Most Conservative Ivy?

Posted on by

Join me and a pretty impressive list of Anscombe alums at today’s event at 7:30 pm in East Pyne 010. 


A panel of recent Princeton alumni candidly discuss life
at Princeton and beyond for students questioning the
more liberal opinions on campus.

Panelists:
Daniel Mark ’03, Current Ph.D. Candidate in Politics at Princeton University
Christian Sahner ’07, former Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, Current Ph.D. Candidate in History at Princeton University
Stefan McDaniel ’08, Current Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania
Jose Joel Alicea ’10, Current student at Harvard Law School
Shivani Radhakrishnan ’11

Stress, Sex, and Neurogenesis

Posted on by

5384-neurons-thumb-200x150-5382.jpgOver at wired.com, Jonah Lehrer discusses some surprising aspects of sex: 1) even as a pleasurable experience, it often causes a large stress response in the body, including the release of chemicals that help the body deal with stress, and 2) as discovered in recent research in rats, it can promote neurogenesis, or the growth of new neurons, in the adult rat brain. One research team in particular, which included Princeton professor Elizabeth Gould, also found that when male rats were allowed to mate with female rats multiple times over the course of the experiment (“chronic” sexual experience) as opposed to just once (“acute” sexual experience), the level of stress-response chemicals went down, but neurogenesis continued. In other words, repeated sexual experience in rats led to beneficial neurogenesis without the harmful chemical stress response. 

You can read Lehrer’s full article here.

I should provide the ever-needed caveat in animal research: we can’t jump to the conclusion that the same holds true in humans, because of the striking differences in anatomy, brain organization, development, etc. And even if it could be proved that the same were true for humans (which might take a while – you can’t kill humans at the end of an experiment and dissect their brains the same way that you can with rats and mice), it would certainly not mean that we students should start having sex all the time in order to boost our GPAs. This is only one isolated aspect of sex, detached from all other ethical, behavioral, and interpersonal considerations. But this type of focused, specialized research is still important: by uncovering these smaller bits of knowledge about sex, piece by piece, we can begin to better understand this complex and fascinating facet of human life.  

Are Soccer Players Fair Game for Objectification? (Part II)

Posted on by

5255-Philipp_Lahm_after_goal-thumb-250x226-5254.jpgThis is the fourth and final post in a series about the 2010 World Cup.

Several days ago, I outlined the problem of physical objectification, specifically in the context of the “ogling” that became something of an international pastime during the World Cup, and criticized the arguments that some proponents of this behavior had offered in their defense. I would now like to give a brief treatment of the question that naturally follows, i.e. whether it is possible for us to express our admiration for these athlete’s bodies without falling into the trap of physical objectification.

For it does seem too extreme to say that we need to strive to become unresponsive to the attractiveness, strength, and beauty of those around us in order to minimize the chances of physical objectification. Rather, one might protest, we should be at least be able to admire these athlete’s bodies from an aesthetic point of view, the way one might appreciate Michelangelo’s David, or state with an air of scientific observation, “He is objectively hot.” Could we even relax those standards further and allow ourselves to say, “Check out those abs!” while claiming, “I’m just appreciating a healthy, athletic body, that’s all!”

I would answer: yes, depending on the attitude and intention of the first type of exclamation and the sincerity of the second. It may be possible to “objectively appreciate” an athlete’s physical attractiveness, but it only takes a small step in the wrong direction to stop thinking of that athlete as a person and start thinking of them as an attractive body to make raunchy comments about and drool over. The solution, I think, is something of a mental balancing act: when you find yourself visually focusing on someone’s awe-inspiring six-pack or gawking at them as a whole, keep reminding yourself that this is a living, breathing person with the dignity of the individual. While holding those two different attitudes in your mind’s eye, bring them into an equilibrium that will keep not just your vocal comments but also your thoughts respectful of that person. It is important to note that even without the element of sexuality, one can begin the process of reducing a person to their physical appearance, judging them based on their weight or the attractiveness of certain body parts. This is not something that we only have to worry about with gorgeous celebrities and athletes on our TV/computer screen – this is a balance we need to strike with our significant others, co-workers, and even strangers on the street.

