April 6, 2015 by The Daily Princetonian

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday april 6, 2015 vol. cxxxix no. 40

WEATHER

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } HIGH

LOW

72˚ 52˚

STUDENT LIFE

Students vote ‘No’ on ‘Hose Bicker’ referendum

Partly cloudy skies throughout the day. chance of rain:

20 percent

In Opinion The Editorial Board encourages students to take the WeSpeak survey and guest contributor Barksdale Maynard ’88 highlights the benefits of majoring in art history. PAGE 6

By Jacob Donnelly news editor

Today on Campus 4:30 p.m.: The Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies is hosting a “Political Sources of Social Solidarity” with 2014-15 World Politics Fellow Peter A. Hall. A reception will follow. Aaron Burr Hall 219. COURTESY OF YOUTUBE

The Archives

April 6, 1995 The University’s Asian Pacific American Heritage Council celebrated Asian Pacific American Heritage Month by hosting speakers from a variety of careers over the course of the month.

got a tip? Email it to: tips@dailyprincetonian.com

PRINCETON By the Numbers

The number of guest wristbands allowed for seniors at Reunions.

News & Notes Student accepted to all 8 Ivies

Harold Ekeh, a student at Elmont Memorial High School in Elmont, N.Y., was accepted to all eight Ivy League universities, as well as five other universities. He was born in Nigeria and moved to the United States at the age of eight. “We had a fairly comfortable life in Nigeria, but they told me we moved to America for the opportunities, like the educational opportunities,” he said in an interview with CNN. He wrote his college admissions essay on the challenges he faced while adjusting to life in America, including difficulties in his U.S. history class. Ekeh is planning on majoring in neurobiology or chemistry in college in hopes of becoming a neurosurgeon. Earlier this year he was named 2015 Intel Science Talent Search semifinalist for his research on acid DHA and its effects on Alzheimer’s disease progression. Outside of high school academics, he directs a youth choir, plays the drums and participates in Key Club and Model United Nations.

Members of Urban Congo performed in November at Princeton Varsity Club’s “Tigers Got Talent.”

Urban Congo videos spark student outrage By Jessica Li

staff writer

Students voiced their outrage over social media this weekend about videos featuring Urban Congo, a student organization funded by the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students. One of the videos shows a dance performance by members of the organization at the annual Princeton Varsity Club “Tigers Got Talent” talent show in November that was deemed inappropriate by many, citing disrespect for multiple African and Native American cultures. In response to growing U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

Guest wristband policy causes distress

discontent, Urban Congo removed the video from its YouTube channel and deactivated its Facebook page. Michael Hauss ’16, the president of Urban Congo, noted that these decisions were a result of a discussion held among organization members and not from pressure from the University. Though its membership is mostly comprised of students on the men’s swimming and diving team, Urban Congo is in no way affiliated with or funded by the athletic department, Hauss explained. Urban Congo also performed this past weekend as

a guest performer for eXpressions Dance Company’s spring production. Achille Tenkiang ’17 said that Urban Congo’s performances disgusted and disappointed him deeply. “I’m ashamed that I share an affiliation, however tenuous, with a group like Urban Congo,” Tenkiang said. “I think this just calls for greater discussion on campus. I hope that my peers wake up and realize that things aren’t so pretty inside the FitzRandolph Gate, and there are a lot of things we need to address as a community.” See URBAN page 4

Students voted against the referendum calling for the end of Bicker this week, Grant Golub ’17, the Undergraduate Student Government’s chief elections manager, said. The referendum would have called on the Bicker clubs to end Bicker by the 2019-20 academic year and on USG to create an ad hoc committee to facilitate ending Bicker. Voting took place from Monday through Wednesday, and 1,988 students voted during that time. In comparison, 2,015 students voted on the referendum about the length of winter break earlier this year. Of the students who voted this week, 1,120, or 56.3 percent, voted against the referendum and 868, or 43.7 percent, voted in favor of the referendum. There are currently no plans for USG to examine the Bicker issue, Golub said. Golub is a former staff writer and former staff copy editor for The Daily Princetonian. Rene Chalom ’17 said the outcome of the referendum was surprising because it was reasonable to assume people who were against Bicker would have turned out more. He noted, though, that the number of people who voted in favor of Bicker shows how ingrained the system is at the University. “As someone who’s not in an eating club next year,” Chalom said, “I found the whole idea of dropping [$9,000-$10,000] to hang out with your friends a little silly, and that this institution is so popular that people are rushing to defend it

is a little surprising.” The referendum was valuable for starting a wider conversation on Bicker, Ryan Low ’16, who proposed the referendum, noted. “If this referendum were held a week or two immediately after Bicker, the results would have been different,” he said. “Turnout would have been different. Conversations on campus would have been different. This is a controversial issue on campus that affects all of us and that we need to continue working on in the future.” While Low said he was disappointed by the results, he was not completely surprised. “The proponents of Bicker and the proponents of the status quo more generally have found a way to take away the voices of anyone who disagrees with them,” Low said. “If you take Bicker as a case study, … if you were in a Bicker club, you couldn’t oppose Bicker because then you’re being hypocritical, if you got hosed you couldn’t be hypocritical because then you’re just being salty, if you’re never bickered then you can’t be opposed because you don’t understand the process.” Underclassmen sometimes don’t express disapproval of Bicker because they don’t want their chances of getting into a Bicker club to be affected, Low said. He added that students should continue to challenge the system in the future. “At least people know that there is a substantial number of students at Princeton who think there is something wrong with Bicker,” he said. The conversation See BICKER page 3

