May 6, 2015 by The Daily Princetonian

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Wednesday may 6, 2015 vol. cxxxix no. 61

WEATHER

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } HIGH

LOW

70˚ 53˚

WE-UNIONS

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

U. receives $10M gift for Wilson School

Cloudy skies early, slight chance of showers. chance of rain:

20 percent

In Opinion Guest columnist Pujan Rai reflects upon the Nepali earthquake, and columnist Marni Morse addresses the University’s new sexual assault policy. PAGE 4

By Jessica Li staff writer

Today on Campus 4:30 p.m.: Congressman Tom Price (R-GA), chairman of the House Budget Committee, will give a lecture sponsored by the Princeton Tory and the politics department. Frist Campus Center 302.

The Archives

May 6, 1992 Thirty-one Nude Olympians pled not guilty to charges of lewdness and disorderly conduct in borough court. The case was expected to go to trial.

YICHENG SUN :: PHOTO EDITOR

Students and alumni celebrate an alternative, environmentaly friendly reunions called We-Unions.

$10M

The amount that was anonymously donated to the University to create a new center within the Wilson School.

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

News & Notes 13 transported for alcohol intoxication during Houseparties, Lawnparties

Thirteen students were transported to either McCosh Health Center or the University Medical Center of Princeton this past weekend for alcohol intoxication, according to University media specialist Min Pullan. The weekend coinciding with Houseparties and Lawnparties traditionally represents a spike in the number of students hospitalized for excessive alcohol intake. Seven students were transported for alcohol intoxication between Sunday at 12 p.m. and Monday at 12 p.m. This was over double the number of students transported during the same time frame of fall Lawnparties, during which three students were transported for alcohol intoxication. Five students were transported from Friday at 12 p.m. to Saturday at 12 p.m., and one student was transported during the same period between Saturday and Sunday.

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

CPUC discusses sexual misconduct policy at meeting By Lorenzo Quiogue

PRINCETON By the Numbers

The University announced on Monday that it received a $10 million donation from an anonymous donor to establish the Kahneman and Treisman Center for Behavioral Science and Public Policy at the Wilson School. This is the second $10 million donation in the last month. The last such gift, which was received in mid-April, will be used to finance a new music building in the Arts and Transit neighborhood. The new center will support research, conferences, visiting faculty and postdoctoral

students to expand research in behavioral economics, a field in which psychology professor emeritus Daniel Kahneman is a pioneer. Psychology professor Anne Treisman has written seminal works in the areas of attention, memory and perception. Kahneman and Treisman are married to each other. The center’s location is still to be determined, according to Wilson School dean Cecilia Rouse. The increased attention and resources to this field will benefit many students, Rouse said. The University has named See DONATION page 2

senior writer

The Council of the Princeton University Community discussed changes to the University’s sexual misconduct policy, the Resources Committee’s rejection of the Princeton Sustainability Investment Initiative’s proposal, the University’s mental health programs and the Special Task Force on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at its meeting on Monday. The meeting began with University vice provost for institutional diversity and equity Michelle Minter presenting proposed adjustments recommended by the Faculty-Student Committee on Sexual Misconduct, which were accepted by the council. Under the new guidelines, certain protections and rights will be provided to complainants in all stalking cases, not just those involving intimate partners. The policy was also modified to permit the University’s Title IX Coordinator to balance several factors in determining whether

to move forward with an investigation. Minter explained that this modification was made in order to consider the wishes of the complainant with respect to whether the investigation should proceed. Minter added that under the old policy, any conflict between people who live together, including roommates, would have been adjudicated under the Sexual Misconduct policy, but under the proposed changes, this presumption would no longer be automatic. Minter said that the University received a high response rate to the WeSpeak survey, and added that four new staff were hired by the University to administer Title IX-related work. She noted that there appears to be a higher number of sexual misconduct cases than in the past, attributing the uptick in part to greater awareness by students of the resources available to them. Resources Committee chair Marc Fleurbaey addressed a See CPUC page 2

STUDENT LIFE

Anscombe Society enters 10th year at U. By Nahrie Chung staff writer

Amid debate over free speech on campus, the Anscombe Society — entering its 10th year of operation — provides a noteworthy case study in the recent history of the wider University community’s engagement with alternative viewpoints. In the spring of 2005, six students founded the Society to respond to what they saw as a need for more honest discussion of the University’s casual sex and hookup culture. The group named itself after the 20th century British analytic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe, a professor at Cambridge University who wrote rigorous defenses of traditional sexual ethics, marriage and family. Cassandra Hough ’07, one of Anscombe’s founding members who currently resides in Princeton and is an Undergraduate Fellows Program Coordinator for the James Madison Program

in American Ideals and Institutions, said that the prevailing attitude of “anything goes” regarding students’ sexual activity was actively promoting risky sexual behavior. “At the time the Anscombe Society was founded, it was in the mind of the other students who founded the group … that the University life, both in its intellectual and social dimensions, really favored more libertarian ideas and norms on matters of sexual relationships,” Hough said. Students who experienced the negative effects of such a culture felt alienated and unsupported, Hough said. Since no campus group existed to address these concerns, she and several classmates decided to establish a network of support for students who shared similar sentiments and wanted to improve campus discourse, she explained. “We wanted to see University discussion take more seriously See ANSCOMBE page 3

ANNA MAZARAKIS:: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Areas of Dillon Gymnasium have been sealed off for asbestos removal in anticipation of renovations.