It is a fine line to walk between appreciative admiration and dehumanizing objectification, but that does not mean we can ignore it. The goal line on a soccer pitch is relatively narrow, but, as the World Cup has shown, this does not stop a global obsession with getting the ball on one side of the line rather than the other.

Are Soccer Players Fair Game for Objectification? (Part I)

Posted on by

5172-andres.iniesta-thumb-250x231-5171.jpgThis is the third in a series of posts about the 2010 World Cup.


During the World Cup, anyone with access to a TV was able to watch the world’s best soccer players in action, but for some, “ogle” would have been a better word.  Among the foremost offenders were sites like Jezebel and Cosmopolitan, with the former posting “Thighlights” and shirtless shots under the tag “shameless objectification,” and the latter compiling a slideshow of “The Hottest World Cup Players” which was saturated with not-so-subtle sexual innuendo. Apparently it dawned on some that this same behavior toward women would be considered less than polite, for midway through the tournament, a post appeared at Jezebel defending this double standard.

The author laid out five points as to why this behavior wasn’t hypocritical. Three of the points apply just as easily to women athletes (I’m thinking especially of women’s beach volleyball, which has become increasingly sexualized) and therefore give no strength to the argument: these athletes are healthy and achieved this level of fitness naturally (point 2), they are willingly doing something they enjoy (point 4), and there are no racial boundaries (point 3). However, the author of the post clearly states that she would be up in arms if someone had been posting photos of female athletes’ body parts for men to stare at. What is it, then, that differentiates woman-ogling from man-ogling? The punch comes in points 1 and 5 – apparently it is all about historical context and equal access. Men have historically had, and arguably still do have, the upper hand in physically objectifying, and women have suffered the consequences, from workplace harassment to rape and even sex slavery: so, the argument goes, it’s only fair that we women reverse the roles.

I will first discuss the alarmingly unsound reasoning behind this point, and then in Part II, address one argument that comes closest to allowing us to express our admiration for these athlete’s bodies without falling into the trap of physical objectification. 

Continue reading Are Soccer Players Fair Game for Objectification? (Part I)

Graduate Student Faces Expulsion for Views on Homosexuality and Gender

Posted on by

5078-ASU-thumb-300x209-5076-thumb-250x174-5077.jpg

by Marlow Gazzoli

Unsettling news from the great
state of Georgia: apparently, opposing the orthodoxy on homosexuality and
viewing gender as more than just a social invention precludes one from being a
counselor in our multicultural world. Jennifer Keeton, 24, is studying for her
master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State University, and sued the
University to prevent her expulsion. An excerpt from the story:

“The suit
alleges the university retaliated against Keeton for stating her belief that
homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not a “state of being,” and that gender
is not a social construct subject to individual change. According to the suit,
the school wants her to undergo a ‘thought reform’ program intended to change
her religious beliefs. She faces expulsion unless she complies, and the suit
seeks to block the university from throwing her out for noncompliance.”

It seems to me that the faculty
have a totally distorted view of what a counselor is. A counselor should not
merely confirm his patient’s choices and lifestyle out of some misguided
respect for diversity. Rather, he is supposed to better the life of his
patient, not just encourage him to do whatever he wants.

A doctor’s purpose is to
safeguard the health of his patient, not defer to his patient’s views of what
is or is not healthy. Absent an objective moral law and order, the counselor is
merely an encourager of whatever life the counseled wants, a “life-coach.” This
is what we can expect in a world awash in relativism. “You can hold your own
views but can’t force them on others. Who is to say what is right? What is
truth?”

Futbol and Fidelity

Posted on by

5006-clint.jpg

This is the second in a series of posts about the 2010 World Cup.

Although by now the World Cup is likely a distant memory for most, the name of  Landon Donovan hopefully still rings a faint bell. Before the U.S. crashed out of the tournament in a frustrating loss to Ghana, Donovan was the hero of the hour (see miraculous injury-time goal over Algeria here), representing America’s hopes and dreams for World Cup glory with his talent as well as leadership on the field.