FULL MOON

By Melissa Curtis contributor

Members of the Class of 2015 were upset last week when they were reminded in an email that all graduating seniors will only be allowed one guest wristband for Reunions. According to the April 2 email, graduating seniors can attend Reunions free of cost but can register one guest for $65, the same price as a wristband for students who are not guests of seniors. Last year, graduating seniors were given the opportunity to purchase two $60 wristbands for their guests, and the year before they were given the opportunity to purchase five. The Office of Alumni Affairs sent an email last year on April 2, 2014 to the then-senior and junior classes explaining that the number of guest wristbands would be reduced to two for the Class of 2014 and further reduced to one for the Class of 2015 and future classes. The wristbands are only required for activities that take place after 5 p.m. in the Reunions tents. Wristbands are not required for events before 5 p.m., including the P-rade and events after that time outside of the Reunions tents, including the orchestra lawn concert and See REUNIONS page 2

YICHENG SUN:: PHOTO EDITOR

After a few days of spring showers, students looked up to see a full moon this weekend over Blair Arch. STUDENT LIFE

USG discusses concerns regarding Big Sean By Katherine Oh staff writer

The Undergraduate Student Government discussed Lawnparties and the choice of Big Sean as the main act at its weekly senate meeting on Sunday. USG president Ella Cheng ’16 said that she and social chair Simon Wu ’17 care about making the process of choosing the main act more democratic than it has been in the past. “There was actually no possibility to make it more open

with this particular act because it came in January, even before our terms had officially started,” Cheng said. Cheng is a former staff writer for The Daily Princetonian. “We are never going to please the majority of the student body,” Class of 2016 senator Kristen Coke said. U-councilor Mallory Banks ’16 said that, in past years, students were surveyed in advance for their Lawnparties artist preferences. “The issue with that is that

you will get Beyoncé, Beyoncé, Beyoncé, Jay-Z, Kanye West,” Banks said. “Yes, the students will speak, but they will say things that are inconceivable given the budget.” The USG social committee works with an agent to get quotes and find out the availability of artists for the headliner act, Wu said, adding said that the social committee hopes to make the selection process for Lawnparties performances more transparent than it has been in past years, despite the

time constraint. “In terms of the contract, where we are now, it is both impractical and unbeneficial to end that, to renege on a very large contract with a big artist. The alternative would be no main act,” Wu explained in response to a question of how much cancellation would cost. “The conversation needs to be in the direction of how we can improve the selection process. I would love to hear suggestions on how we can make it better, See USG page 2

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Monday april 6, 2015

USG senate also looks at ways to reduce dodgeball tournament costs

SPRING SUNSET,

USG

Continued from page 1

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

make it something that people feel invested in.” Students took to social media on Sunday to express concern over the choice of Big Sean as the main act after Duncan Hosie ’16 and Rebecca Basaldua ’15 started a petition urging USG to choose a different act given what he called Big Sean’s promotion of “rape culture” and “misogyny” in song lyrics. The petition was not directly addressed at the meeting. Princeton Perspective Project chair Mary Heath Manning ’17 attended the senate meeting to present an update on the project. “We’re constantly checking back to our mission statement to make sure that the programs we are planning, the focus groups we’re planning to coordinate, everything is working towards our overarching goals,” Manning said. The Princeton Perspective Project plans to hold an event called “Behind a Smile: A Storytelling Event,” featuring a keynote speaker as well as stu-

dent speakers and performers, on April 18. Student participants will share stories of difficulties or failures at the event, according to Manning. “The main event will be a segment done by student storytellers presenting their stories from behind a curtain, and ultimately revealing themselves, proving that we can break down these barriers that we tend to put up and act as though everything is going perfectly,” Manning said. Wu suggested that the Princeton Perspective Project collaborate with Songline or Ellipses slam poetry groups. Projects Board co-chair Tyler Lawrence ’16 presented a request for $2,000 for the annual dodgeball tournament. When asked if it was plausible to do the event with lower costs by eliminating the cash prizes, James Poindexter ’18, a representative of The Colosseum Club, said that T-shirts for the event have already been ordered and that negotiations with local pizza vendors are already underway. Deputy Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne, who attended the meeting, noted that the annual event had for-

merly started on a smaller scale without cash prizes, but that the money has really made it a campus-wide event. The senate also talked about the upcoming Chipotle study break, which will not only fulfill Cheng’s campaign promise, but also serve as a way to gather feedback about USG. Students will be invited to take a short survey that consists of several openended questions about how to improve USG and its election process, according to communications chair Nick Horvath ’17. Only the first 170 people to fill out the survey will be able to come to the study break. U-councilor Danny Johnson ’15 said he was concerned that the comments people submit might not be extensive or thorough, given that students will try to submit answers quickly to get the free food. Johnson is a former staff writer for the ‘Prince.’ The new USG website is launching on Monday, in time for the spring 2015 elections season. Horvath noted that the website could later include a list of answers to frequently asked questions.

