous departments that are vital to the University’s safety and operation. These departments include University Health Services, Facilities, Public Safety, and University Services.

For more information about how to prepare for inclement weather on campus, the University recommended visiting their “page with tips on preparing for and dealing with winter storms.”

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

Andrew Goldstein ’96 serves as mainstay of Mueller investigation

By David Veldran Staff Writer

After nearly two years of work, the U.S. investigation into Russian interference, headed by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller ’66, is expected to yield a report in the next few weeks.

Though Mueller is the face of the special counsel, several other prosecutors have played an important role, including Andrew Goldstein ’96, a former U.S. attorney of the Southern District of New York.

Goldstein, former chief of the public corruption unit in his office, has in-

terviewed several key figures in the Trump administration, including Donald F. McGahn II, Michael Cohen, and Roger J. Stone Jr., a former adviser who was indicted in January in connection with interference in the 2016 election.

At the University, Goldstein concentrated in the Woodrow Wilson School.

Goldstein has drafted lines of questioning intended for President Donald Trump. Mueller’s special counsel has been in talks with the President’s lawyers in recent months over whether Trump will See GOLDSTEIN page 3

By Taylor Sharbel Contributor

President Donald Trump is not going away anytime soon, according to Anthony Romero ’87, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

In a lecture to a nearly full auditorium on Monday, March 4, Romero spoke about the efforts of the ACLU against the Trump administration and infringements on civil liberties as a whole.

Romero has served as the director of the ACLU since 2001, taking office a week before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

He is the first Latino and openly gay man to serve as the organization’s executive director. Eighteen years into his tenure, the ACLU has taken extensive legal action against the Trump administration.

Trump, however, is not the entire problem, accord-

ing to Romero.

Although Trump “didn’t start the parade,” Romero said that Trump did jump forward to lead it. Romero noted that, regardless of whether Trump leaves office in two years or in six, he will have left a legacy and an impact that will endure indefinitely.

“The Trump presidency is a super fund of toxic waste on civil liberties and civil rights that will take us years to clean up,” he said.

Romero’s next words to the audience were those of encouragement, praising them for not losing hope, but rather tuning out the conf lict and increasing their engagement with politics.

According to Romero, in the two years of Trump’s presidency, ACLU membership has grown from 400,000 to 1.875 million.

Romero also spoke about the different actions of the

ACLU, dividing them into defensive and offensive categories. According to Romero, the major issue that the ACLU takes an offensive stance on is mass incarceration.

For instance, with the help of Kim Kardashian West and her attorney, the ACLU pursued the clemency case of Alice Marie Johnson.

In 1996, Johnson was given a life sentence for her involvement in a cocaine trafficking organization based in Memphis, Tennessee. On June 6, 2018, Trump commuted her sentence after a meeting with Kim Kardashian West. Johnson was subsequently released on parole.

Romero also said that the ACLU takes a defensive stance on three main “white hot issues:” immigrants’ rights, voting rights, and abortion rights.

The ACLU has filed 87 class See ROMERO page 3

TAYLOR SHARBEL / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero spoke at Friend Center on Monday, March 4.

In Opinion

Today on Campus

Editorial Assistant Madeleine Marr argues that mansplaining is a problem in the comments section, and Columnist Winnie Brandfield-Harvey discusses the implications of President Trump’s Title X policy. PAGE 6

7:30 p.m.: The German a capella quintet Calmus makes a much anticipated return to Princeton as part of the Glee Club Presents series.

Miller Chapel, Princeton Theological Seminary

WEATHER

By Linh Nguyen

HIGH

31˚

LOW

14˚

Sunny chance of rain:

10 percent

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Tuesday March 5, 2019

Arenas ’16: Sign-in clubs do not feel U. is consistent in its messaging PICKUPS Continued from page 1

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

on safety as the reason for the decision and also noted that the changes were discussed with eating club officers in advance.

“Those changes were discussed in the ICC forum well in advance of Street Week, and in detail, but sometimes the impact is not fully considered and appreciated at the time,” Schmucki wrote in an email to the ‘Prince.’ “That seems to be the case in this instance.”