In preparation for renovations, Dillon sees asbestos removal

By Jacob Donnelly news editor

In anticipation of renovations on the A-level of Dillon Gymnasium, work is being done now to remove asbestos in the area, Director of Environmental Health and Safety Robin Izzo said. Asbestos is a mineral that can cause cancer and lung disease. According to Senior Associate Director of Athletics David Leach, the renovations include six gender-inclusive changing

and shower areas that will double as family changing areas; upgrades to the existing locker rooms, including new lockers and showers; addition of team rooms for clubs, including men’s and women’s volleyball; and a new hallway along the gym’s west side on the A-Level. The renovations are expected to be completed in the fall of 2016, Leach said. There is a presumption that buildings constructed before 1981 have building materials that contain asbestos, and the University was aware that pipe

insulation in Dillon contained materials with asbestos, Izzo explained. “Some of the renovations will impact exposed mechanical spaces,” Izzo said. “Renovations will impact the locker rooms and a few other places.” The asbestos removal work is expected to be completed by around the end of August, Izzo said. A third party contractor is monitoring the removal contractor and testing the air quality to ensure asbestos fibers are not leaving the areas See ASBESTOS page 2

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

Campus mapping tool deadline extended to June for use by community members By Nahrie Chung staff writer

The University extended the deadline late last week for community members to use the campus mapping tool Campus Compass from May 14 to the first week of June. The Office of the University Architect launched the online app in an effort to gather University-wide feedback for the Princeton University 2026 Campus Plan. The interactive mapping tool asks respondents to map how they experience, use and travel around campus. Questions range from activity-spe-

cific locations to most commonly-used routes, and each question has users identify campus hotspots with icons that represent extracurricular activities, eateries and group study and relaxation spots. Once users have dropped an icon on a campus building or created a mark on the mapping space, they can input a corresponding comment to identify problems or offer possible solutions. Associate University Architect for Planning Natalie Shivers said the campus planning team developed the application with Urban Strategies, a Toronto-based design consult-

ing firm assisting the University in its short- and long-term campus plan. The University is still in the earliest part of its campus planning. In contrast to the previous campus plan for 2006-2016 now nearing completion, University Architect Ronald McCoy GS ’80 said that Campus Compass was an important addition to the planning process for 2026 and beyond. “One of the things that we’re doing differently this time is to try to capture more data, particularly from the users of the campus,” McCoy said. See CAMPUS page 3

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Wednesday may 6, 2015

New center to incorporate research Minter notes new Title IX hires, high from engineering, humanities, sciences response rate for WeSpeak survey DONATION Continued from page 1

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

Eldar Shafir, a psychology and public affairs professor, as the inaugural director of the Kahneman and Treisman Center. “Shafir is one of the preeminent behavioral psychologists in the world,” Rouse said. “He has worked closely with Kahneman over the years.” Shafir explained that the Center will aim to incorporate research across campus in the social and physical sciences, engineering and the humanities. “Our intention is for the Center to provide the intellectual milieu for everyone on campus — undergraduate and graduate students, postdocs, faculty and other researchers — who is interested in exploring the role of behavioral research and findings in the conduct and implementa-

tion of policy,” Shafir said. Shafir said the application of behavioral and cognitive science to policymaking is still in a stage of infancy. He added that policymakers are often misguided by inaccurate assumptions about human behavior. “Behaviorally informed policymaking can deliver better, more effective products and increase people’s well-being,” Shafir said. “Princeton has been at the forefront of this budding activity since its inception, and there is little doubt that our new Center will provide impetus for Princeton to remain at the forefront.” Kahneman and Treisman, after whom the Center is named, did not respond to requests for comment. Kahneman was awarded a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2002 for his work in judgment and decision-making.

Kahneman had challenged the assumption of human rationality as the basis of economic choice making. Treisman, a recipient of the National Medal of Science, specializes in the study of interactions between attention, memory and understanding, particularly the cognitive constructions of images from visual information. “It is easier for universities to follow successful trends than to set them,” Shafir said. “In this case, Princeton was the first to establish this area of research formally in a policy school. It has been a clear success, has garnered generous support and we should be proud of that.” The Wilson School is the only major public policy school in the nation that has a requirement for graduate students to take a class focusing on psychology for public policy.

Asbestos removal expected to conclude around end of August ASBESTOS Continued from page 1

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

that are cordoned off. Pipe insulation and other asbestos-containing materials are monitored officially at least a couple of times a year, Izzo said, adding that maintenance workers working on unrelated issues serve as another source of informal monitoring. The purpose of this monitoring is to learn of materials that have become wet or damaged, because intact asbestos containing materials does not release airborne particles and are not dangerous. In the case of Dillon, though, the asbestos removal work was prompted by the planned major renovation. “There is an asbestos abate-

ment contractor working on campus almost every day,” Izzo said, explaining that some jobs are small, while renovations like the one at Firestone Library can prompt a significant amount of work. However, the danger of asbestos to the community is minimal, Izzo added. “They generally aren’t in places where people can touch them,” Izzo said. “The places where they’re doing the removals are mechanical spaces.” Students interviewed had mixed reactions about the impact of the ongoing work at Dillon Gym. Arianna Brown ’18 said that while she thought some of the disruptions, specifically including the closure of the Cardio Annex, were significant,

she also didn’t view it as a major concern, because there are more than enough cardio-related machines in the Stephens Fitness Center. For the time being, the closure of the Cardio Annex is not a major concern, Jason West ’18 added. “People can go for a run [outside],” he said. The continual nature of the asbestos removal work at the University in the past proved to be an occasional matter of controversy. In 2011, students returned to campus in September to find a 20-foot inflatable rat outside Firestone Library, whose organizers said they intended to protest substandard asbestos removal work but may have actually intended to protest the University’s use of nonunion removal contractors.

