May 11, 2018 by The Daily Princetonian

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Friday May 11, 2018 vol. CXLII no. 60

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

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

U . A F FA I R S

Workers’ testimonies reveal mistreatment, sexual misconduct By Ivy Truong Assistant News Editor

IVY TRUONG :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Students and YDS members hold signs at the town hall. S T U D E N T A F FA I R S

On Wednesday, May 9, campus staff members shared testimonies of job uncertainty, low wages, and sexual harassment during a town hall organized by the Young Democratic Socialists and Service Employees International Union, Local 175. The town hall comes in the lead-up to contract negotiations in June. “These are the people that clean buildings, feed you, and generally give you a home feeling,” SEIU

president Thomas Parker said to the students to kick off the testimonies. Many worker testimonies — some anonymous because of fear of retaliation — revealed that working at the University is a double-edged sword. “Working for Princeton is a privilege,” Kathy Mikos, who works in Dining Services, explained. “But there’s a dark side also.” For many of the workers who testified, this “dark side” includes intimidation by the management, See YDS page 3

U . A F FA I R S

ICC presidents combat Committee on Sexual Misconduct declining membership at releases fourth annual report sign-in eating clubs Staff Writer

According to the Interclub Council, the percentage of people choosing to join non-selective, “signin” eating clubs has been declining. This year, 325 sophomores participated in the first round of the sign-in process, a 14 percent decline from the spring of 2017. The Daily Princetonian spoke with both the current and previous presidents of the ICC to find out more about the over-

all decline in membership among the five sign-in clubs. Both the current president Hannah Paynter ’19 and former president Matthew Lucas ’18 said the ICC is taking active measures to reverse the trend. “There are more and more concentrated efforts to expand the transparency of the eating clubs and to champion diversity and inclusion,” said Paynter, president of the ICC and president of Cloister Inn. “We want the clubs to not just be an option for stuSee ICC page 4

ACADEMICS

COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Philosophers debate whether businesses can deny service to gay people By Sarah Warman Hirschfield Associate News and Video Editor

On Wednesday, five philosophers debated where to draw the line between religious liberty and discrimination, using the high-profile pending Supreme Court case Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission as a main example. The case concerns the right of a business to refuse services based on the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and free exercise of religion. When Jack Phillips, the owner of a cake shop in Colorado, refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple due to his Christian beliefs, the couple said it was discrimination. Phillips maintained that baking a cake is an act of creative expression. A court held oral arguments last year and will likely reach a decision by the end of its term. “[The decision] could come out at any moment,” said Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, who moder-

In Opinion

ated the talk. Last year, George and Sherif Girgis ’08 co-wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times arguing in favor of the shop owner’s right to deny the couple service. As a longtime advocate of traditional marriage, George, along with panelists Girgis and Ryan T. Anderson ’04, co-authored the book “What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense.” John Corvino, a philosophy professor at Wayne State University, also known and self-described as the “Gay Moralist,” started the talk by addressing his new book, “Debating Religious Liberty and Discrimination.” He coauthored the book with fellow panelists Anderson and Girgis. “People are sometimes surprised to hear me refer to [Anderson and Girgis] as my friends. They say, ‘How can you, as a LGBT rights advocate and a gay man yourself, be friends with Anderson and Girgis?’” Corvino began. “The answer to the question is really quite simple: I drink.” Corvino said that he beSee MARRIAGE page 4

Head Opinion Editor emeritus Nicholas Wu encourages us to reflect on the critical junctures that shape one’s experience at Princeton, and a guest contributor explores the merits of motherhood as a campaign tool. PAGE 6

The Faculty-Student Advisory Committee on Sexual Misconduct gathered feedback from students and faculty to draft the report.

By Allie Spensley Associate News Editor

The Faculty-Student Advisory Committee on Sexual Misconduct released its fourth annual set of University policy recommendations on Thursday morning. This year’s 22-page report is larger and more extensive than reports from past years — reflecting the committee’s new tactics to gather more widespread sources of input — and touches on sexual misconduct policies including training, transparency, penalties, and power differentials. Throughout the academic year, the committee gathered feedback from a variety of sources on campus, including from We Speak survey data, smaller groups such as the Undergraduate Student Life Committee, and opinion pieces in The Daily Princetonian. The committee received written input from students and faculty and held town hall meetings where members of the University community could voice their concerns about current sexual misconduct policies. “The committee has made a set of recommendations every year, but they have typically been based more on the We Speak survey data or on other factors around campus,” said Vice Provost for Institutional