U. cites ‘dramatic increase’ in Reunions attendance as reason REUNIONS Continued from page 1

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

YASH HUILGOL :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Color returns to campus this weekend with the spring sunset and melted snow.

fireworks. The email last year cited “the dramatic increase in overall Reunions attendance in recent years” as the reason behind the reduction, but interviewed seniors said they had either completely forgotten or never read this message. Several of those interviewed said they were upset and shocked by the number of wristbands they would be allowed to have, explaining that they felt they were being forced to pick one of their parents or one of their friends, to celebrate their graduation. Kat Gebert ’15 said she was distressed when she received the most recent email. “It’s very inconvenient because I, like many other seniors, have more than one friend and multiple siblings,” Gebert said. The Alumni Association should find a way to accommo-

date the crowds as opposed to stiffing new graduates, Emily Burr ’15 said. “I find it irritating because students have to pay for guests anyway, and I feel that every senior has put enough time and money and effort into this school that they should be allowed the same number of guests previous years have been allotted,” Burr said. Others did not feel so strongly about the issue. “It doesn’t affect me personally,” Brie Gilbert ’15 said. “I am hoping to be at NCAAs during Reunions, provided our [crew] season goes well. Also, as an international student, bringing friends and family to Reunions isn’t super easy for me anyway.” The Undergraduate Student Government has also expressed dismay at the newly enforced policy, according to USG president Ella Cheng ’16. She said USG has contacted the Alumni Association for the allocation of two wristbands per senior and has re-

quested the policy’s reversion to last year’s two-band distribution on behalf of the Class of 2015 and future classes. Cheng is a former staff writer for The Daily Princetonian. The Alumni Association’s Associate Director for Reunions Mibs Southerland Mara stood by the University’s newly instituted wristband policy, noting that an email was sent last year explaining the policy for 2015. “Due to the rapid increase in Reunions attendance and for the preservation of the Reunions tradition, the University reviewed its guest policy before Reunions last year and decided to limit the guests of seniors to one for 2015 and beyond,” she said. Mara suggested that the University is already unique in offering Reunions. “No other university does Reunions like Princeton, where all alumni are invited back for the weekend and seniors are included, free of charge,” she said.

Take it like a polaroid picture.

Join the ‘Prince’ photo department. join@dailyprincetonian.com

The Daily Princetonian

Monday april 6, 2015

Bicker referendum results not surprising, says creator Low ’16 BICKER

Continued from page 1

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

surrounding the referendum was positive and made people think about why Bicker exists and how it should change, Joe Margolies ’15, former Interclub Council president, said, noting that he was not speaking for the Interclub Council or the eating clubs. Jean Carlos Arenas ’16, the current Interclub Council president, and other eating club presidents either did not respond to a request for comment or declined to comment. The ICC discusses Bicker extensively before it occurs every year and follows up with students who bickered, Margolies said, noting the most common comment received is that there should be more transparency surrounding how the process works and decisions are made. “There are definitely legitimate critiques to Bicker felt by Bicker club officers, such as wanting to accept more people than there is room for, or having to run a process that is very stressful and political,” Margolies said. “I don’t think anyone thinks Bicker is perfect, even in a Bicker club.” While 57.8 percent of the freshman class, 58.7 percent of the sophomore class and 58.2 percent of the junior class voted “no” on the referendum, Margolies noted that only 51.2 percent of the senior class voted “no” on the referendum. “The Class of 2015 has more experience with the process,” Margolies said. “They would have gone through it two times, rather than just one. The second thing is that the Class of 2015 is less affected by this referendum than other classes

are. If a member of the Class of 2015 didn’t like Bicker but wanted to join a Bicker club, they might have had a higher estimation of Bicker before that.” The difference might also have just been due to random chance, Margolies noted. The vast majority of students who took the sophomore survey about Bicker said they enjoyed the process, Thomas Fleming ’69, chair of the Graduate Interclub Council and of the Cap & Gown Club graduate board, noted. While this referendum was an important part of the larger conversation about eating clubs, serious critiques have been made of Bicker at least since the 1950s and 1960s, Sandy Harrison ’74, chair of the Terrace Club graduate board, noted. “Students are still opting for Bicker clubs, knowing it’s there, and knowing they might not get in and could be hosed, and recognizing all that, it’s a willingness to live with the fact that it’s pretty exclusionary and elitist and discriminatory,” he said. “Every four years, there’s a complete turnover of the student body, and [Bicker’s] a good thing to be talking about.” The results were more balanced than one might have expected, Undergraduate Student Government president Ella Cheng ’16 said, adding that the campaigning of Low and others might have been responsible. Cheng is a former staff writer for The ‘Prince.’ While USG administered the referendum, it did not endorse it. “The momentum largely died out by this week, so I was expecting a more one-sided

vote,” Cheng said. “I don’t have a personal opinion on either side, because it’s such a complicated issue, but [Bicker] is a good thing to think about.” While USG will not be required to create an ad hoc committee to facilitate the end of Bicker due to the referendum failing, Cheng said one of her priorities coming into office this year was to increase accessibility to the eating clubs and that USG would work with the ICC and the University to institute a more streamlined eating club financial aid process. A report on eating club accessibility is in the works, and USG is pushing for more PUID nights instead of having students rely on passes or membership as much, she added. “It’s much more complicated to deal with things regarding the social aspects of eating club life, because a lot of that is out of University and definitely USG control,” Cheng said. Joe LoPresti ’15, who helped campaign in favor of the referendum, said he was pleased the referendum did as well as it did. “The sort of banter you heard on Yik Yak and other anonymous sources tended to be on the ‘no’ side,” he said. “I think the [results from the senior class] show that the more people think about Bicker, the more they realize it is a bad system.” Some clubs historically had members threaten to drop when they were refusing to admit women, and that pressure resulted in some success in allowing women into the clubs, he said. “I’m hopeful that next year’s sophomores will exert that kind of pressure [on the Bicker system],” LoPresti said.