CPUC

Continued from page 1

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

proposal from the Princeton Sustainable Investment Initiative, which requested that the University invest its endowment in a more sustainable manner, consistent with its environmental research and moves to reduce carbon emissions. As Fleurbaey spoke, members of the group silently stood up, bearing signs protesting the University’s current investment practices. Leigh Anne Schriever ’16, the head of the PSII, explained that the proposal had four main points: that the University sign on to the United Nations’ Principles for Responsible Investment, that the University sign on to the Carbon Disclosure Project, that the University create a carbon footprint of its endowment and its investments and that the University create a committee to look into making the University’s environmental practices more sustainable. The proposal did not specifically call for divestment. Fleurbaey noted that the concerns were brought to University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 and to the Princeton Investment Company, and said that the committee received letters from both Eisgruber and PRINCO in response. Eisgruber wrote that energy providers interact with the University in many ways, and that the responsibility to act on climate change issues did not rest on just a few companies, but on everyone. “In many, if not most cases, where a need or injustice exists, decent social, economic and political systems will adjust to address it,” PRINCO’s memo said. The memo noted that PRINCO was already considering environmental issues when making investment decisions, pointing to $1.5 billion of investments that specifically promote environmental sustainability. Phil Hannam GS, another member of the PSII, explained that the political systems in place were not adequately addressing the issues, so there is a need for the University to be proactive. “The standard for divestment is a very high standard, and it has only been met in two cases,” Eisgruber explained, referring to the University’s move to divest from companies supporting apartheid

in South Africa and violence in Darfur. Fleurbaey explained the committee’s reasons for rejecting the points of the proposal, noting that the University already does things similar to what the PSII had proposed. Fleurbaey concluded by saying that the next resources committee would welcome continued conversation regarding the issue. The Special Task Force on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion presented a set of recommendations related to student life resources, staff and coordination. The task force recommended reassessing the effectiveness of and increasing support among existing resources for students, such as the Carl A. Fields Center, as well as making resources more available for graduate students who seek them out. Other recommendations included hiring a senior administrator to lead diversity and inclusion efforts in campus life, and increasing both staff and monetary resources for cultural and identity-based student organizations. The task force also recommended the availability of a confidential resource for students who have experienced bias. Minter noted that the resource would work somewhat like Sexual Harassment/Assault Advising, Resources and Education. University Provost David Lee GS ’99 explained that recommendations in other areas, such as academics and public programming, would be included in the final report of full recommendations in mid-May. Initial actions will take place over the summer, according to Lee. Minter explained that while the task force could only make recommendations, Eisgruber’s endorsement of the recommendations presented at the meeting meant that they would be put into place very soon. “It is possible that not every recommendation the task force makes will be taken in exactly the form that it has crafted it, but they will happen,” she said. Minter added that students would be much more involved in making important decisions, such as the selection of the senior administrator, than they had been in the past. Minter said that in its cur-

rent shape or form, the task force would end with the publication of the full report, but expects the work to continue even after the report is issued. “Not only does [continuing a task force after the report is issued] maintain accountability, it also helps us address a lot of other things that we really wanted to discuss this semester but just couldn’t get to in the time frame,” she said. Minter noted that while some changes, such as instituting a diversity-related distribution requirement for undergraduates, would require more research and discussion by a separate committee, she expects many of the changes the task force recommended to be in place by the next academic year. Director of Counseling and Psychological Services Calvin Chin gave a presentation about the current state of mental health at the University, as well as the programs that CPS provides. Chin noted that stress continues to be the biggest issue that students face on campus, and noted that the number of CPS visits has doubled over the past fifteen years. Chin attributed the increase to a greater number of staff and services offered by CPS, and to higher awareness of mental health issues among students. The percentage of students that CPS sees is around twice the national benchmark, Chin said, explaining that University students are much more willing than peers at other institutions to seek help for their issues. The meeting concluded with a presentation by Mizzi Gomes ’16 and Carol Gu ’17, who discussed the programs of the Student Health Advisory Board, and a presentation from Naimah Hakim ’16 and Amalya Megerman ’16, cochairs of the Undergraduate Student Government Mental Health Initiative Board. Hakim and Megerman discussed changes in programming and issues that the MHIB faced. In particular, they noted that the fall referendum calling for the University to publish detailed policies regarding leaves of absence was brought to administrators after receiving support from 95 percent of voters, and they criticized the University for its disappointing response to the death of Audrey Dantzlerward ’16 in January. The meeting took place at 4:30 p.m. in Friend 101.

CORRECTION Due to a reporting error, an earlier version of the May 4 article, “Result of divestment referendum raises questions over campaign financing and biased language,” misstated where the election and referendum rules can be found. They are in the USG elections handbook. The ‘Prince’ regrets the error.

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

The Daily Princetonian

Wednesday may 6, 2015

page 3

Versions of web app for town members, Campus reciptivity to Anscombe alumni in beta-testing stage, says Shivers in decline, according to Hough ’07 CAMPUS Continued from page 1

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

“The traditional way of designing is to have the designers make observations and draw conclusions and make recommendations based on those observations. But by asking all the different constituencies — students, faculty, staff, alumni and the local community — to participate in this tool, we’re not just relying on ourselves to make observations.” Undergraduate Student Government president Ella Cheng ’16, who will soon release a video campaign to increase student engagement, said the opinions of current undergraduates matter because there is no better constituency to provide feedback on the issue of campus planning. “We’re in every dorm, we’re in every study and common area, eating area, and only we really have that information,” Cheng said. “So if we don’t share that information when

they push out this effort, then the University may go awry in pursuing this campus plan. They’re going to miss a lot of really important hot spots and hot topics to address.” Cheng is a former staff writer for The Daily Princetonian. Cheng said she beta-tested Campus Compass prior to its general launch. “Another [question] is, what spaces do you most like to study in or like to socialize in?” Cheng said. “They’re really trying to find these hot spots on campus where a lot of activity of a certain kind occurs. They’ve got a really cool interface for it and I think they did a really good job.” Stephanie Velazquez ’15, an architecture major, said the decision to engage undergraduate students in the planning process was a good idea, though she was unsure what purpose the mapping tool was intended to achieve. The current campus layout is especially unaccommodating for biking, Velazquez added. “You see a lot of desire lines

around, which is when you have a set pathway and you’ll have … this spot in the grass because that’s where everyone is going through,” Velazquez said. “I feel like there are a lot of places like this on campus — where you have a huge green area that you’re supposed to walk around when it’s so much more convenient to cut through.” There are also versions of Campus Compass for alumni and town members, which are still in the beta-testing stage, Shivers said, which contributed to the extension. Warren Price, a representative of Urban Strategies Inc. working with the University, said campus planning at the University has been enjoyable to work on. “What is really exciting for us is Princeton’s commitment to the planning process,” Price said. “They take the process as a work extremely seriously, they really challenge us to do the best work we can, and at the same time they’re incredibly supportive.”