Sign-in club presidents either declined to comment or deferred comment to

Paynter.

A recent history of pickups On-campus eating club pickups, however, did not always occur during the day, nor did they always occur at 1879 Arch.

The past 10 years have seen massive shifts to how eating club pickups occur.

For instance, until 2012, Tower had usually hosted pick-ups at Wilson Courtyard instead of 1879 Arch.

In 2010, Ivy Club had held pickups in front of “New Butler,” now Butler Residential College.

From 2006 to 2014, eating clubs pickups came under heated controversy, as is-

sues of sexual assault and alcohol abuse came into the forefront in conversation about pickups.

But the clubs have grappled with the controversy in different ways, with one eating club even foregoing pickups one year and other eating clubs changing their locations for pickups.

In 2006, for instance, cases of sexual assault during pickups in February forced Tiger Inn to go dry for over a month.

A few months later in that same year, RCAs and other concerned students banded together in Wilcox Commons to air their frustrations. The event was known as “Princetonians

Gone Wild: A Closer Look at Initiations” and “The Real Story of Pick-Ups,” In 2009, 16 University students had to be transported to McCosh or the University Medical Center at Princeton (UMCPP) for alcohol-related incidents during pickups.

In the following year, club presidents successfully made a more concerted effort to mitigate concerns about safety.

That year, Princeton Borough Police Chief Robert Dudeck announced that there was a drop in alcoholrelated transports during pickups from the previous year, making alcohol-related transports during pickups weekend a defining part of his monthly crime report to the Borough Council.

Despite this decline, for the next four years, an average of 10 students every year would have to be transported to McCosh or UMCPP for alcohol-related reasons during pickups weekend.

Former University spokesperson Martin Mbugua noted that, because the data is representative of transports for that entire weekend, it is not possible to associate the transports to any specific event, like pickups.

A culture of exclusivity Safety concerns, however, weren’t the only point of controversy with eating club pickups. Eating club pickups, especially for Bicker clubs, came under fire for perpetuating a culture of exclusivity.

In 2010, Cottage Club did not pick up new members from their dorm rooms, citing these concerns about exclusion.

“For the officer corps, it became apparent that our on-campus pickups activities had become ‘salt in the open wound’ for the many students who are not granted a bid through Bicker,” Ben Bologna ’10, who was president of Cottage at the time, explained. “This is not what Cottage stands for, and, as a result, we no longer want to continue such activity.”

Former University Vice President and Secretary Bob Durkee ’69, who chaired a task force established in September 2009 to examine the relationship between the University and the eating clubs, explained that the feelings of those who were rejected from clubs were a continued topic of concern among the administration as well.

“One of the task force members described it as ‘conspicuous cruelty,’” Durkee said, referring to the pickup tradition.

Durkee said that rejection from a club “makes it even more difficult if they have to witness the picking up of students who were successful.”

Six years earlier, Durkee had noted that a “best practices” group — comprising administrators, Public Safety officials, and eating club officers — was established to discuss “issues relating to eating club procedures.” At the time, however, the connection between pickups and heavy alcohol consumption had come to the forefront of the group’s conversation.

In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Durkee had said that the tradition of hosting pickups was of “relatively recent vintage.” Before then, during pickups,

new members would arrive at their respective clubhouses instead of awaiting a collective pickup.

At the time, further changes were enacted.

New guidelines at the time called for eating clubs to inform Public Safety before pickups began, to end pickups by 5 p.m., and to not carry alcohol during pickups.

Student respond, feel unaffected Students interviewed by the ‘Prince’ did not express strong opinions on the location and times for their respective pickups.

One sophomore member of Tiger Inn, who was granted anonymity from the ‘Prince,’ said they enjoyed getting to celebrate joining in the club in a place as distinctive as 1879 Arch.

“I thought it was cool going to a place everyone knows on campus and then getting taken to the street with your new fam,” they said. “I liked it.”

Ned Furlong ’21, a new member of Quadrangle Club, said he was skeptical that day pickups would have been any more fun than those at night.