It came as a dull disappointment, then, to read in the midst of all the World Cup excitement that Donovan, who has been separated (but not divorced) from his wife Bianca for about a year, was accused by a British woman of being the father of her unborn child. Donovan’s response, while disappointing insofar as it confirmed his behavior with this woman, was surprisingly mature: he publicly promised to provide the appropriate support if, after tests, the child proved to be his.

Soon after the World Cup ended, it was announced that Landon Donovan was not the father after all. In addition, it appeared that he was in the process of reconciling with his wife, and I along with other Donovan fans could breathe more easily. For me, it is always such a disappointment to discover that a talented soccer star whom I greatly respect and admire is involved in sordid scandal, and I had hoped it would not be the case with Donovan. Only recently, the great John Terry of England was involved in a messy affair with the wife of a good friend and fellow teammate, and Franck Ribery of France was charged with soliciting under-age prostitution. Here, while Donovan’s behavior was far from a shining standard of fidelity or self-control, my respect for him can remain mainly intact: although I certainly wish that he would lead a lifestyle of complete integrity, I am glad that he acted maturely when the time came to take responsibility for his actions, as so few athletes of his kind do in similar situations. To Landon Donovan I would say: thank you for your incredible leadership during the World Cup, good luck in Brazil 2014, and here’s to hoping for a happy and lasting reunion with your wife!

Discrimination and the First Amendment: Christian Legal Society v Martinez

Posted on by
4956-supreme_court_building1-thumb-300x222-4955.jpg

by Shivani Radhakrishnan

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court faced a landmark case on the issue of whether or not a public university law school, Hastings College of the Law, could deny school funding (and related benefits) to a religious student organization because the group requires its officers and voting members to agree with its core religious viewpoints. The Court ruled 5-4 that a public university law school could deny these groups such funding. The majority appealed to a neutral university policy that school funding is contingent on whether a student group allowed all-comers to become members and officers.

But to see the case as upholding a neutral policy that student groups should only receive funding if they allow all-comers is too simplistic. The pith of the issue turns around whether a public university’s attempts to secure equality of access impede on a student group’s free exercise of its beliefs (beliefs that by its very nature exclude other beliefs).

It is interesting to think about what an all-comers policy would mean, if taken to its logical conclusion. What would have happened had a political group, say Students United Against the Death Penalty, required students to be anti-death penalty in order to join? If Hastings enforced the “all-comers” policy, the anti-death penalty student group could be forced to admit a majority of students that support the death penalty. In effect, this could result in the silencing of the anti-death penalty students’ expression, a serious First Amendment concern. For groups that are formed based on a shared group of beliefs, Alito astutely argued, “the consequence of an accept-all-comers policy is marginalization.”

See the full ruling here.

World Cup: Community and Camaraderie

Posted on by

4898-Chile-VS-Honduras-thumb-300x200-4895-thumb-300x200-4896-thumb-300x200-4897.jpg

This is the first in a series of posts about the 2010 World Cup

.

I have seen hundreds of games over five World Cups, and by far
the most exciting Word Cup experience for me occurred this summer in Chile. The
already infamous fervor of Chilean fans was intensified by the fact that they
had not qualified since the 1998 World Cup. Of course, this created many
opportunities for some typical soccer hooliganism. If you happened to be nearby
after watching the Chile-Brazil match in one of Santiago’s central plazas, you
might have seen people being water-cannoned in the face by police-tanks back down the stairs of some metro station entrances. But besides providing
an opportunity for raucous behavior, the World Cup encouraged above
all a sense of unity among Chileans. Every time Chile played, families had
barbecues, co-workers gathered around TV sets at the office, and the masses
showed up at the country’s plazas where enormous projectors were set up to
watch the matches. Clubs, bars and restaurants were packed, the country’s bus
drivers took a ninety-minute break, and schools across the country stopped
classes as soon as a game was underway. Paraphernalia with Chile’s national
colors was sold everywhere and about half of all TV commercials and highway
advertisement boards displayed images of the Chilean national squad.