Equity and Diversity Michele Minter, one of the committee’s two co-chairs. “The committee has never used a process like this year’s, which involved holding open meetings and actively soliciting input from the community. This was an intensive process of collecting information.” Minter co-chairs the Faculty-Student Committee with psychology professor Nicole Shelton. The 10-person committee serves as an advisory body to the University president and provost, focusing on Title IX and Title IX-related sex discrimination and sexual misconduct policies and procedures. The group also includes Kathleen Deignan, the dean of undergraduate students; Jacqueline DeitchStackhouse, director of the Sexual Harassment/Assault, Advising, Resources, and Education office; and two professors, two graduate students, and two undergraduates. The committee’s report is sent to President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 and Provost Deborah Prentice. In addition, specific recommendations call for a number of University offices — the Dean of the Faculty, Human Resources, as well as the Title IX office itself — to discuss and potentially implement suggested changes. The report addressed rela-

Today on Campus 2:00 p.m.: Students in the course MUS214: Projects in Vocal Performance present a final recital of 19th–20th century French songs by Fauré, Debussy, Duparc, and others. Taplin Auditorium in Fine Hall

See REPORT page 5

WEATHER

By Nick Shashkini

tionships between individuals of different University status, such as faculty members and students. Rules for these relationships do not fall under the Title IX office, but under other University policies such as the Consensual Relations with Students Policy, a part of the Rules and Procedures for the Faculty. Current policy states that “no faculty member, researcher, graduate student, visiting student, or undergraduate course assistant” may initiate a romantic or sexual relationship with a student who is subject to their academic supervision or evaluation. Earlier this academic year, the ‘Prince’ reported how Title IX investigations found that electrical engineering professor Sergio Verdú was guilty of sexually harassing his advisee, violating the University’s policy on sex discrimination and sexual misconduct. The Faculty-Student Advisory Committee on Sexual Misconduct received feedback from some members of the University community that all relationships between individuals where a power differential exists should be defined as sexual misconduct, even if the relationship is consensual. The report states that faculty, staff, and graduate students have the right to consensual relationships even where a power differential is present, but notes that consent can be hard to establish in these situations and can evolve into sexual misconduct. “We were not prepared to take away from people their right to make their own decisions about their relationships or to define their relationships. We felt that personal agency was important,” Minter said. “The Title IX Policy addresses unwelcome conduct. So we were not willing to tell someone that the relationship they felt was welcome, and that they chose to be in, was unwelcome.” Some recommendations, such as redesigning faculty training and changing the content of annual reports on disciplinary outcomes, can go into effect as soon as the beginning of next school year,

HIGH

73˚

LOW

53˚

Mostly sunny chance of rain:

10 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Friday May 11, 2018

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

Kornegay: Nowadays we’re part of a business, not a family YDS

Continued from page 1

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

favoritism, being overworked, and low wages. One testimony which dealt with sexual harassment recounted two Title IX cases that a worker brought forward against two of her managers. Only the second of the two cases had the manager dismissed. The testimony was read by a YDS member to preserve anonymity. In the first case, the manager was inappropriately touching, hugging, and kissing the worker. But, despite opening a Title IX investigation, the case against the manager was dismissed and the worker was assigned to work under him for Reunions that same year. The second Title IX case involved the worker being inappropriately addressed by someone who she believed acted knowing her previous harasser got off without punishment. On advice of a legal defense fund, she recorded his inappropriate behavior, and her Title IX suit was successful. Many workers also spoke about how the culture of the University — at least among workers — has changed significantly over the decades. Al Kornegay, a Building Services worker, recalled that when he was hired 38 years ago, he was a part of

the “University family.” “Nowadays you’re not part of the family; you’re part of a business,” he said. SEIU vice president Rich Wilder echoed these remarks, saying that working at the University is now simply a place where a worker can “punch in and punch out.” In another testimony, also read by a member of YDS to preserve anonymity, an employee said she feels like she “ceases to be a real person” when she puts on her uniform. The worker doesn’t look forward to going to work daily. She specifically spoke about the lack of appreciation and acknowledgement for her job, which she has been doing for 32 years. She noted the importance of the work that she and her coworkers do. “This place would fold [without us],” the testimony read. Some of the testimonies also lamented the lack of resources that the University provides them. One Building Services worker who introduced himself as Vincent talked specifically about the lack of accommodations provided to essential workers during snowstorms in March 2017, when employees were made to sleep on cots in Frist Campus Center. He described the accommodations as akin to being “packed together like sardines.”

“We’re not animals,” he said. “We’re workers.” He noted that having to stay overnight at the University wasn’t a problem. The problem was that the University couldn’t accommodate essential workers with a proper place to sleep. One custodian who wrote an anonymous testimony said that, for custodians, accommodations during severe weather conditions have been particularly horrible. Often, they have no accommodations or toiletries, as outlined by their union contract. Instead, they would sleep in their car, truck, or even a corner in a building. The Daily Princetonian has previously reported on inadequate housing at the University in preparation for storms, as well as a change in housing for such storms from the previous year. Another worker with Building Services, who introduced himself as Erik, said that his team is understaffed. He said he is particularly worried at the prospect of working on the Lake Campus expansion while understaffed. “This is a great university, but the expansion that’s going on here — 1.5 million square feet of building space has been built — and they’ve only increased our staff from six to eight people,” he said. Intimidation and bias within management were