Don’t be mad. Don’t be sad. Be glad, and BUY AN AD! (it’s the hottest fad.)

For more information, contact ‘Prince’ business. Call (609)258-8110 or Email business@dailyprincetonian. com

ANSCOMBE Continued from page 1

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

the wealth of research and arguments that either challenged those libertine ideas about sexuality and relationships, or that support, instead, the institution of marriage, the role of the intact family and what we like to call sexual integrity,” Hough said, adding that Anscombe was the first organization on campus with such a purpose. The group hosts public lecture events each semester, invites professors and students to present arguments in weekly discussions and, often, contributes significantly to conservative thought at the University. Among other reasons, the Anscombe Society exists to contribute a voice to campus discourse that would not otherwise persist, its president, Christian Say ’16, explained. “We’re kind of a gadfly. We’re always there,” Say said. “We think there’s a way of viewing sex that is most in line with who we are as human beings and [we’re going to] do things that continually remind us and the campus of this alternative view. And if we don’t exist, there is literally no one in this public square at Princeton who is going to say otherwise.” Hough said she has observed a decline in campus receptivity to Anscombe since its founding 10 years ago. According to Say, the Society’s status as a dissenting minority voice means the group naturally attracts criticism. “There’s definitely a stigma attached to the Anscombe Society, but I think that the fact that we exist allows other people to … become increasingly more vocal, and not aggressively vocal, but increasingly more willing to take a hit for what they believe,” Say said. “There’s a niche for what we do, and I

think that’s an important one and that it contributes to the campus discussion.” Say added that constant challenges and scrutiny from the majority increase the need for Anscombe to defend its intellectual rigor. Say said he had concerns over the health of the University’s public forum in general. The dominance of campus orthodoxy is especially worrying, he said, because its antagonism toward countervailing opinions has discouraged a wider, pluralistic debate. Anscombe attempts to engage more with other viewpoints on campus, Say added. “I’ve been really trying to reach out, as president, to groups we disagree with, trying to open up avenues of dialogue,” he said. In the fall, Say invited several organizations to present and discuss alternative views on the issue of marriage. He was surprised when some of the groups invited reacted negatively, he added. “Right now, a lot of our fight is just saying, ‘Look, we can talk about these things,’ ” he said. Lily Gellman ’17, co-president of Princeton Pride Alliance and a LGBTQ Center staff member, said she sees Anscombe differently. “I’m sorry if people were rude to them and I don’t think that’s ideal, but I also can understand where that urge would come from,” she said. “There are lot of queer and trans kids at Princeton … and to have to engage with a group that’s violently opposed to these very important aspects of people’s lives — I can see why people would think that it would be counterproductive to even bother.” However, Gellman said she was still open to discussing issues with the Society. “I’m interested in having a variety of conversations on a variety of points of view because I

would never want to suppress anyone’s free speech,” Gellman said. Noting that the Pride Alliance and Palestine solidarity activists’ posters are often torn down across campus, she added that she understands the feeling of being shut down. “I would not want [the Anscombe Society’s] speech to be suppressed, because I know what that feels like and it doesn’t feel good,” Gellman said. Daniel Teehan ’17, co-editor of The Princeton Progressive, praised the shift nationally and on campus toward marriage equality and greater civil rights for people of different sexual orientations. He said the fact that non-heterosexual people no longer have to defend their sexual orientations is a good thing. “If [non-heterosexual people] don’t want to engage with people who they see as not believing in their rights or who they see as backwards in their sexual ethics, then I think that’s their prerogative,” Teehan said. Erik Massenzio ’17, an Anscombe member, said Anscombe was doing valuable and under-appreciated work in advocating for an alternative viewpoint. “[When it comes to gay marriage], a lot of people think there’s just no argument on the other side, and that all arguments on Anscombe’s side is completely irrational,” Massenzio said. “I think the community that it’s fostered is extremely successful. Just from my own personal experience, I came in not having an opinion and am very glad that I came in and now I have an opinion. It’s changed my life. I have looked at relationships in a different way, I feel like I’ve become a better friend in this way. I feel like my future romantic relationships are going to be much more healthy now.”