“I don’t find that very hype. I don’t see the big excitement,” Furlong said.

“Running around the Street at night is a great thing.

Running around the Street during the day makes you look a little bit dumber.”

Furlong added that he did enjoy the sense of community pickups provided, regardless of time or place.

“I really like the idea [of] something as fun and innocent as running up and down Prospect Street with your friends in their new t-shirts,” Furlong said. “I think it’s cute.”

He did note, however, that pickups at 1879 Arch could have been “cool and visually iconic.”

Brent Kibbey ’21, who signed into Cloister Inn, expressed a general apathy towards pickup location.

“I don’t think it matters all that much, on campus or off campus,” Kibbey said.

“It doesn’t make that much of a difference.”

Kibbey said that on-campus pickups could build community and get students excited when walking back to the club, but that the tradition “can be done without.”

Despite students’ general apathy, Blount maintained the change was overwhelmingly positive.

In an email obtained by the ‘Prince,’ Blount stated that the restriction to daytime-only on-campus pickups was a step in the right direction for student safety and maintaining a positive perception of the eating clubs.

“The demonstration of pickups that occur during daylight hours and within the footprint of 1879 Arch has been … a crucial change to club admissions that on-campus advocates of the clubs have been able to point to as a sign of great improvement,” Blount wrote in an email after pickups occurred.

“A regression in this progress would have negative impacts not just for individual club reputations, but would damage perceptions of the entire club system.”

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: 609375-8553; 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.

The Daily Princetonian

Tuesday March 5, 2019

Nawaday: Goldstein was a “very much measure 10 times, cut once” man GOLDSTEIN Continued from page 1

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

testify.

These open-ended questions seek to gain more insight about the President’s thoughts and actions ranging from issues such as the firing of former FBI Director James Comey and the negotiation of a real estate deal in Moscow.

Goldstein did not immediately respond to request for comment from The Daily Princetonian.

In contrast to the picture the president has sometimes painted of the special counsel as disorganized and biased, Goldstein’s presence has given the team a more professional image. Goldstein is known for his diligence and careful approach to uncovering facts.

He is also known to avoid confrontation and quietly resolve disagreements.

Because of this and his mostly behind-the-scenes work, Goldstein is rarely the subject of media attention. “[Goldstein] was very much measure 10 times, cut once,” Kan M. Nawaday, a prosecutor and former colleague of Goldstein, said to The New York Times.

Goldstein’s work on the special counsel has directly led to an investigation of the president’s motives in firing James Comey. The special counsel has been trying to determine whether the president’s actions constitute obstruction of justice.

In addition to his work as a prosecutor, Goldstein has also been a reporter for Time Magazine as well as a high school teacher.

ERLEND BJØRTVEDT / WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The U.S. Department of Justice building in Washington, D.C.

Romero: During Trump’s presidency, ACLU membership has more than tripled ROMERO Continued from page 1

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

action lawsuits on the behalf of families separated by the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy. They have helped to unite roughly 2,600 families out of the speculated 3,000. They are also concerned that several thousand more families were separated before the government made the policy known to the public.

Furthermore, in this past midterm election, the ACLU helped pass Proposition 4, a ballot referendum which gave 1.4 million individuals with past felony convictions

the right to vote. Since the election of President Trump, 25 states have passed laws that make it harder to vote.

The ACLU also worked to keep Kentucky’s last abortion clinic open. Since 2010, states have enacted more than 400 restrictions on the right of a woman to obtain an abortion.

“Abortion rights are under assault by the very same people who feared the power of women when they first got the right to vote,” Romero said.

The lecture, titled “We The People: A Conversation with the ACLU’s Anthony Romero,” took place in Friend Center Room 101 on March 4.

wee dont maek mistake Join the ‘Prince’ copy department.

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

page 3

Tuesday March 5, 2019

Opinion

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Her body, his choice?