also key issues that were brought up during the event. Kornegay said that, as a known “union troublemaker,” he has been involved in multiple confrontations with management where he felt that he was disrespected. In one situation, he was allegedly threatened with violence. “You can’t just sit there and yell at us and cuss at us and threaten us with violence,” he said. “I had an incident where a manager threatened to punch me out. But when you go to Human Resources, he makes an excuse,” he said. Dining Services worker Marie Daniel, known affectionately as “Momma Marie,” spoke about the bias from management during evaluations where employees are rated on their performance at the end of each year. She said she finds that evaluations are not based on performance as much as they are

on the manager’s personal feelings towards a worker. “If you’re not their [management’s] friend, they try to put you down,” she said. “It hurts.” A worker in an anonymous testimony said that, in her building, tables and surfaces can be wiped down, but managers sometimes replace the dust on the surfaces in order to give workers a poor evaluation. Despite the obstacles that they go through, many workers at the event expressed gratefulness for the support of the students. Parker described the support as “inspiring” for the staff, and many workers who gave testimonies at the event often emphasized the need for students to support them when negotiations begin. “I believe that from the first brick laid here, labor’s been here, labor is here, we are labor,” Wilder added.

IVY TRUONG :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Campus staff members shared testimony of job uncertainty, low wages, and sexual harassment.

IVY TRUONG :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Approximately 50 students attended the event.

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Friday May 11, 2018

Anderson: Religious liberty is as American as apple pie. But so too is persecution and discrimination. MARRIAGE Continued from page 1

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

lieves serious public questions deserve a thoughtful public dialogue, and that this dialogue happens best through friendship. Regarding the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, he explained the challenges associated with upholding a variety of values. It is understandable that the gay couple would not like to hear that they cannot purchase a wedding cake, he said. At the same time, it is also understandable that Phillips, the owner, wanted to to conduct his business in a way that ref lects his values. Corvino reminded the audience that, in order to be in violation of Colorado’s law, Philips needed to have refused service on the basis of the customer’s sexual orientation. However, Phillips was willing to sell the couple other baked goods — just not a wedding cake. Corvino also reminded the crowd that the debate is not just about cakes, but about equal access in the public sphere. Anderson, the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and

the founder and editor of the publication Public Discourse, spoke next. “Religious liberty is as American as apple pie. But so too is persecution and discrimination,” he said. “What we’re now seeing in the United States is a form of progressive puritanism: people who have fought for the freedom to live their lives according to their deepest convictions, who are now using the law and the government to try to coerce other people into affirming their core convictions,” he said. Anderson argued that the Masterpiece Cakeshop case bears similarity to the debate over abortion, since women can have right to an abortion, but physicians can simultaneously have a right to refuse to perform one. Anti-gay bigotry is wrong, Anderson said, but this is not a case of anti-gay bigotry. He ended by quoting Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. “‘Tolerance is essential in a free society.’ It seems to me that the state, in its position here, has neither been tolerant nor respectful of Mr. Phillips’ religious beliefs,” Anderson said. Christopher Tollefsen, a philosophy professor at the

University of South Carolina, spoke next, arguing in support of the baker. Tollefsen saw the primary question as determining when it is permissible for the state to coerce an individual against their conscience. “The state has very little epistemic authority to make determinations about the truth about this or that religion, or the legitimacy of the demands made by this or that religion,” he said. “Lacking such authority, [the state] needs to exercise restraint with regard to a number of judgments that private citizens are licensed to make.” Kevin Vallier, an associate philosophy professor at Bowling Green State University, talked about “Debating Religious Liberty and Discrimination,” the new book written by Corvino, Anderson, and Girgis. Discussing Corvino’s argument, Vallier noted that upgrading secular exemptions to religious exemptions in size and scope would produce a “swiss cheese legal system.” He suggested a moderately libertarian position. Instead of granting more exemptions, he recommended limiting government action to begin with. His second criticism centered on Corvino’s equation

of refusals with control and interference. The two are not the same, Vallier argued, and Corvino’s equation produces unsettling conclusions. “If a boss fails to give an employee a raise, he has imposed a pay cut on her,” he said. Vallier went on to discuss concerns he had with Anderson and Girgis’ argument. The problem, Vallier said, is that it presumes that supernatural goods do not override natural goods. Discussing new natural law theory, Vallier pointed to a conf lict between the good of religion and the supernatural. “[The] majority of new natural law theorists are Catholic,” he said. “Jews and Muslims do not enjoy the eucharist, and that is a spectacular loss. Catholics enjoy special access to the sacraments.” If we acknowledge supernatural goods case, Vallier said, Anderson and Girgis’ argument seems severely compromised. Girgis, a graduate student in philosophy at the University, responded to Vallier. He noted that people cannot act for the sake of supernatural goods, only for what they have access to, which are natural goods, and that restricting religious liberty means doing direct harm to the conditions