A more complete Princeton Preview Nicholas Wu columnist

eeing all of the newly admitted students walking around campus last week brought back a f lood of memories for me. I really had a wonderful experience at Princeton Preview back in April 2014. Indeed, I made some of my best friends there. It seems like it was not long ago that I was one of those starry-eyed prefrosh too, clutching my orange-and-black drawstring bag as if it contained the Holy Grail. It was certainly amusing to take a step back as a Preview Host and an Activities Fair volunteer to see what we all looked like as prefrosh. I noticed that one person even posted in the Class of 2019 Facebook group to ask, “Who else kept their Princeton plastic water bottle(s) from preview and plans to reuse them indefinitely?” I could sympathize with that person’s sentiments. After the temporary stint inside the Orange Bubble that is Princeton Preview, items as simple as a plastic water bottle marked with the Princeton shield or an orange-and-black drawstring bag remained our only tangible connection to that mystical place known as Princeton when we returned to our homes in the real world. With the Princeton Preview program, the University is successfully able to present an ideal version of Princeton to the outside world; however, Preview also masks the less glamorous aspects of life on campus, particularly with regard to the state of mental health. A person who attended Preview would come away with the impression that Princeton was an amazing place all of the time, without a fault in the world (other than the inf lation of prices of University apparel at the U-Store). The truth is that’s not the case, as evidenced by the number of initiatives on campus like the Princeton Perspective Project, Dear World and the numerous other mental health initiatives that aim to show that the campus is not entirely idyllic after all. I definitely expected to be challenged here academically, but I never expected to be confronted with mental health issues among my closest friends. Based on what I had seen at Preview, I had no inkling of the kinds of problems that lurked beneath the surface here at Princeton. The only image of Princeton that I had seen at Preview was the perfect one, with no forewarning of the potential travails to come. According to a 2008 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, nearly half of all college-aged people suffered from at least one kind of psychiatric disorder in the past year, but less than half of those suffering from some disorder seek out any form of treatment for that disorder. In the context of our campus, that phenomenon is indicative of a larger problem about addressing mental health problems. The 2012 COMBO III survey showed that almost half of all female students on campus and 37 percent of male students felt that they were sometimes or often depressed. There are programs on campus that are working towards establishing a safer, healthier campus for everyone like the Undergraduate Student Government Princeton Mental Health Initiative, but Preview remains one of the parts of the campus experience untouched by these. The campus’s mental health problems should be made transparent to the visiting prefrosh so that they can see that these problems exist and that there are the resources available to help them in the event that they are aff licted by these issues as students. This is not to say that Preview should become a gloomy time; on the contrary, it should still maintain its celebratory air — it should still attract students to come here, after all. Instead, it should change to ref lect a more accurate picture of Princeton as a place that is at once “the best damn place of all” and yet not a perfect wonderland. One way to improve awareness of these issues would be the publicizing of different mental health resources for students here on campus during Preview. An expanded Counseling and Psychological Services or Mental Health Initiative presence at the Preview Activities Fair might be a way of accomplishing that goal. Not only would those provide a more complete picture of life here on Princeton, but also from the view of a prospective student, those facilities are attractive insofar as they show the amount of help and care that the University could provide for its students. The University has repeatedly affirmed its dedication to mental health initiatives on campus — Preview can serve as a part of that effort as well. Nicholas Wu is a freshman from Grosse Pointe Shores, Mich. He can be reached at nmwu@ princeton.edu.

Opinion

Wednesday may 6, 2015

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Searching for meaning in the rubble Pujan Rai

guest contributor

n April 25, a 7.8-magnitude earthquake shook the tiny nation of Nepal, killing over 7,000 people and destroying precious cultural heritage sites. Even Mount Everest trembled as entire villages were flattened. As a Nepalese student, I am personally struggling to find an objective meaning behind this tragedy. The only objective truth about this disaster that I know is that moving tectonic plates caused the earthquake. Despite the lack of an objective meaning to this disaster, I think we can apply subjective meanings to it, drawing humble lessons. First, it is clear that the Nepalese government should implement stricter building regulations and Nepalese people should be encouraged to build safer houses. The majority of earthquakerelated deaths are due to building collapse and Nepal was no exception. Moreover, given the fact that Nepal lies in a seismically unstable region, the country should always be prepared for a disaster like this. However, we can also draw lessons from Nepal as a country; the Nepalese can choose to rally around this national tragedy to foster unity that has become a rare commodity in recent times. In the aftermath of a civil war from 1996 to 2006 and repeated failures to draft a timely constitution, the people of Nepal have become increasingly divided over ethno-linguistic, regional and political differences. This earthquake has stricken

the Nepalese regardless of their identity, caste, color, region and religion. This hour of common sorrow calls the Nepalese to be united as a nation. As Nepal looks forward to a slow and painful recovery, a united reconstruction, not division, should be the spirit of the nation. Inspiring news is emerging from the chaos. There are stories of the Nepalese helping each other under duress when their government failed to respond promptly. Nepal’s South Asian neighbors, who themselves are poor and prone to natural disasters, have been quick and generous to send aid to Nepal. In particular, India wasted no time in sending airplanes with relief material. In addition, the international community has been quick to help the hapless Nepalese government mount a relief operation. My former host family in Norway immediately contacted me to check that my family was okay and informed me that Norway was sending 30 million Norwegian kroners as relief aid to Nepal. A Norwegian rescue dog named Gere helped save the life of a woman trapped under the rubble for five days. Besides governments, companies like Coca Cola, Pepsi, Microsoft and Toyota have contributed to the relief fund. Google revived its Person Finder tool designed to post information about missing people in the disaster zone. Facebook launched a Safety Check tool that allowed people to let their family and friends know that they were safe amidst the chaos. Solidarity with Nepal was demonstrated even in the soccer field; Real Madrid Football Club donned a special jersey calling its fans to be united for Nepal.

vol. cxxxix

Such humane and sympathetic reactions from the rest of the world make me think that in the absence of an absolute meaning of this disaster, perhaps we can assign our own meaning to it. Perhaps this tragedy has meaning in the opportunities it offers. There is an opportunity for the Nepalese to help their fellow countrymen. There is an opportunity for the South Asian nations to help a devastated neighbor. Most importantly, at an individual level, there is an opportunity for any person geographically insulated from the events to help reduce the suffering of fellow humans reeling from the wrath of nature. This disaster has exposed the fragility and vulnerability of human life in a poor nation. However, this hour can also be transformed into an opportunity to demonstrate human compassion, resilience and unity. With this spirit, Princeton students, the Pace Center for Civic Engagement, the Office of Religious Life and Princeton in Asia are organizing events in solidarity with the victims of the calamity. A vigil was held in Murray-Dodge Hall and we have launched a fundraising campaign to support organizations providing relief on the ground in Nepal. While we didn’t feel the earth shaking here in Princeton, it is our human responsibility to help. I invite all readers to meditate on this tragedy as an opportunity of shared humanity and to contribute to these campaigns in any way you can. Pujan Rai is an economics major from Bhojpur, Nepal. He can be reached at prai@ princeton.edu