Winnie Brandfield-Harvey Contributing Columnist

T

his Friday, the Trump administration announced its new rule, which will cut Title X funding for clinics that provide abortions or abortion referrals. Providers will have to make abortion facilities “physically and financially” separate from their federally funded clinics, including separate staff and entrances. The rule will also contain a “domestic gag rule,” which will prohibit doctors and nurses from providing their pregnant patients with any information about the abortion procedure.

If medical providers want federal assistance, they must not “perform, promote, refer for, or support abortion as a method of family planning.”

Essentially, health care providers will have to choose between funds and the wellbeing of their patients, which ultimately violates medical ethics and nullifies the oath that doctors take to put their patients’ needs first.

The new rule has made abortion and Title X interdependent, which is not a surprising move from an administration that has made

a mission to defund Planned Parenthood simply because it offers abortion services. However, there is so much more to Title X that is lost in the midst of the abortion debate.

The family planning program serves up to four million low-income women and families and offers them access to services such as contraception, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and various other forms of preventative care. For many women, Title X providers such as Planned Parenthood are their only source for adequate health care, and the loss of funds will leave a significant number of women, especially minority women, without basic care.

A 2016 report found that 89 percent of care receivers, through Title X, identified as female and 64 percent had family incomes at or below the poverty line. Contrary to Trump’s beliefs, constructing barriers does not solve solutions nor offer any protection; it just leads to more suffering among the vulnerable population.

When looking at the laws, it is important to also look at the track record of the lawmakers themselves. In 2011, Mike Pence cosponsored a bill that would have forced women seeking an abortion to receive an ultrasound and then listen to the description of the embryo in great detail.

He cosponsored another bill that would only allow federal funds for abortion if it was a case of “forcible rape,” redefining rape as an act that could somehow possibly be one without force. And on top of all that, he supported a bill that would allow hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions. It comes as no surprise that Pence is now supporting a bill that, once again, leaves out the notion of consent and completely ignores the safety of women.

While Trump needs no introduction when it comes to consent, the president’s stances on abortion throughout the years are not as widely known. In 1999, during an interview on “Meet the Press,” Trump declared that he was “very pro-choice,” and although he cringed at the concept of abortion, he said, “still — I just believe in choice.” However, in 2011, in the midst of his presidential aspirations, Trump seemed to change his mind and told the Conservative Political Action Conference: “I am pro-life.” In 2016, he changed his stance about five times in a matter of a few days.

While Trump may feel entitled to women’s bodies — to grab them, to insult them — they are not dispensable.

While Trump’s views may be malleable (often in pursuit of political gain), women’s bod-

vol. cxliii

ies are not, and they should not be subject to the wishywashy nature of his presidency. There are no such things as alternative facts in medicine.

At the very least, patients deserve and expect complete and accurate information.

If this bill passes as planned, politicians will have successfully inserted themselves into the exam room, undermining the legacy of Roe v. Wade and the right to privacy. For some reason, reproductive healthcare is considered to be something different than healthcare, which is exactly what it is. The care for one’s health. There is no pro-abortion side, only proaccessible healthcare. Imagine if a man with testicular issues or a sexually transmitted infection was denied information about his options for treatment. That wouldn’t happen.

Women are caught in the crossfire of many wars, over religion and politics and science. But at the end of the day, when all the battles have been fought or forgotten, when the men have either fled or remained, the woman is the one who has to live with her choices. Let her be the one to make them.

Winnie Brandfield-Harvey is a junior Wilson School concentrator from Houston, Texas. She can be reached at wab2@princeton.edu.

editor-in-chief

Chris Murphy ’20 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

Don’t whine.

Opine.

Write for ‘Prince’ Opinion.

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 editor Samantha Shapiro ’21 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 cartoon editors Zaza Asatiani ’21 Jonathan Zhi ’21 head video editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 associate video editor Mark Dodici ’22 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20

NIGHT STAFF copy Catherine Yu ’21 Heather Gaulke ’22 design Rachel Brill ’19 Irina Liu ’21

48 University Place Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

Opinion

Tuesday March 5, 2019

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Men explain things to me at Princeton Madeleine Marr

Assistant opinion editor

I

n 2008, Rebecca Solnit published the groundbreaking article “Men Explain Things to Me” outlining her repeated experiences with men ignoring her established knowledge (Solnit has written seventeen books about the environment, politics, and art) and condescendingly explaining her expertise to her — in one extreme case, explaining her own book.