page 3

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 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 2015, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542. T HE DA ILY

Whatever your talent, the ‘Prince’ has a place for you.

join@dailyprincetonian.com

page 4

The Daily Princetonian

Monday april 6, 2015

USG to investigate ODUS approval of Urban Congo URBAN

Continued from page 1

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

Personality Survey: 1) During lecture you are... a) asking the professor questions. b) doodling all over your notes. c) correcting grammar mistakes. d) watching videos on youtube.com e) calculating the opportunity cost of sitting in lecture. 2) Your favorite hidden pasttime is... a) getting the scoop on your roommate’s relationships. b) stalking people’s Facebook pictures. c) finding dangling modifiers in your readings. d) managing your blog. e) lurking outside 48 University Place.

In response to claims that members of Urban Congo did not have bad intentions, Tenkiang said the impact was more important than the intention. “You may be the most well-meaning person ever, but how it comes across is a totally different picture, and that’s what you need to be cognizant of as you act and you decide to do certain things,” Tenkiang said. Lena Sun ’16 said that she had seen Urban Congo perform at the Saturday night eXpressions show, in which five male students came onstage wearing loincloths for a filler performance. The students held items above their heads at times and at others placed them on the ground, as though at an altar, she said. According to Sun, people laughed and cheered at the performance. She said she felt uncomfortable with the

performance and was confused as to why others did not seem to feel the same way. The next morning, students took to social media to express their varying reactions to the performance. “After realizing the mistake we had made, we fully recognized the offensive nature of the performances and felt it was best to take the video down,” Hauss noted. Hauss said that he and his organization were being ignorant. “Though we did not intend to denigrate other cultures, we realize that this fact does not absolve us in the least,” Hauss said. “We created something that was inexcusably offensive, and we appreciate all those who called attention to our mistake.” Hauss added that he believed the error in his organization’s judgment has sparked a productive dialogue that will help the University community to become more conscientious.

He said that after surveying reactions to the video, the organization has decided that it will not continue to function as a performing arts group. “[Our organization] was founded on inclusivity; if our existence is harmful or offensive to anyone, we have become something that this group never stood for or intended to be,” Hauss said. Clare Sherlog ’17, president of eXpressions, declined to comment about Urban Congo’s performance this weekend. After watching the video, Undergraduate Student Government president Ella Cheng ’16 said she would take on an initiative to reexamine Urban Congo’s recognition as a student organization by the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students. “I was equally offended, like the many students who’ve voiced [their concerns] over social media, by the misappropriation of culture in the video. And

it was upsetting to learn that [Urban Congo] was an ODUS-approved group,” Cheng said, explaining that she, along with the Student Groups Committee, will be meeting with ODUS in the coming week to discuss the controversy. Cheng is a former staff writer for The Daily Princetonian. In addition, Cheng said she will work with the Student Groups Committee chair to inspect when the group was approved and whether the group description submitted at the time is at all reflective of its recent conduct. Cheng also noted that she is looking into protocols about revocations for ODUSrecognized student organizations and will bring the matter to the f loor at the USG senate meeting next Sunday. Media relations specialist Min Pullan and University Associate Director of Athletics Kellie Staples did not respond to requests for comment.

3) The first thing that you noticed was... a) the word “survey.” b) the logo set in the background. c) the extra “t” in “pasttime.” d) the o’s and i’s that look like binary code from far away. e) the fact that this is a super-cool ad for The Daily Princetonian.

If you answered mostly “a,” you are a reporter in the making! If you answered mostly “b,” you are a design connoisseur, with unlimited photography talents! If you answered mostly “c,” you are anal enough to be a copy editor! If you answered mostly “d,” you are a multimedia and web designing whiz! And if you answered mostly “e,” you are obsessed with the ‘Prince’ and should come join the Editorial Board and Business staff! Contact join@dailyprincetonian.com!

(if(equal? web love) (join the ‘Prince’ now) (join anyway)) Join the ‘Prince’ web and multimedia team. Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

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

Monday april 6, 2015

The Daily Princetonian

page 5

Black Balance Photography by Yicheng Sun :: Photo Editor Last week, the Lucas Gallery presents the work of Amber Stewart ‘15 on large-format photographs in an exhibition called “Black Balance.”

The voice in voting

EDITORIAL

Lea Trusty

Lea Trusty is a sophomore from Saint Rose, La. She can reached at ltrusty@princeton.edu.