When Watching Game of Thrones Chloe Song ’17

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

Anna Mazarakis ’16 editor-in-chief

Matteo Kruijssen ’16 business manager

139th managing board news editor Jacob Donnelly ’17 opinion editor Benjamin Dinovelli ’16 sports editor Miles Hinson’17 street editor Lin King ’16 photography editor Yicheng Sun ’16 video editors Leora Haber ’16 chief copy editors Caroline Congdon ’17 Joyce Lee ’17 design editors Julia Johnstone’16 Austin Lee’16 web editor Clement Lee ’17 prox editor Rebekah Shoemake ’17 intersections editor Jarron McAllister ’16 associate news editors Ruby Shao ’17 Jasmine Wang ’17 associate opinion editors Jason Choe ’17 Shruthi Deivasigmani’16 associate sports editors Sydney Mandelbaum ’17 Tom Pham ’17 associate street editors Harrison Blackman ’17 Jennifer Shyue ’17 associate photography editors Natalia Chen ’16 Christopher Ferri ’18 Sewheat Haile ’17 associate chief copy editors Chamsi Hssaine ’16 Alexander Schindele-Murayama ’16 editorial board chair Jeffrey Leibenhaut ’16 Cartoons Editor Terry O’Shea ’16

NIGHT STAFF 5.5.15 senior copy editors Megan Laubach ’18 Winny Myat ’18

“Best interests of the University community” and sexual assault policies Marni Morse columnist

n the midst of formals and Lawnparties, I doubt many people have paid much attention to the round of changes to Princeton’s sexual assault policies the Council of the Princeton University Community finalized on Monday. These latest revisions primarily are in response to requested policy clarifications from the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the Department of Education. Most of these changes are uncontroversial and quite beneficial to ensuring the fairness of the process. Under the changes explained in a cover letter to CPUC, students who face sexual and nonsexual charges related to the same incident — such as both an alleged sexual assault charge along with a property damage claim — would have to undergo only one joint judicial process instead of two. In addition, the definition of stalking is expanded to be more inclusive and accurate, by extending the policy to all complainants and not just those involving intimate partners. Most importantly perhaps, rather than forcing every complaint to be taken through the University’s judicial process, the OCR is permitting more flexibility and a variety of elements can now be considered. While some of these factors seem unquestionably an improvement, like the “complainant’s articulated concerns”

for the University not to pursue an investigation, the vagueness of other listed aspects, such as the “best interests of the University community,” are quite concerning. According to the marked-up edits CPUC approved at Monday’s meeting, “OCR provides guidance indicating that we can balance the Complainant’s wishes along with other factors in determining whether to move forward with an investigation.” In response, the policy has thus been adjusted to permit the “complainant’s articulated concerns, the best interests of the University community, fair treatment of all individuals involved, and the University’s obligations under Title IX” to be considered in determining whether or not to move forward with an investigation and judgment. This list of criteria is spelled out three times in the new policy, in sections 1.9, 1.9.8, and 1.9.10. This new flexibility could erode the policy’s protections against the University simply making a determination short of a full investigation and judicial action that it is in the “University community’s” best interest not to pursue a case. Many factors could be considered in the University community’s best interest, and they often compete with what is in the best interest of the complainant. Justice to victims is best for the University community’s interests. Thus, going forward with investigating cases, so long as the com-

plainant wishes to do so, is ideal. Hopefully the administration agrees that investigating reports of sexual assaults and convening a judicial review when found applicable are best for the community and thus would generally go forward with a case even under this new flexible criterion, unless there is some extenuating circumstance. However, the potential exists for this new flexibility to be abused. Nationally, there is a trend for colleges to underreport sexual assault. Presumably, these schools believe underreporting renders them more desirable, safer campuses, even though this could be simply a sign of ignoring the problem. According to Vice Provost for Institutional Equity and Diversity Michele Minter at Monday’s CPUC meeting, all cases would still undergo a basic investigation before this decision would be made and then these listed criteria would be considered when determining whether or not to move forward. While this statement is somewhat comforting, it still doesn’t change the potential arbitrariness the current wording permits. As Vice Provost Minter highlights, the flexibility provided by considering all these factors can do much good — such as allowing the University to pursue a case in the best interest of the overall safety of the community despite the complainant’s desire for no action, such as if there was some

fear of a serial rapist, as studies show many college rapists are. But the possibility of good decisions under the new policy does not outweigh the opportunities for abuse. Simply spelling out in more explicit detail what the best interests of the University are in the actual policy can both help allow the positive outcomes and avoid possible missteps. So long as the decision to bring a judicial proceeding is going to be made in a closed-door setting, as it really must be due to privacy concerns, by people who are ultimately subjective like any other individual, the criteria for making this determination should be specified in writing. This will limit the potential subjectivity and provide more transparency to the entire process. The University community must really understand what information is being weighed when the decision is made to move a case forward or not. Spelling out exactly what factors should be considered is challenging, and doing so inherently limits flexibility in a potentially harmful way. However, it is possible to draft a clearer, more exhaustive list than “best interests of the University community,” and the benefits of this transparency outweigh the potential downfalls of slightly restricted flexibility. Marni Morse is a sophomore from Washington, D.C. She can be reached at mlmorse@princeton.edu.