The publication of this article led to the coining of the word “mansplaining,” or “the explanation of something by a man, typically to a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing,” according to Oxford Dictionaries.

Since then, the word and the concept behind it have only become more misunderstood and maligned as a supposed tool for “reverse sexism.” Ironically, the societal instinct behind mansplaining has contributed to dismissals of women’s experiences of it. As participants in an institution dedicated to the production and legitimation of new knowledge, the phenomenon of “mansplaining” must be recognized as a genuinely harmful practice at Princeton — while some may argue that female students are exaggerating the prevalence of the problem, one has to look

no further than The Daily Princetonian comments section as an example.

It is important to note, as Solnit does, that “mansplaining is not a universal f law of the gender, just the intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck.”

Not all instances of men offering explanations are mansplaining, and women are equally capable of condescension. Mansplaining, however, defines a specific trend that spans interpersonal and societal dynamics of power.

In her article, Solnit described how “on [multiple] occasions, I objected to the behavior of a man, only to be told that the incidents hadn’t happened at all as I said, that I was subjective, delusional, overwrought, dishonest – in a nutshell, female.”

The implications of mansplaining go further than the conversational level; the systemic dismissal of women’s experiences and knowledge play out, for example, when countries like Yemen and Saudi Arabia deny that women’s testimony has legal standing, so a woman can’t testify that she was raped without a male witness. Mansplaining on Princeton’s campus and gender-based violence are not equivalent, but they are both examples on the spectrum of denying women’s right to legitimacy and believability.

Examples abound of female students feeling that they are ignored or spoken

over in class. Frustration with the societal and unofficial administrative responses to campus sexual assault stems from the fact that women’s accounts are often treated as false until proven otherwise, as demonstrated by the paranoia around false accusations despite their infrequency.

Women aren’t taken seriously by their doctors when they say they don’t want children, or when they report symptoms of pain.

These are all examples of the varying degrees of society’s habit of dismissing women and their understanding of the world. Another example, one that hits closer to home, is the treatment of female writers in this newspaper — the comments section of The Daily Princetonian serves as a helpful microcosm for this trend and substantiates female students’ assertion that these instances occur even within the elite “Orange Bubble.”

Op-ed sections by their very nature depend on the legitimacy of one writer’s account, as they are reliant on subjective interpretations of reality. As a result, there is a perhaps subconscious preference for male voices — 97 percent of opinion columns written by scholars in the Wall Street Journal are men. In this newspaper, female opinion writers face repeated denials in the comments section of their claims to knowledge.

While comments sections are never hospitable places, there is a visible difference in the way male writers are

treated versus female writers. Articles written by male writers generally receive comments that take issue with the substantive points in the article — one exemplary comment reads: “An interesting article that raises some questions” and goes on to analyze the article point by point. Questions about the articles’ point (“What’s the point of legislation if it’s only symbolic? ”) appear more frequently, and the attacks tend to be at larger groups (liberals, authoritarians, etc.) rather than against the writer personally. There are obviously examples of these targeted attacks, but they are much less frequent.

Female writers, on the other hand, are eviscerated or condescended to for their pretensions at knowledge.

Comments include: “I think you misinterpret what a person usually means ...”; “The author like many before her fails to understand ...”; and “this author needs to stop looking down on everyone.” Insults on my own columns (which have since been taken down for violating the paper’s comments policy) have called me a “toddler” and “Princeton’s acceptance mistake,” digs aimed to undermine my claims to mature analytical thought and intelligence.

The most dramatic example of condescending advice from a commenter included a “Self-help Program” (for the curious: “Step #1: Get off facebook. It is a forprofit addiction specifically designed to suck your soul away. Step #2: Don’t virtue

two blind mice jonathan zhi ’21

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

signal.” The commenter reminded the female columnist something I would be shocked if public female figures forgot: “Nobody cares how you feel.”