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

columnist

hen I received an email from the Undergraduate Student Government containing details on how to vote on the widely talked about Bicker referendum, I rolled my eyes and deleted it in a snap. I disagreed with the referendum for a number of reasons. I am a happy member of a sign-in club and have close friends who are independent, eating at dining halls and members of Bicker clubs. I also happen to dislike policing when people — students — have the capabilities to address issues personally and independently. But more than that, I was under the impression that many other people agreed with these sentiments, too. Based on Facebook posts, conversations I had with friends and just general talk I had heard during dinner or after classes, I had assumed a large percentage of the student body thought “Hose Bicker” was unnecessary. Imagine my surprise, then, when I received another USG email containing the results of the Bicker referendum. Though the number of those against the referendum outnumbered those who favored it, the margin by which it did so was surprisingly low. About 56 percent of those who voted said no, while a little under 44 percent said yes. I began to question what I had previously presumed about popular opinion on Bicker. Did such a large portion of the undergraduate student body really want to do away with the process? These thoughts reached a halt, however, when I saw the actual amount of students who had voted on the referendum. Of the 5,200 undergraduate students, only 1,988 had voted. That is significantly lower than half of the student body. I initially was surprised by the low voter turnout. Eventually, however, I realized that several students may have had the same thoughts as I did: There’s an extremely small chance this will pass, as most people I’ve talked to are against the measure. Even if it does pass, the likelihood of any serious change is also small, as the eating clubs are independent institutions. Finally, this referendum really affects me in no way. This line of thinking may be fairly harmless in a university setting. While the types of things we vote on through the USG affect campus culture and aspects of our college experience, they are not central to the lives we will live after graduation. However, these same excuses cannot be said for referenda we vote on at the local or state level, or for those politicians that we choose to represent us in Congress. Those votes — or thereof — permeate parts of our lives even when we are unaware of them. Moreover, they do not begin to do so after we leave Princeton; they do so now. Only a week or so ago, I was in my American politics precept, discussing Congress, when our preceptor asked us how many of us had actually voted in an election — presidential, Congressional or even local. Few hands went up. Even including students under the voting age and the one international student ineligible to vote, the number was surprisingly small. When our precept asked why, the reasons for not voting varied. Some said they did not vote because they weren’t informed enough, others said they simply hadn’t gotten around to it, someone said it didn’t matter enough to them, and some thought that their votes simply did not matter. These are all often cited reasons why large numbers of people—particularly young adults—do not vote. It’s easy to understand why someone would be apathetic to voting considering the state of Congress as of late. It’s not illogical that people don’t vote on something that they don’t consider directly affects them. Yet, the fact remains that votes must matter. The historical struggle for enfranchisement of marginalized groups — both in and outside the United States — tell us as much. And we’ve seen the effects that voting can have both nationally — with Senator Al Franken’s 2008 election to the Senate decided by less than 300 votes — and on campus – with USG’s decision to sign an amicus brief on the behalf of the plaintiffs in Lewis v. Harris, a gay marriage case before the New Jersey Supreme court in 2005. We have seen the direct effects that our opinions can have. And so, if something does not seem critical to our personal lives — whether it be a Bicker referendum or student election — we must ask ourselves, if our vote doesn’t count now, if our voices don’t matter here, when and where will they? Although we are in college for only a short amount of time (in the grand scheme of our lives), much of what we do here lays the foundation for what we pursue — and how we pursue it — after exiting FitzRandolph Gates. Academic courses drive personal interests and change our professional desires. Student organizations inform us of what matters to us outside of the classroom, and often, students stay dedicated to these themes and missions within or outside of their careers. Our independent work can spark curiosity and lead to further research. What we do at Princeton doesn’t narrowly restrict our lives’ paths, but these patterns give a glimpse of what is to come. So while voting on campus may not seem critical, doing so may be critical in determining whether we vote in our greater civic sphere.

Opinion

Monday april 6, 2015

Take the WeSpeak survey: ‘It’s a Princeton issue.’

ast week, an opinion column was published in The Daily Princetonian by members of the Faculty-Student Committee on Sexual Misconduct urging the student body of the University to participate in the “WeSpeak: Attitudes on Sexual Misconduct at Princeton” survey. According to an email distributed to students by the committee, the objective of the survey is simple: to learn about the prevalence of sexual assault at Princeton and to more effectively address issues related to sexual violence and sexual assault. The Editorial Board recognizes the critical importance of accurate data related to instances of sexual assault and sexual violence at the University, and the Board is concerned that an initially low response rate may have caused the University to extend the survey deadline. Consequently, we urge every student to participate in the survey before its April 7 deadline. Sexual assault, sexual violence and the accompanying culture are pervasive on college campuses. The problem affects women and men. It affects our roommates and teammates. It affects our friends and family. These instances of assault and violence cannot be meaningfully quantified because every prior attempt to administer surveys similar to WeSpeak has yielded imprecise results. Both a 2008 survey distributed by the University and a 2011 study conducted by the American College Health Association were characterized by gross

under-participation. We do not know if the results of these surveys over-represent or under-represent rates of sexual assault and violence at the University. Statistics from surveys conducted nationwide offer the University even less stable footing. The commonly cited statistic that one in five females enrolled in college will be a victim of sexual assault or sexual violence during her university years comes from the Campus Sexual Assault Study, a survey conducted by the Justice Department’s National Institute of Justice. The NIJ only polled undergraduate females at two large public universities, and, according to researchers, the response rate of these universities was low. To solve the problems related to sexual assault and sexual violence at the University, University administrators must understand the complex nature of the problem. Surveys with low levels of participation are unable to give an accurate picture of campus issues and prevent us from understanding the problem we are trying to solve. A Princeton-specific survey will help to isolate what is and is not working with current University policies, and the results will help to shape better, more effective policy going forward. Simply put, the results of WeSpeak will give information that no other survey can provide to the University community. Maximizing participation will help the University account for the diversity of campus experiences, perceptions and opinions as it

vol. cxxxix

Anna Mazarakis ’16 editor-in-chief

shapes and implements new policy. Subsequent policy changes will be inclusive and will foster safety in the Princeton community. Pragmatic benefits aside, the Board believes that each student has an obligation to complete WeSpeak. Princeton is not simply a community; rather, it is our community. Each of us has the right to not only be safe here, but also to feel safe. Even if you feel like you have not encountered sexual misconduct on campus or feel like you do not know enough about the issue, it is important to participate. WeSpeak is not only meant for members of our community who have worked on these issues. It is meant for all of us. The least we can do for one another is to take less than 20 minutes in the coming days to complete the survey. WeSpeak is an opportunity for each of us to make a meaningful and positive contribution to Princeton for our peers and for generations of Princetonians to come. If you wish to make further comments on this important issue beyond what is addressed in the survey, the Board encourages you to email WeSpeak at wespeak@princeton.edu to share your thoughts. The Editorial Board is an independent body and decides its opinions separately from the regular staff and editors of The Daily Princetonian. The Board answers only to its Chair, the Opinion Editor and the Editor-In-Chief.