The Daily Princetonian

Wednesday may 6, 2015

page 5

Pole vaulter Adam Bragg breaks Snub for senior attackman a shock school record with 5.42m mark especially considering statistics TRACK

Continued from page 6

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

about a quarter of a second slower than Ingalls. In the 1500, freshman Noah Kauppila demonstrated that he will be a mainstay in the team for years to come as he placed second, with a time of 3:47.36. The Tigers did not have much success in the other track events, with only sophomore Greg Leeper with a podium finish in the 400, but the Tigers dominated the field and relay events. The Tigers swept the 4x100 and 4x400 relays. The team of junior trio John Hill, Dré Nelson and Jake Scinto and freshman Carrington Akosa showed their unbelievable

pace as they finished the relay with a mark of 40.68. The 4x400 team of sophomores Bryant Switzer, Ray Mennin and Leeper along with freshman Josh Freeman finished with a time of 3:12.73. In the field events, the Tigers triumphed in three other events. Most notable was perhaps the long jump, as the top four finishers were all Tigers. Senior Tumi Akinlawon won with a mark of 7.13m, followed by Scinto, Leeper and junior Bryan Oslin. Sophomore Chris Cook was the top of a 1-2-3 finish for the shot put as he triumphed with a personal best mark of 18.48m. Senior Scott Rushton came second, followed by freshman Mitchel Charles. In the triple jump, senior Nana Owusu Nyantekyi

dominated as he finished with a best jump mark of 14.89m. The Tigers had impressive finishes in the discus throw as Charles came in fourth and Cook came in sixth. Even more impressive was the hammer throw, where the Tigers came 2-34, with sophomore Vic Youn placing second with a throw of 56.39m, followed by senior Jake Taylor and freshman Gabe Arcaro. After an impressive Princeton Open, both the men’s and women’s track and field teams will look toward the Heptagonal Championships hosted in Philadelphia this upcoming weekend on Saturday and Sunday before returning home the week after to host the ECAC Championships.

OPINION Continued from page 6

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

38 goals and 23 assists for 61 points, with 36 turnovers and a shooting percentage of 33 percent. And finally, Yale’s senior captain Conrad Oberbeck also finished with 38 goals and 23 assists for 61 points, but had 37 turnovers while shooting 37 percent. Seeing all these statistics and knowing that MacDonald was left out, one must assume that he had

far more turnovers or a lower shooting percentage than the other three. In fact, he was the best of all, with only 20 turnovers and shooting 40 percent. I would argue that MacDonald had the best season of the four, and the league voted that MacDonald and Molloy both had the best seasons in the Ivy League. When looking at the statistics alone, clearly he put up better numbers than Oberbeck or Donovan, but more than that, MacDonald was

always there when his team needed him. Nothing exemplifies this more than in his final game as a Tiger, when, down by two goals with a minute left against Yale, MacDonald netted the last goal of his career to give Princeton a fighting chance in the game. MacDonald absolutely was one of the most outstanding college lacrosse players this season, and it is shameful that the Tewaaraton committee did not give him a chance to be recognized for his season.

Men’s heavyweight wins at Content Cup, women’s open crew beats USC CREW

Continued from page 6

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

this season, the Tigers shaved down their margin, missing Columbia by 3.6 seconds while beating Delaware by over six seconds and Mercyhurst by more than 10. The 2V and 3V boats saw successes, beating Columbia by over five seconds and over three seconds, respectively. The Tigers finish the season with an 8-3 record, only losing to Cornell and Columbia this season, which should ensure that the Tigers head into sprints this coming weekend in the third seed. Women’s Open No. 8 women’s open crew concluded their regular sea-

son Sunday with a win over No. 15 USC on Lake Carnegie, setting the Tigers up perfectly to pursue their third consecutive Ivy League Championship. The Tigers won three of the four races on Sunday, with the Trojans winning the 2V race by 1.7 seconds. Two Tiger boats competed in the fours race, with the A and B boats finishing over 14 and 11 seconds ahead of the USC boats, respectively. The varsity eight boat finishes the season with an 8-2 record as the Tigers head towards conference championships, in which the defending champion Tigers should be seeded second behind Brown, which remains undefeated against Ivy League opponents. Women’s Lightweight Women’s lightweight crew

finished third at Sprints this past weekend, and will now start turning its focus to IRA National Championships on May 31. The second varsity eight and varsity four both placed in the grand finals, finishing fourth. The 2V finished less than nine seconds behind Wisconsin, while the four finished around 17 seconds behind Georgetown. The first varsity boat had faced off against defending national champion Radcliffe twice already this season, splitting tight races both times. Radcliffe took the title in the varsity eight grand final with Boston University right behind, with Radcliffe about seven seconds ahead of Princeton. The Tigers have a few more weeks to train and prepare for IRA Championships.

YICHENG SUN :: PHOTO EDITOR

Senior Mike MacDonald’s snub for the Tewaaraton is confusing, considering his superior season.

Sports

Wednesday may 6, 2015

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } TRACK AND FIELD

Tigers honor seniors at Princeton Open with exciting wins By Tom Pham associate sports editor

OLIVIA TOBEASON :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Both men’s and women’s track and field teams impressed at the Princeton Open, winning 10 events. LACROSSE OPINION

This past weekend, the men’s and women’s track and field teams honored their senior teammates at the Princeton Open, which was hosted over Friday and Saturday at Weaver Track Stadium. In the final regular season meet, the teams hoped to bid farewell to their seniors with some strong performances as well as prepare for the upcoming postseason events. The men’s and women’s teams combined for 10 victories over the weekend, three for the women’s team and seven for the men’s teams, with an especially impressive performance from junior Adam Bragg who not only comfortably won the pole vault event, but also set a school record. In the women’s events, junior Cecilia Barowski had a fine day. She triumphed in the elite 800, finishing with a time of 2:07.23. Senior Kim Mackay came in fourth, while freshman Ashley Forte set her personal best and placed sixth. Barowski also set her personal best in the 400, finishing in second place with a time of 54.20.