This trend is in no way limited to The Daily Princetonian. However, it offers concrete examples of the opposition to women asserting their right to knowledge production. Even those women who have purportedly confirmed the legitimacy of their intelligence through admittance to an Ivy League school are personally attacked when they express their thoughts on a public platform.

Clearly the internet does not represent the best of our society. But it does express the societal inclinations that lurk behind closed doors. While harassing female columnists is the extreme, it is a point on a spectrum that includes the abysmally small number of female faculty at Princeton, the underreporting of college sexual assaults, and the chronic interruption of female students in precepts and seminars. It is pointless to ask trolls to stop trolling. Nonetheless, they are a visible symptom of a larger problem that includes the administration and student body at Princeton, who can use this as a moment of realization. The problems we are complaining about are real — look no further than the comment section.

Madeleine Marr is a sophomore from Newtown Square, Pa. She can be reached at mmarr@princeton.edu.

Tuesday March 5, 2019

Sports

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S LACROSSE

Men’s lacrosse defeated by Johns Hopkins, will face Navy on Tuesday

By Tom Salotti

Associate Sports Editor

Despite leading through halftime, men’s lacrosse (1–2) was defeated 14 –12 by Johns Hopkins (2–2) on Saturday after a late-game blitz by the Blue Jays.

Hopkins opened the game with a goal 50 seconds into the first quarter. The Tigers responded a minute and a half later with a goal from sophomore attacker Chris Brown, his seventh of the season. Sophomore long-stick midfielder Andrew Song had the assist. Princeton had two more shots before junior attacker Michael Sowers hit the team’s second goal at 12:14.

After Hopkins’ Robert Kuhn was given a penalty and Princeton went man-up, Brown scored his second goal of the game at 10:49. Sophomore middie Jamie Atkinson had the assist.

The Blue Jays added their second goal with eight minutes to go in the quarter after senior midfielder Strib Walker was handed a penalty for cross checking, and Princeton went man-down.

Princeton allowed another goal at 5:36, and the first quarter ended 3–3.

In the second quarter, the two teams went back and forth with goals. Princeton’s Charlie Durbin, a senior

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Men’s lacrosse was defeated by Johns Hopkins 14—12 on Saturday, giving up the lead late in the game.

middie, scored his seventh of the season at 10:40 and brought the game to 4–4. He scored again with seven minutes left, assisted by Sowers, bringing the Tigers into the lead. Hopkins quickly tied the game again and the two teams traded shots until Princeton’s Atkinson scored in the last second of the quarter, closing out the half 6–5.

Two minutes into the third

quarter, Durbin secured a hat trick, bringing the Tigers two ahead of the Blue Jays. Hopkins’ Cole Williams scored two goals in a row to tie the game 7–7. Princeton’s senior attacker Emmet Cordrey got one past the goalie with a little less than seven minutes to go, assisted by Brown. Sowers scored four minutes later on a man-up play, a result of a slash called

on Hopkins’ Patrick Foley.

Hopkins responded seconds later at 2:25, and the half ended 9–8 in the Tigers’ favor.

In the fourth quarter, Hopkins scored 17 seconds into play, starting what would become a four-goal run that ultimately secured their victory. They hit the back of the net again at 13:24 and seconds later at 13:12. Durbin followed up with a shot, but it was

blocked by Hopkins goalie Ryan Darby. Hopkins scored again at the 9:00 mark. Junior midfielder Connor McCarthy scored with 5:34 left in the game after a clear by the Tigers, bringing the game to 12–10 in Hopkins’ favor. The Blue Jays scored twice more in the quarter. Their last goal of the game at 2:54 gave them a four-point lead over Princeton, 14–10.

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL

Women’s basketball defeats Dartmouth, claims spot in Ivy League tournament

By Jo de La Bruyere Assistant Sports Editor

Sitting in her team room for a post-game interview Saturday night, women’s basketball head coach Courtney Banghart did something unusual: she laughed.

“You couldn’t have a better story to write,” she said. “This means the world.”