for some people’s f lourishing. Responding to Tollefsen, Girgis said that though it is possible to determine that a state is not malicious and promotes a good, this is not the end of the discussion. He said that it is necessary to look at those affected by the law. “They could be in a situation in which they have to pay a fine or do something contrary to their conscience,” he said. In some cases, a person is forced to pick between his integrity and a paying a fine, according to Girgis. “There’s some reason to give you an exception,” he said, “even if your underlying belief is mistaken.” He noted that if people only needed to grant exemptions for conscious claims they agreed with, they would not have to grant exemptions at all. “Self-determination is at stake all the time,” he added. Girgis concluded by speaking to the importance of integrity. The lecture, “A License to Discriminate? Masterpiece Cakeshop, The First Amendment, and Antidiscrimination Law,” took place on Wednesday, May 9, 2018, at 4:30 p.m. in Lewis Library 120. It was a part of the James Madison Program’s series, “An America’s Founding and Future Lecture.”

SARAH WARMAN HIRSCHFIELD :: THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

Five philosophers debated where to draw the line between religious freedom and discrimination.

Lucas: There’s no difference between bicker and sign-in clubs ICC

Continued from page 1

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

dents, but to be available to everyone.” Paynter also noted there are valuable aspects of sign-in clubs that many students may be unaware of. She said that increased awareness of what makes the clubs great will help students make more informed decisions about signing into a club. To expand awareness, Paynter said that a new marketing campaign and Instagram page will be launched in the fall. “We really want people to feel that they’re prepared to make a choice after Intersession,” she said. “Awareness is the key to getting things moving” said Nivanthi Karunaratne ‘18, a member of Colonial Club. She said she chose to

sign into Colonial because she liked the friendly atmosphere, and the fact that there wasn’t pressure to drink, or not to drink. Paynter and Lucas expressed concerns that there is bias against the sign-in clubs among the student body. They said that perceptions of the sign-in clubs as second tier options may have played a part in the decline in membership between 2017 and 2018. Colonial Club president Kimberly Peterson ’19 declined to comment. Quadrangle Club president Sarah Spergel ’19, Terrace Club president Liz Yu ’19, and Charter Club president Conor O’Brien ’19 did not respond to requests for comment. “There is definitely a damaging rhetoric on Princeton’s campus that paints the sign-in clubs

as second tier choices, when that’s not the reality,” Paynter said. “Each and every club offers extraordinary opportunities for students across campus to come and grab a meal with students they may not have already met, and feel supported and engaged in a whole slew of great things that the clubs provide,” Paynter said. Lucas also pointed to the fact that in 2011, the creation of Cannon Dial Elm Club tipped the balance in favor of Bicker clubs. With the addition of Cannon, six of the 11 clubs are Bicker. Lucas said that the shift in balance was not necessarily a bad thing, but that it may have changed how students make decisions about which clubs to join. Lucas emphasized that the trend is “concerning” to the Street as a whole. “There’s no difference

between the Bicker and sign-in clubs. From my time here, just the fact that there’s this huge push for Bicker as an experience, it kind of dominates everyone’s conversations,” Paynter said. “What I would say to someone is that ultimately an eating club has a lot more to offer than exclusivity,” Karunaratne said. “Our member events are really great, and we’re not an exclusive club by any means.” “People are more likely to say ‘what club are you bickering?,’ Paynter said. “But the reality is that the 70 percent of the student body that are in eating clubs aren’t all in Bicker clubs.” The problem of declining membership has been on the ICC’s radar for several years. Lucas said the issue was

a big topic that came up during his very first meeting as ICC president, in late 2016. “There’s more that could be done, but I don’t think that it’s anyone’s fault,” Lucas said. “There’s no clear thing that we can point to and say ‘this is bad’. The trend emerged as a result of choices people make.” As of the spring of 2018, 77 percent of sophomores either bickered or signed into a club, which shows that eating clubs are still overwhelmingly popular venues on campus overall. “All of the clubs recognize that the open clubs are important to the Street functioning the way it does overall. There’s a strong sense that we’re all in it together, so it’s in everyone’s best interests to have strong and viable options,” he said.

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.

Friday May 11, 2018

The Daily Princetonian

page 5

Some recommendations could go into effect by next school year REPORT

Continued from page 1

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

according to Minter. Recommendations regarding faculty training include an expanded orientation for new faculty, redesigned faculty and staff training, “booster” training sessions within departments, and supplemental training for department chairs and directors of graduate studies. Other, more complicated issues will require a longer period of discussion over the next academic year. “[The recommendations] are going to require thought, in some cases really significant thought before decisions can be made about whether they could be implemented,” Minter said. “Some of them involve complicated topics where figuring out exactly what is feasible will still take a lot of work.” The report also addresses conflict of interest issues, acknowledging that feedback

from the University community reflected concern and confusion over the current policy. The committee recommends orientation and sexual misconduct training sessions that will make current procedures more explicit. In a series of further recommendations, the report speaks to a “desire for greater clarity” regarding penalty and appeal processes for sexual misconduct cases. The committee confirms that in cases involving faculty, factors such as rank, seniority, and grant funding are not considered in penalty decisions. The report also addresses the role of the dean of the faculty, who is the sole administrator who determines sanctions for a faculty member found responsible for violating sexual misconduct policy. In response to suggestions that a larger group decide sanctions, the report states a number of reasons to keep the process limited: the necessities of extensive training,