Although she did not compete in the elite 800, sophomore Katie Hanss perhaps should have, finishing the 800 in second place with a time that would have placed her in the top 10 of the elite 800. The Tigers’ two other wins also came in track events, as sophomore Nicole Marvin came out victorious in the 5K followed by freshman Melissa Reed, who completed the 1-2 finish for the Tigers in the event. Sophomore Jessica Ackerman wrapped up the first-place finishes for the Tigers on Saturday, as she was the first finisher in a 1-2-3 finish in the 1500, followed by freshman Delaney Miller and senior Gina Talt. All three competitors had competed in the elite 1500 event on Friday but were beaten out by much tougher competition, although sophomore Ally Markovich was able to finish fourth and second her personal best. There were other solid finishes in the track events as senior Joanna Anyanwu impressed, finishing third in the 100 before finishing eighth in the 200 and setting her personal best in both races. Junior Meghan

McMullin finished second in the 400 hurdles, losing out by five-hundredths of a second to the eventual winner. Although the field and relay events did not bring home any silverware for the Tigers, there were solid performances all around, including from junior Taylor Morgan who gained a personal record in the shot put with a mark of 12.58m on her final attempt. The Tigers did have podium finishes in the 4x100 and the 4x400 as well. In the men’s events, Bragg’s performance was the main story of the Princeton Open, breaking the Tigers’ school record in the pole vault with an impressive mark of 5.42m. Bragg also easily cruised past his opponents, as the runner-up finished 0.21m behind Bragg. The Tigers were impressive in both the elite 800 and 1500 events, with a 1-3 finish in the 800 and a second-place finish in the 1500. Freshman Joshua Ingalls set his personal best as he came out victorious in the 800, finishing with a time of 1:49.36. Senior Bradley Paternostro had to accept a third-place finish despite coming in See TRACK page 5

MEN’S & WOMEN’S CREW

MacDonald deserves Tewaaraton finalist spot after great season By Grant Keating staff writer

The Tewaaraton Award is often referred to as the Heisman Trophy of lacrosse, and is “given annually to the most outstanding American college lacrosse player.” This past week, senior attackman Mike MacDonald was named Co-Ivy League Player of the Year with Brown attackman Dylan Molloy. MacDonald won the award over four other Ivy League players (including Molloy), who were all named Tewaaraton Finalists. MacDonald was not. After a one-goal loss to Yale in the Ivy League Championship and not receiving an atlarge bid to the NCAA tournament, the Princeton men’s lacrosse season has come to an end. And while it was not the ending that that they wanted, it certainly does not diminish MacDonald’s record-shattering season. MacDonald finished the season with 48 goals, tied for 13th alltime in the Ivy, and 30 assists through 15 games, good for 78 points. MacDonald broke the single-season point record with his show and has the second-most goals in a season in school history. To put his stats into perspective, MacDonald finished fourth in points per game for all of Division I lacrosse and fifth in goals per game. He broke countless school re-

cords. For example, he is the only Princeton player to ever have at least 40 goals and 20 assists, and his statistics compare favorably to past Princeton stars and Tewaaraton finalists Tom Schreiber ‘14 and Ryan Boyle ‘04. Finalists, not nominees. When put in perspective, many began asking why MacDonald was not nominated. One could argue that MacDonald had an easier schedule than some of his ACC counterparts who were nominated. That is true to a degree. Or you could argue that his stats are inflated by playing attack and Princeton’s up-tempo offensive style. That is possible, as only Brown played faster offensively than Princeton. But even with these concessions, let’s take a look at MacDonald’s statistics compared just to the Ivy League attackmen who were nominated for the Tewaaraton to understand why they were nominated over him. Dylan Molloy is the most understandable case. As the Co-Ivy League Player of the Year, he finished with 59 goals and 30 assists for 89 points, leading the league although he had 42 turnovers and shot just 30 percent in Brown’s transition-based up-tempo offense. Joining Molloy on the nominations list was Matt Donovan, Cornell’s senior attackman who finished with See OPINION page 5

PRINCETONIAN FILE PHOTO

Although the lightweight teams could not claim victories this weekend, the men’s heavyweight and women’s open teams were victorious.

After impressive weekend, crew enters postseason with optimism By Sydney Mandelbaum associate sports editor

Men’s Heavyweight Last Saturday, men’s heavyweight crew competed against Brown in the Content Cup, winning for the second year in a row. The No. 4-ranked Tigers came from behind in the final 500 meters to pass the

eighth-ranked Bears and finish .7 seconds ahead of Brown, leaving the Tigers with an 8-1 overall record, 5-1 in the Ivy League. The varsity boat, the 2V boat and the 3V won their races against Brown, with the second boat winning by over four seconds to conclude an undefeated season and the third boat winning

by about six seconds and concluding the regular season with a 7-1 record. Brown boats won both the 4V and 5V races by about three seconds. With the victory, the Tigers will likely enter the Eastern Sprints on May 17 seeded second only to Yale, who the Tigers fell to the weekend before in their

only loss this season. Men’s Lightweight While heavyweight crew faced off against Brown, the No. 2 lightweight team hosted Delaware, No. 3 Columbia and Mercyhurst, finishing in second place. After losing to the Lions by over nine seconds earlier See CREW page 5

Tweet of the day

Inside

‘I have worn a dress and heels for each of the past 4 days. This goes against my code. Breaking all kinds of soccer girl rules.’

Read about how the men’s and women’s track and field teams fared last weekend. SPORTS PAGE 5

‘Prince’ Sports is on Twitter! Follow us at

Hannah Winner, Junior Goalkeeper on women’s soccer

www.twitter.com/princesports

for live news and reports!