Princeton (18–9, 10–2 Ivy) entered the weekend on a six-game win streak. But the past weeks have been more difficult for the Tigers than their record indicates.

Time and again, the team has seen its halftime-to-final lead shrink — from 18 points to six, from 17 to four. Banghart has called her squad’s performances undisciplined, careless, and disappointing.

It seemed an entirely different team that stepped onto the floor of Jadwin Gym on Friday night to face Dartmouth (12–13, 5–7). Last time the two squads met, Princeton earned an 82–75 victory. This time, with 18 points, sophomore guard Carlie Littlefield led the Tigers to a commanding 64–47 win and a spot in the Ivy League Tournament.

The first half of the game saw roughly even performances from the teams. Princeton led by five points for much of the first quarter, but Dartmouth clawed its way to a 28–27 advantage heading into the break.

Just over a minute into the third quarter, the tone changed.

First-year Grace Stone nailed a

three-pointer from the top of the circle. Littlefield followed up with a layup on a fast break. The Tigers never looked back. Over the course of 20 minutes, they stretched their one-point deficit to a 17-point lead, outscoring Dartmouth nearly two to one in the process.

Dartmouth’s drubbing gave the Tigers renewed confidence heading into their next game. On the team’s Saturday Senior Night, a thrilling last-ditch effort earned Princeton a 61–58 win against Harvard (14–11, 7–5). The team’s players, three playing for the last time, left their home court in tears.

For much of the game, Princeton struggled. Though scoring efforts from senior forward Bella Alarie and Littlefield propelled the Tigers to a slim early lead, the Crimson entered the second half up 27–25.

The third period would see no Dartmouth-esque comeback for the Tigers, who missed layup after layup, rebound after rebound.

Harvard capitalized on Princeton’s mistakes; with just over seven minutes left in the game, the Crimson led 51–46.

To onlookers, it seemed Princeton was doomed to relive its shortcomings of the past few weeks.

But the team’s players never lost hope.

“I believed,” said senior forward Sydney Jordan. “We needed this win, and every single person knew that. I knew every person would bring her heart through the last second of the game. I knew it

Tweet of the Day “Congratulations Sarah Fillier - the @ecachockey Player of the Week!”

Princeton Hockey (@PWIH)

wasn’t over.”

She was right. As the clock ticked on, Princeton’s three seniors — Jordan, guard Gabrielle Rush, and injured guard Qalea Ismail — saw their last home game slipping away. So they doubled down.

A Rush three-pointer electrified her team and narrowed Harvard’s lead to two. Stone ended the Crimson’s next possession with a steal; Littlefield capitalized with a layup in the paint. The score was tied 51–51. The game was on.

In just six and a half minutes, Littlefield scored seven of Princeton’s 12 points. Stone mounted an impressive defensive perfor-

mance with two rebounds and a steal. Alarie logged two points and five rebounds to clinch yet another double-double for the season. Jordan got in one last Jadwin layup and rebound and Rush scored Princeton’s last two points.

The score stood at 61-58.

It all came down to one final Harvard possession. Katie Benzan, ranked No. 4 nationally in threepointers, shot — and missed. Alarie collected the rebound, preserving the Tigers’ three-point lead.

The seniors’ home career was over. Princeton was tied for first in the Ivy League. Coach Banghart had recorded her 250th career victory — and, for once, she was

laughing.

“It should have been Syd and Rush on their senior night,” she said. “And it was. It was the perfect way to end.”

“I’m so happy,” said Jordan.

“Our team battled it out and pulled through in that win. I couldn’t be prouder of every single person.”

Next week, Princeton will travel to Providence to face Brown (9–19, 1–11) and to New Haven to face Yale (16–11, 6–6). After that comes the Ivy League tournament — and the team’s strategy is straightforward.

“We’re going to come with fire,” said Jordan. “We’re going to come with energy and we’re going to hang a banner in this gym.”

JACK GRAHAM / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Sophomore Carlie Littlefield dribbles past a Harvard player.

Stat of the Day

Follow us

6

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

Women’s basketball star Bella Alarie earned her 6th Ivy League Player of the Week after this weekend’s games.