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act confidentiality policy, maintaining privacy on a small campus, and the time-consuming nature of making such decisions. The report notes that while the dean of the faculty is currently permitted to informally consult with other administrators during the decisionmaking process, the University should consider formalizing these interactions. Further recommendations deal with questions from the community about the level of transparency in sexual misconduct procedures. Transparency is important, but can come into conflict with maintaining individuals’ privacy. “We got a lot of questions and concerns related to transparency. It’s quite a complicated topic, so there was no one point of view,” Minter explained. Under current policy, the full penalty for a respondent found responsible for sexual misconduct is not shared

with the complainant in the case. The report recommends the University should consider creating new protocol for informing the complainant about the respondent’s full penalty. Other recommendations related to transparency included appropriately expanding the number of people who receive information about a given sexual misconduct case, providing the University community with more details on the types and consequences of sexual misconduct that have occurred on campus, and creating a more centralized and standardized backgroundcheck process. To arrive at these recommendations, the committee worked with the Offices of the General Counsel, Human Resources, and the Dean of the Faculty, as well as the SHARE Office, Minter said. “We thought a lot about the University’s values,” Minter said. “[We] tried to come up with recommendations that

Like sports? Write for the sports section! Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

we thought were appropriate, and to write something that reflected why these topics are so complex.” Because these policies are not under the purview of the committee, the report recommends that the Faculty Advisory Committee on Policy increase the clarity regarding alleged violations of the consensual relationship policy, the distinction between these matters and sexual misconduct, and how investigations are conducted. The report concludes with an invitation for further feedback. Suggestions to the committee can be sent to facultystudentcommittee @ princeton.edu. “We were very grateful for all of the input that we received,” Minter added. “These are emotional and challenging issues for everyone to be thinking about, but what we most want is for the campus to be a safe place and one where people are really able to thrive.”

Opinion

Friday May 11, 2018

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Why we need more women like Cardi B

Patricia Hoyos

Guest Contributor

e need more women like Cardi B. The first solo female rapper to top the Billboard 100 in 19 years, she has become a rare voice who is helping redefine #MeToo in entertainment sectors like hip-hop and the adult entertainment business. In those industries, the perception of gender power imbalance is inflated, which has been found to increase the likelihood of sexual assault by those in power. Cardi B is a rare representative for women in those industries who view themselves as taking control of their sexuality, although society may deem their occupations powerless. To shift the dominating perception of women having less power in those industries, we need more women like Cardi. In cases where women’s experiences are not given the gravitas they deserve, a perception of gender power imbalance is often observed. For example, entertainment industries like Hollywood have been historically male-dominated. However, the recent surge of feminist movements in Hollywood and the #MeToo movement have empowered women in the industry. The long list of men who have been accused of sexual misconduct in Hollywood since last October is a testament of what can happen when women are empowered to voice their experiences. The occurrences in Hollywood corroborate the finding of a 1994 study, which found that the perception of power asymmetries predicts the likelihood of sexual harassment. As women have begun to feel empowered through movements like #MeToo, victims have begun to voice their experiences of sexual harassment. Other men and women became allies in what became a movement that ultimately shifted the perception of gender imbalance in the industry. So one of the most effective methods in changing the perception of power imbalance in Hollywood has been through the projection of women’s voices in the business.

While the entertainment industry has made incredible progress, other sectors of the entertainment industry that are considered to sexualize women more, such as the hiphop industry or the adult entertainment industry, have yet to make a breakthrough. Like Hollywood, the hiphop and adult entertainment industries have been historically plagued with gender imbalance and the disregard of sexual misconduct towards women. Those industries also have an exacerbated image of objectifying women and perpetuating male dominance. An issue arises when people think of women who are in the hip-hop or adult entertainment industries as willingly placing themselves in a realm of gender power imbalance and sexual objectification. Women in the adult entertainment industry have been portrayed as instruments of male enjoyment and have been deprived of power in the media. This perpetuates the myth that “women who get assaulted ask for it.” The lessons learned from the empowerment of women’s voices in Hollywood should be applied to debunk the perception of power imbalance in other industries where women