Matteo Kruijssen ’16 business manager

EDITORIAL BOARD chair Jeffrey Leibenhaut ’16 Allison Berger ’18 Elly Brown ’18 Thomas Clark ’18 Paul Draper ’18 Daniel Elkind ’17 Theodore Furchgott ’18 James Haynes ’18 Zach Horton ’15 Mitchell Johnston ’15 Wynne Kerridge ’16 Cydney Kim ’17 Daphna Le Gall ’15 Sergio Leos ’17 Carolyn Liziewski ’18 Sam Mathews ’17 Lily Offit ’15 Connor Pfeiffer ’18 Ashley Reed ’18 Aditya Trivedi ’16 Andrew Tsukamoto ’15 Jillian Wilkowski ’15 Kevin Wong ’17

NIGHT STAFF 4.5.15 senior copy editos Belinda Ji ’17 staff copy editor Omkar Shende ’18 news Annie Yang ’18

Belief

Caresse Yan ’15

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

For career success, major in art history

W. Barksdale Maynard ’88 guest contributor

aybe your parents warned you that an art history degree means a job pumping gas at your local Shell station. Or perhaps you listened to President Barack Obama’s 2014 speech in which he proclaimed, “Folks can make a lot more, potentially, with skilled manufacturing or the trades than they might with an art history degree.” If you think these warnings ring true, you’d better think again: the humanities in general, and art history in particular, can be a powerful ticket to career success. Art history plunges you deep into critical thinking about the world’s cultures, about the nature of creativity and genius, about the ineffable sources of greatness in human endeavor — and if it’s a good fit for you personally, the longterm results can be extraordinary. “I’m convinced that being an art history major helped me stand out as an applicant to Stanford Business School,” Kelly Sortino ’03 tells me. “Since then, I have worked at Boston Consulting Group and Google — and no one batted an eyelash that I didn’t pursue a more ‘practical’ major.” She adds, “Being an art history major allowed me to differentiate myself from the sea of economics and computer science majors out there!” Sortino is right: when one in five American undergraduates is majoring in business, your “safe” major could land

you in a vast, turgid sea of lookalike business school resumes — a sea that grows by nearly 400,000 every June. I’ve been asking my fellow Princeton alumni if an art history major helped their career or hurt it. All say that it helped — and in ways they never could have predicted when they were 20. “My art history education was the first step in training my eye to recognize the recurring signatures of price movement in the financial markets,” Jamie Crapanzano ’00, portfolio manager at Guggenheim Partners, told me. Who would have guessed? “Majoring in art history brilliantly expanded my ability to solve problems in medicine,” says noted psychiatrist Jeremy Spiegel ’92, who fondly recalls “the nurturing and consciousness-expanding playpen” of the Department of Art and Archaeology. As a vice president of NBA Entertainment, Stephen Hellmuth ’75 has made design innovations to arena display screens that enhance the drama of basketball for all of us. In this and other endeavors involving complex visual systems, his “degree from art and archeology was essential,” he says. Once more, art history proves itself astonishingly useful in unpredictable ways. “Majoring in art history allowed me to relate to and understand the psychology of the creative mind,” says Sara Dennis ’87, who has been senior vice president at top fashion companies, including Lands’ End. Dennis has drawn from art history

again and again, because “the beauty of the major is that the student can explore a plethora of topics, from science to politics.” The Tigers I spoke to agree that art history expands your mind and can launch you into the career world with an explosive burst. And these graduates end up everywhere. “I had the pleasure of studying a subject matter I really loved, and gaining cultural literacy,” says Kristin Hodgson ’03, communications director of Meetup, the world’s largest network of local groups (social networking based on geographic locale). Like others, Hodgson warns against choosing a “safe” major. But what about the pressure you are getting from your parents? You are not alone: a 2012 survey showed that 42 percent of parents push their children towards majors that will supposedly pay off (the Princeton Class of 2014 gravitated especially to economics and politics). “My father spent his entire career at Citibank and was concerned that I would not be able to find a decent job if I majored in art history,” Jason Harris ’00 remembers. “But I landed my first job after graduation at Morgan Stanley.” Harris, who now heads a huge Presbyterian church on Park Avenue, recalls that first Morgan Stanley interview: “I spent most of it talking about Picasso with a man who was an art aficionado.” That conversation might not have happened had Harris chosen a “safe” major. Beware: majors geared towards business

and seemingly safe sectors in fact tend to produce underemployed graduates, Fortune has shown. Often, graduates of safe majors report lower rates of job satisfaction. “You have all your working life to concentrate on things that are boring and make you miserable — don’t start early!” warns Alexandra de Campi ’92. “I majored in art history because it combined the best of all other liberal arts majors: history, politics, economics, sociology,” de Campi told me. “I then went on to be an equity research analyst in Hong Kong.” Today she is a famous music video director and writer. Don’t blow your once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fall in love with a major. Remember: the humanities just might supercharge your career. They certainly won’t hurt it: even those ultra-rigorous medical schools show no preference in admissions for Princeton science majors over Princeton majors in humanities and social sciences. And if your parents still don’t believe you, tell them that The Telegraph reported a few days ago in “What Degree Should You Study to Become a Billionaire?” that 9 percent of the 100 richest people on the Forbes list studied arts in college — more than those who majored in economics (8 percent) and finance (3 percent). W. Barksdale Maynard ’88 is the author of seven books and is teaching ART 251: Architecture of Princeton University on campus this spring. He enjoyed majoring in art history.