The World Cup brought joy to Chileans. I watched the
Chile-Switzerland game at a local school that some friends of mine attend.
There are few times in my life when I have seen a group of people so jubilant
as in the instant when Chile scored the game-winning goal against Switzerland.
More than sixty of us were watching the game in a classroom designed for maybe thirty.
There were kids on the floor, in chairs, on tables in the back, on chairs and
tables piled on tables in the back, and on top of bookcases. And when Chile
scored, it was chaos: frantic movement celebrating victory, chants, flags,
vuvuzelas and even a drum. Within three minutes after the game was over, cars
were in the streets honking horns to a rhythm of victory. Drivers zoomed around
with people hanging out halfway, shouting and waving Chile’s flag. Some people
formed caravans and danced on street shoulders. 

Even after they were knocked out of the tournament, the Chileans
were enormously proud of what their team accomplished–after all, they had only lost
to Spain and Brazil. When Chile’s players came back from South Africa,
thousands rallied to the plaza in front of the presidential palace to welcome
the national squad back home.

The World Cup stirs the pride of nations and brings the joy of
soccer to families, friends, co-workers and nations. It has been a pleasure to
witness how celebrating South Africa 2010 in Chile has encouraged a sense of
camaraderie among the nation’s people, a phenomenon that is replicated in many
countries all over the world.

World Cup: Community and Camaraderie

Posted on by

4898-Chile-VS-Honduras-thumb-300x200-4895-thumb-300x200-4896-thumb-300x200-4897.jpg

This is the first in a series of posts about the 2010 World Cup

.

I have seen hundreds of games over five World Cups, and by far
the most exciting Word Cup experience for me occurred this summer in Chile. The
already infamous fervor of Chilean fans was intensified by the fact that they
had not qualified since the 1998 World Cup. Of course, this created many
opportunities for some typical soccer hooliganism. If you happened to be nearby
after watching the Chile-Brazil match in one of Santiago’s central plazas, you
might have seen people being water-cannoned in the face by police-tanks back down the stairs of some metro station entrances. But besides providing
an opportunity for raucous behavior, the World Cup encouraged above
all a sense of unity among Chileans. Every time Chile played, families had
barbecues, co-workers gathered around TV sets at the office, and the masses
showed up at the country’s plazas where enormous projectors were set up to
watch the matches. Clubs, bars and restaurants were packed, the country’s bus
drivers took a ninety-minute break, and schools across the country stopped
classes as soon as a game was underway. Paraphernalia with Chile’s national
colors was sold everywhere and about half of all TV commercials and highway
advertisement boards displayed images of the Chilean national squad.

The World Cup brought joy to Chileans. I watched the
Chile-Switzerland game at a local school that some friends of mine attend.
There are few times in my life when I have seen a group of people so jubilant
as in the instant when Chile scored the game-winning goal against Switzerland.
More than sixty of us were watching the game in a classroom designed for maybe thirty.
There were kids on the floor, in chairs, on tables in the back, on chairs and
tables piled on tables in the back, and on top of bookcases. And when Chile
scored, it was chaos: frantic movement celebrating victory, chants, flags,
vuvuzelas and even a drum. Within three minutes after the game was over, cars
were in the streets honking horns to a rhythm of victory. Drivers zoomed around
with people hanging out halfway, shouting and waving Chile’s flag. Some people
formed caravans and danced on street shoulders. 

Even after they were knocked out of the tournament, the Chileans
were enormously proud of what their team accomplished–after all, they had only lost
to Spain and Brazil. When Chile’s players came back from South Africa,
thousands rallied to the plaza in front of the presidential palace to welcome
the national squad back home.

The World Cup stirs the pride of nations and brings the joy of
soccer to families, friends, co-workers and nations. It has been a pleasure to
witness how celebrating South Africa 2010 in Chile has encouraged a sense of
camaraderie among the nation’s people, a phenomenon that is replicated in many
countries all over the world.