are still marginalized. Fortunately, women in the hip-hop and adult entertainment industries have found representation in Cardi B, who openly speaks about her experiences as a stripper and a female rapper in an industry that is still perceived to be male-dominated. In a recent interview with Cosmopolitan, Cardi B pointed out the duality of the #MeToo movement in industries where sexuality is commercially emphasized and a historically gendered power imbalance exists. She stated that the validity of a woman’s statement is devalued if she participates in these industries because there is a societal perception that she is voluntarily exploiting herself in a male-dominated system. In her music, Cardi explains that women who work in these industries do not think they are serving men, but are rather expressing autonomy and ownership over their bodies and their sexuality. To Cardi, women in those industries are revolutionizing feminism by exercising their autonomy and often acquiring a degree of economic independence. She recalls her initial reason to start stripping was to get out of an abusive relationship. In

her interview, she emphasizes that the women dancing at a strip club are human beings, and often recalls that when she used to be a stripper, she used to feel powerful, rather than subordinate to men. Just as has been done in Hollywood, being empathetic of and projecting the voices of women who represent the feminine perspective in diverse social niches must be bolstered. Their experiences are instrumental to furthering gender equality by validating their experiences and reducing crimes that arise from perceptions of imbalance. Women like Cardi B are offering much-needed insight into the roles of women in the hip-hop and adult entertainment businesses. However, Cardi B is one of the few representatives of women in those industries, and women’s experiences in those spheres are still stigmatized. Without more women like Cardi B, the feminine perspective is not emphasized as much as it should be and the perception of gender imbalance and its effects risks perpetuation. Patricia Hoyos is a senior from Fairview, N.J. She can be reached at phoyos@princeton.edu.

Rachel Lurie

uring this midterm elections campaign season, many female candidates have used their status as mothers to defend their policy stances and appeal to voters. Some argue that this is detrimental to gender equality, because it plays into the idea that women must justify their leadership in some way. But while using motherhood as a campaign strategy may play into gender norms in the short term, it will be advantageous over the long term in the fight for gender equality. Several female candidates are appealing to motherhood in their campaign pitches. Kelda Roys, a candidate for governor of Wisconsin, has expressed the motivation she felt to increase gun control at hearing her 3-year-old daughter recount an active-shooter drill at preschool. Betsy Dirksen Londrigan, an Illinois candidate for Congress, explained that she decided to run after the House passed legislation directed toward repealing Obamacare, a policy impor-

editor-in-chief

Marcia Brown ’19 business manager

Ryan Gizzie ’19

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

142ND MANAGING BOARD managing editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Claire Lee ’19 head news editor Claire Thornton ’19 associate news editors Allie Spensley ’20 Audrey Spensley ’20 Ariel Chen ’20 associate news and film editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 head opinion editor Emily Erdos ’19 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Jon Ort ’21 head sports editors David Xin ’19 Chris Murphy ’20 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Jack Graham ’20 head street editors Danielle Hoffman ’20 Lyric Perot ’20 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20 COURTESY OF FLICKR COMMONS

“Women like Cardi B are offering much-needed insight into the roles of women in the hip-hop and adult entertainment business.”

Campaigning on motherhood promotes gender equality Guest Contributor

vol. cxlii

tant to her because of her son’s serious illness. The use of motherhood as a political tool is not new. But while Republican female candidates have largely adhered to conventional symbols of motherhood used in the past, Democratic candidates are now taking a more radical approach, staging campaign videos in which they breastfeed their infants on camera. According to political consultant Margie Omero, this is a response, in part, to the #MeToo movement’s demand that women should be able to express their realities without shame. Though this new form of communicating motherhood may break from gender norms, political scientist Jill S. Greenlee argues that employing motherhood as a tactic at all is counterproductive for gender equality. “The reliance on motherhood to identify women’s political interests or to justify their concerns serves only to more deeply entrench the notion that women’s political claims must be legitimized in some fashion,” she writes. What Greenlee does not rec-

ognize is that change takes time. Using motherhood as a campaign tactic will be advantageous overall in the fight for gender equality. A study by psychologists Hannah Riley Bowles and Linda Babcock showed that women are rewarded in the workplace when they play into gender stereotypes and are punished when they deviate from them. Women who negotiated for higher compensation by citing their concern for workplace relationships both raised their pay and increased the willingness of their evaluators to work with them. On the other hand, those who mentioned outside job offers in their negotiations, appearing less communal, received higher pay but faced social disapproval. Female politicians who play into the gender stereotype of motherhood are likely to be rewarded by voters, raising their political payoff. There are of course other strategies that might work to inspire voters. But by capitalizing on the norm of motherhood, female politicians are also apt to receive greater approval from their political peers once elect-

ed. This will make them more effective on the job, enhance their power, and increase their likelihood of reelection. As more women are elected and re-elected, they will “break the glass ceiling” by setting a greater precedent for female political power. This will lead to the election of even more female politicians. There is much room for growth: currently, only 20 percent of U.S. Congress seats are occupied by women. Greater female political power will also lower the barriers that deter some women from even running. Outspoken Senator Tammy Duckworth successfully fought for infants to be allowed on the Senate floor, a change that will improve the ability of young mothers to serve. When more women are elected, there are likely to be more Tammy Duckworths. There is also likely to be greater acceptance for the changes these women champion. The more women that hold political office, the more that societal notions of traditional gender roles will change. And the more that public officials lower the obstacles inhibiting

associate chief copy editors Marina Latif ’19 Arthur Mateos ’19 head design editor Rachel Brill ’19 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19 head photo editor Risa Gelles-Watnick ’21