Monday april 6, 2015

The Daily Princetonian

In contest, Dietrick holds her own against premier shooters in the country

In addition to victory, Slifer and Bennantine are awarded indivdual accolades

W. B-BALL Continued from page 8

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

rank third, fourth, sixth, seventh and eighth in the country, respectively, for three-point shooting. Dietrick herself is not officially listed in the NCAA’s ranking of top women’s threepoint shooters. The issue lies in her volume of shots. The NCAA requires a player to have made at least two three-pointers a

W. LAX

Continued from page 8

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

The Tigers held on for the win, limiting Yale to only four shots on goal in the second half. While the Bulldogs would score early on in the half to decrease the deficit to one, it would be the only goal the Tigers would give up. Interestingly, a look at the box score might suggest that the Bulldogs were in control for much of the game. Yale performed better than Princeton in multiple statistical categories, outshooting Princeton, winning more groundballs and taking 10 of 14 faceoffs. As the team continues to roll, two of its stars were recognized in the Inside Lacrosse All-American list. Senior midfielder Erin Silfer was named a second-team All-American midfielder after putting up 32 points in nine games. Junior defender Liz Bennantine was an honorable mention for the list, as her tenacious defense and number of turnovers forced caught the eyes of the committee. Princeton will travel to face No. 1 Maryland on Wednesday for a 7 p.m. game in what is sure to be a thrilling showdown. As of March 30, the Terrapins have a perfect 12-0 record.

page 7

game on average to be on the top shooters list. Dietrick made 63 in 32 games, just one threepointer shy of qualifying for the list. Dietrick held her own in this tough crowd, placing fifth in the first round in a field of eight. Unfortunately, only the top four would move on to the second round. With the contest behind her, Dietrick can continue preparing for the WNBA draft, taking place April 16.

With intra-conference losses, Tigers go from second to third in EIVA M. V-BALL Continued from page 8

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

three sets. Fortunately, the Tigers were able to prevent the previous night’s mistakes, committing a significantly fewer number of service errors at 13 in total. Kessel led the Tigers with 12 kills, while the Pioneers relied on a more balanced distribution of kills. Prior to this weekend, the Tigers had actually faced both teams at home in February, winning by significant margins.

However, the weekend play only reinforces Princeton’s continued struggle to win on the road — the Tigers are 5-1 at home but only 3-7 away. The pressure of the two losses were somewhat alleviated as Harvard lost to NJIT on Saturday night, dropping Harvard to only half a game ahead of the Tigers in the EIVA standings. Following these two losses, the Tigers will capitalize on a 10day intermission before beginning a three-game home stand against Kean, Penn State and St. Francis.

Tweet Tweet!!

DANIELA COSIO :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

In their next game, the Tigers hope to avenge last year’s close loss to the Maryland Terrapins.

Sports

Monday april 6, 2015

page 8

{www.dailyprincetonian.com} MEN’S VOLLEYBALL

WOMEN’S LACROSSE

Tigers fall in games against conference foes By David Liu contributor

In a tough weekend of travel and intra-conference play, Princeton (9-10 overall, 5-4 Eastern Intercollegiate Volleyball Association) lost to Harvard on Friday night and then Sacred Heart on Saturday night. Moreover, the Tigers suffered steep scoring margins, losing to Harvard in four sets and then Sacred Heart in only three. The loss to Harvard dropped the Tigers to third place in the EIVA conference with under a month of play left in the regular season. Friday’s game against the Crimson put the long standing rivalry between the two teams at stake — this was a rematch of last year’s EIVA semifinals, in which Princeton defeated Harvard in four sets. Going into the match, Harvard trailed Princeton by just half a game, putting pressure on the Tigers to defend their standing. The Tigers actually got off to a solid start early on Friday. The Orange and Black capitalized on Crimson errors midway through the first set to go on an 8-2 run and comfortably finish the game by a 25-17 margin. However, the Harvard wasn’t the only team to fall to errors

on Friday night; in fact, the key statistic for the Tigers soon became 34 total service errors on the night. In all three remaining sets, the Crimson demonstrated the ability to close out tight sets while the Tigers succumbed to costly errors, highly uncharacteristic for the clutch Tigers. Despite the loss, several Princeton players marshaled impressive statistics. Consistently dominant senior outside hitter Cody Kessel displayed 14 kills. His counterpart, junior outside hitter Devin Stearns led the team with 16 kills. Sophomore middle blocker Junior Oboh also featured eight kills and six blocks. The odds were even more in favor for the Tigers going into Saturday’s games versus Sacred Heart. Prior to Saturday, Princeton had amassed a significant 6-2 series lead over the Pioneers. Moreover, Sacred Heart had indicated signs of struggle throughout the season, winning only one conference game prior to this weekend. The Pioneers soared to a quick start on Saturday and never looked back. Going on 4-0 runs throughout the evening, Sacred Heart held Princeton to just 11, 18 and 19 points in the respective See M. V-BALL page 7

Women’s lacrosse tops Yale, remains perfect in league play By Grant Keating contributor

JACK MAZZULO :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

With EIVA championships starting soon, the weekend’s two losses were a large setback for the volleyball team.