NIGHT STAFF assistant chief copy editor Catherine Benedict ’20 copy Susan Guo ’19 Jordan Allen ’20 Jeremy Nelson ’20 design Irina Liu ’21

women from entering office, the more the private sector is likely to follow. Female politicians are public leaders who are in a special position to inspire societal gender equality. When women use motherhood as a campaign tool, they may play into gender stereotypes. But by enhancing their own and other women’s access to political leadership, they erode those stereotypes in a lasting way — hopefully so much so that future generations of female leaders will not even consider invoking them. Rachel Lurie is a senior in the Wilson School from Los Angeles, Calif. She can be reached at relurie@princeton.edu.

Friday May 11, 2018

Opinion

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

The “but-for” test of life

Nicholas Wu

Opinion Editor Emeritus

I spent a lot of time trying to figure out about what I would write here — how can one sum up their four years going through Princeton in the words allotted to a Daily Princetonian column? Looking back through our archives, there are any number of ways that retiring columnists have reflected on that process and thought towards the future. I had a conversation some time ago with a Wilson School professor and mentor, Stanley Katz, about applying the “butfor” test to life. It’s normally a test in tort law to determine causation — “but for the existence of X, would Y have

occurred?” As Professor Katz explained it, though, it’s also a useful way to think about our lives. It’s grounded me during some difficult spots over the past few years. Here are just a few examples: But for sitting down in a Jones Hall classroom during Princeton Preview to attend one of the most bizarre lectures of my Princeton career (“The Chinese Sexual Revolution — with visual aids!”), would I have met one of my best friends here by bonding over the wackiness of the lecture after? You make friends in strange places, after all. But for taking Professor Beth Lew-Williams’ Asian American History class and subsequently getting more involved with AAPI issues on campus, would I have gained the understanding of my heritage and history that I really needed to appreciate where I

came from and where I was going? I’m eternally grateful for the community and camaraderie provided through the Asian American Students Association, the Asian American Studies Committee, and the generational struggle for Asian American studies on campus and beyond. But for Professor Keeanga Yamahtta-Taylor’s class on housing in America, what would I have really understood about my hometown of Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan? It was a reminder of how important it is to take classes outside of your comfort zone. But for joining and competing with the Model United Nations team, would I have learned the public speaking and communications skills that were so useful later on during the rallies I helped lead at Princeton? You never know what skills might come in

handy later. But for joining the ‘Prince,’ would I have found one of my favorite communities on campus and learned how difficult it is to actually put out a newspaper every single school night? I never could have even imagined that a little column about “Fresh Off the Boat” back when I first joined the ‘Prince’ would lead to a greater involvement in campus journalism, culminating in a frigid Canadian immigration reporting trip. You never know where life will take you. But for the love and support of my friends on campus, would I have made it through my studies here? An alumnus told me just before I started college that “Princeton is the best place in the world to be miserable with your friends,” and four years later, I couldn’t agree more. One last one — but for

the care of my family, would Princeton have been a place for me to grow, learn, and develop? I’m eternally grateful for all of my family’s love over these past few years — especially for the examples set by my paternal grandparents, who passed away in 2015. I hope that I’ve made you proud. The list could go on. We’re only at Princeton for four years — it’s a short time in the grand scheme of things with an outsized impact on the way we live and form our worldviews. What I encourage everyone to do, then, is to just take some time to think about the critical junctures in and influences on our time here. Trust me, it’ll be worth it. Nicholas Wu is a senior in the Wilson School from Grosse Pointe Shores, Mich. He can be reached at nmwu@princeton.edu.

taxes victor guan ’21

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

Like what you see? Join the ‘Prince’! Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

Friday May 11, 2018

Sports

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } WOMEN’S LACROSSE

Women’s lacrosse faces off against Syracuse in NCAA first round By Tom Salotti Contributor

Princeton Women’s Lacrosse (12–5 overall, 6–1 conference) takes on the Syracuse University Orange (9–9, 1–6) today in the first round of the NCAA Division I tournament. After dominating the Ivy League in conference play, the Tigers look to continue their hot streak in the postseason, with the national championship in mind. The Tigers are in peak form, fresh off of a six-game win streak and winning eight out of their last nine games. Currently ranked 18th in the nation according to the latest NCAA poll, the Tigers are looking to extend their dominance of the 2018 season. After cruising through Ivy League regular season play, Princeton easily defeated Columbia (6–10, 3–4) in the conference tournament semifinals, bringing them to the championship game against Penn (13–4, 6–1). In the final, the Tigers and the Quakers were neck and neck at half, Princeton with seven and Penn with six. The team pulled through in the end, clinching the Ivy League Championship for the second year in a row. The Tigers started off the season with mixed success, earning victories over non-conference opponents Temple (9–8, 4–5), Lehigh (13–6, 7–2), and Big 10 powerhouse Penn State