Princeton women’s lacrosse topped perennial league rival Yale 7-5 in New Haven over the weekend to remain undefeated in the Ivy League. It was a great win for the Tigers, their third league win of the season, as they approach the bulk of their in-league games. It was a great defensive win for the Tigers (8-2 overall, 3-0 Ivy League) as sophomore goalie Ellie DeGarmo had nine saves, playing a crucial role in holding the Bulldogs down. Their performance kept the Bulldogs (6-6, 1-3) to well under their average — the women from Yale normally put up 8.75 goals per game in league play. Princeton went up 4-1 in the earlier stages of the game before Yale started a run to narrow the gap. The teams went into halftime with a score of 6-4. See W. LAX page 7

WOMEN’S BASKETBALL

MEN’S LACROSSE

Dietrick places fifth in 3-point shooting contest

Men’s lacrosse upset by Stony Brook

By Miles Hinson Sports editor

Senior guard Blake Dietrick had the opportunity to continue her magical season Thursday night as she competed in the NCAA Women’s Three Point Contest, placing fifth overall. Anyone who saw Dietrick on the court this year can attest to her abilities as a sharpshooter. She shot 40.9 percent from downtown on the year as part of a scorching hot Tiger team. Having gone 31-1, this team is built in large part on its marksmanship — the team as a whole shot 40.5 percent from three on the season, the second best rate in the country. The selection for the competition is not purely based on three-point shooting percentage. Dietrick’s teammates junior forward Annie Tarakchian and junior guard Michelle Miller, who were not part of the contest, shot 46.9 percent and 46 percent, respectively. Traveling to Indianapolis, Ind., for the competition, Dietrick will pit herself against some of the top ranked shooters in the country. The field sported stars such as Kelsey Harris, Andrea Hoover, Melissa Dixon, Cassandra Brown and Bonnie Samuelson, who See W. B-BALL page 7

By Andrew Steele senior writer

Unlucky No. 13 men’s lacrosse (6-3 overall, 2-1 Ivy League) suffered its third loss of the season this past Saturday at No. 20 Stony Brook (9-2, 2-1 America East). A 4-1 first quarter Princeton advantage quickly evaporated as the Seawolves stormed back with a 6-2 second-period run, establishing a lead they would not relinquish despite the Tigers’ late efforts. Saturday’s contest marks just the third iteration of this rivalry. Princeton dominated the first two contests, played in 1992 and 1993. The score line falls in line with a pattern of Princeton’s scoring habits. Across their nine contests, the Orange and Black have outscored opponents 30-17 in the first period. Their opponents, however, have an 80-76 advantage in the remaining three quarters. Senior midfielder Kip Orban continued in a pattern of his own. Held scoreless by Maryland earlier this season, he responded in the following matchup against Penn with a career-high seven goals. Again, shut out by Brown last weekend, the Princeton captain tied Stony Brook’s Brody Eastwood with a game-high five goals (both players took eight shots in the contest). His classmate, attackman Mike MacDonald, added three more goals. But Princeton’s offense otherwise showed an uncharacteristic lack of luster. Sophomore midfielder Bear Altemus tallied his fourth of the season with six seconds left in the first

YICHENG SUN :: PHOTO EDITOR

The No. 13 men’s lacrosse team faced an unwelcome shock as they fell to the No. 29 Stony Brook on the road this past Saturday.

quarter. Facing an essentially insurmountable 13-9 lead, junior attackman Ryan Ambler scored with 3:21 remaining in regulation. Four extra-man opportunities came for the Seawolves, three of which the home side capitalized upon. Princeton’s one power play resulted in a shot by sophomore midfielder Gavin McBride and a save by Stony Brook’s Brandon Ma-

Tweet of the day

“Doot doot” alexander schindele-murayama (@alexschindele), men’s volleyball

ciejewski. That efficiency was characteristic of the Seawolves’ win. The home side put 21 of their 30 shots on target. In addition, 10 of their 13 goals came off assists. Defensive inexperience seems to have caught up with the Tigers, whose close defense is notably lacking in upperclassmen. The one-on-one prowess of Princeton’s backline shone last

weekend. However, doubtful defense off-ball sank the Orange and Black at Stony Brook. Significantly outmatched off the draw over their past three games, Princeton had a slight 14-13 faceoff advantage over their opponents. Freshman specialist Sam Bonafede won 12 of his 21 battles while sophomore midfielder Zach Currier added two wins of his own. Once again, Currier

proved deadly on the ground with eight ground ball wins. He currently leads his side with 40 GBs on the year. The Tigers will have a quick turnaround before facing Lehigh this Tuesday. Ideally, the Tigers will be able to find some rhythm before they close out the season with a trio of Ivy League matchups, beginning next Saturday at Dartmouth.

Inside

Read more about the women’s lacrosse team and its upcoming battle with the No. 1 Terps. SPORTS PAGE 7

‘Prince’ Sports is on Twitter! Follow us at www.twitter.com/princesports

for live news and reports!