(10–9, 3–3), while losing to the University of Virginia (9–9, 4–3). Ivy League play saw a win against Brown (9–6, 2–5) and their only conference defeat to Dartmouth (11–5, 5–2). The turning point in their season, according to head coach Chris Sailer, was their game against Syracuse in late March. “I personally feel like we won that game,” Sailer said. “At the time Syracuse had been playing really well, and that half we played was the best half we played all year.” The team went down in the first half 9–5 but roared back in the second half with 11 goals to Syracuse’s eight. Despite their stellar performance, the Tigers fell one goal short of a win. Still, the game represented a shift in Princeton’s dynamic. “We just took off from there after that game,” said Sailer. “We knew what was possible for us if we played well.” The newly invigorated Tigers sprang into action, winning six out of their seven games, with their only loss to no. 3-ranked Maryland (18–1, 7–0), by one goal. Now, Princeton and Syracuse face off in a game with much higher stakes. A loss means instant elimination from the tournament and a farewell to all hopes of lifting the Division I championship trophy.

Whoever wins the firstround game will go up against the Boston College Eagles (19–1, 7–0), currently ranked second in the nation. The Eagles dominated this season, with a perfect conference record and only one loss overall. They also lost in last year’s championship final, to Maryland.

If the Tigers progress to the quarterfinals, they will face the winner of the currently ranked no. 1 in the nation and undefeated SUNY Stony Brook (19–0, 7–0) and Penn or Penn State game. In order to win today’s game, “we just have to execute the fundamentals

of the game well, both offensively and defensively,” according to Sailer. And Syracuse better watch out — the Orange will be facing a “vastly different team than the first time we played them, with different kids in different positions, and a solidified goal keeper.”

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Last time the Orange faced the Orange and Black, Syracuse got the upper hand.

WOMEN’S GOLF

Walton falls just short of NCAA bid By Miranda Hasty

Associate Sports Editor

Sophomore Maya Walton looked to repeat last year’s success in the NCAA women’s golf championships, to which she earned an individual bid by qualifying in fifth place at the 2017 NCAA Athens Regional. At this year’s three-round regional tournament at TPC Harding Park in San Francisco, however, Walton fell short of securing an individual bid to the NCAA finals in Oklahoma, while the team also failed to secure a team bid. Alongside Walton, junior Amber Wang, freshman Anabelle Chang, junior Tiana Lau, and senior Tenley Shield traveled to San Francisco to compete for one out of the six team bids to the championship tournament. Walton was on track for one of the three individual bids after the first round on Monday. Shooting two-under 70 with four birdies on the front nine and two holes over par, she tied for fifth out of 96 players. Princeton finished 16th overall out of 18 teams at +17. Walton extended Mon-

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Walton just misses cut in attempt to make back-to-back NCAA finals.

day’s momentum into the second round of the tournament on Tuesday, finishing at two-over 74 after 36 holes. After the performance, Walton stood at even par. Princeton advanced to 15th overall on Tuesday after cutting

Tweet of the Day “It’s been quite a run for the lightweights but they know what challenge awaits as they race for gold Sunday at sprint” princeton lightweight rowing (@PrincetonLights)

six strokes off their firstround score from Monday. Walton then hoped to clinch an individual bid in Wednesday’s third round, but ultimately fell four shots behind from the last qualifying position. She closed the tour-

nament at one-over 217 to finish in 22nd place. Chang finished in 60th after shooting nine-over 225. Lau wasn’t too far behind in 68th at 11-over 227. Wang stood at 84th at 16over 232, and Shield concluded her collegiate ca-

Stat of the Day

15.06 goals per game

The women’s lacrosse offense is currently 18th best in the NCAA and will look to carry the team to a win over Syracuse.

reer at 85th at 17-over 233. The Tigers finished 15th overall at +37, cutting back their score another two strokes. The team carded a 305 in Monday’s round, a 299 on Tuesday, and a 297 on Wednesday. Because only the top six teams and top three players not on those teams can advance, Princeton as a team did not qualify for the NCAA Championships. The top six teams that earned bids to the finals in Oklahoma are Stanford (-8), UCLA (-4), Mississippi (-1), Louisville (E), Kent State (+1), and Colorado (+5). The three top players who earned individual bids are California’s Marthe Wold (-6), Pepperdine’s Hira Naveed (-5), North Carolina State’s Laura Kowohl (-3), and Oklahoma State’s Emma Broze (-3). With the conclusion of the NCAA Regional, the Tigers wrapped up their season, which is highlighted by the team’s second-consecutive Ivy League title victory. With Tenley Shield as the team’s only senior, the remaining four regional participants are set to return for next year’s season.

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