• Woodrow Wilson and Race

• Birth Control

• Princeton Athletics

• Hubert Alyea

• For the Record

WOODROW WILSON AND RACE
Bill Paul '70's article "Woodrow Wilson and Affirmative Action" (Opinion, November 27) skirts a subject that has been too long ignored by historians of Princeton and by those who, in the phrase of James W. Loewen in Lies My Teacher Told Me, have felt it necessary to "heroify" Wilson.
The thrust of Loewen's argument is that high-school history texts, in regard to much of American history, are prone to ignore unpleasant but important truths about our past; and in doing so, they present a distorted view that does not serve the present. He writes that Wilson, a southerner, "had been president of Princeton, the only major northern university that refused to admit blacks. He was an outspoken white supremacist-his wife was even worse-and told 'darky' stories in cabinet meetings. His administration submitted a legislative program intended to curtail the civil rights of African Americans, but Congress would not pass it. Unfazed, Wilson used his power as chief executive to segregate the federal government."
Loewen has much more to say about Wilson's record in both domestic and foreign affairs, which contains ample evidence that he was, indeed, racist and jingoistic by any measure, including the standards of his day. His virtues as President are well known and incontrovertible; his weaknesses, however, should not be ignored, for doing so creates a deeply flawed picture.
David Fleishhacker '59
San Francisco, Calif.

Bill Paul's article prompts my first letter to PAW since I graduated in 1962, as, unfortunately, the only black in my class. His supposition that Woodrow Wilson would have supported affirmative action as now practiced by Princeton's admission office is frightening. His statement that the "intellectual foundation" for the civilrights movement of the 1960s was "set forth by Wilson during . . . his final years as the president of Princeton" is insulting to black Americans.
Mr. Paul builds his case on Wilson's Quad Plan, which was intended to break down the university's abhorrent club system. That plan, according to Mr. Paul, "evolved into a war against privilege and prejudice, a war Wilson would soon carry onto the national political stage." But Wilson's "war" never had anything to do with achieving equality for, or reducing prejudice toward, black Americans; just the opposite. As noted by historian Samuel Eliot Morison in The Oxford History of the American People, "Segregation reached its height under President Wilson, when all government offices, restaurants, and lavatories were segregated, and for the most part so remained until the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration."
Mr. Paul correctly points out that the Quad Plan applied only to white, moneyed males. When dealing with a much broader spectrum of the American people, Wilson took the moral low ground. In matters of race, the history of Princeton in the 20th century offers few examples of leadership or courage until the presidency of Robert F. Goheen '40 *48.
Charles A. Shorter, Jr. '62
New York, N.Y.

It is odd that Bill Paul believes that Woodrow Wilson's thoughts on elitism, egalitarianism, and democracy could form an intellectual foundation for a fairer, more nuanced form of affirmative action. For, as Richard Kluger '56 points out in Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality, Wilson, upon assuming the presidency, "wasted little time introducing [racial] segregation into the national government." Of course, we must judge leaders by the tenor of their times, but Wilson's actions in the realm of race relations were clearly regressive.
Stephen Fromm '86
Laramie, Wy.

I find it hard to believe that anyone with even a passing knowledge of Wilson's views on race could possibly believe that he would have supported affirmative action in any form.Wilson promised as President to deal fairly with the "colored people in every matter; and not mere grudging justice, but justice executed with liberality and cordial good feeling"; he also pledged to assist in "advancing the interest" of blacks. But these words fell by the wayside. In his first term, he signed executive orders segregating dining facilities and restrooms in federal buildings, and most blacks were phased out of the civil service.
Although Wilson's role in the club-quad controversy may suggest a man concerned with egalitarian principles, his advocacy did not extend to blacks. To somehow imagine that his championing of individual worth would have led him to support the inclusion of racial minorities at Princeton or any other institution is an exercise in revisionist history.
Lolita Buckner Inniss '83
Princeton, N.J

BIRTH CONTROL
A full response to Walter Weber '81's views on birth control (Letters, December 11) would take more than a letter to the editor, but here is my brief response.
Creation, meaning creativeness and creativity but not "pro-creation" alone, fulfills God's image for us. Birth control affords two people the chance for their romantic creativity to become procreative-intentionally. Thank God for birth control!
It is not fertility that makes the sexual act complete, but emotional honesty. Birth control keeps the baby from having to pay the penalty for any adult dishonesty. Let's pray for better methods of birth control, more faithfully exercised.
Sexuality is spirituality. Sex would lead more directly to commitment were it not for people denying the Spirit that brought them together in the first place. Praise to the Holy Spirit for the gracious influences that bind us one to another.
Men abuse women whenever they behave, according to the old attitude of "love 'em and leave 'em." Let's pray that men would become as conscious of birth control as women.
Casual sex, recreational sex, and ignorant sex promote venereal disease. If sex were discussed in the sunlight in this "Christian" country, what happens because of the moonlight would be truly divine. Praise God for love in our lives!
Only responsible individuals can reduce venereal disease and unintended pregnancy. But responsibility is only real when it is given over to people to exercise freely as theirs. Handcuffing people, even with theology, will not result in better decision-making. Let's pray for freedom and responsibility to be jointly exercised by conjoined souls.
The Rev. Richard N. Chrisman '65
Boston, Mass.

Walter Weber believes conception begins at fertilization. But that is not the medical definition of conception, which is the beginning of pregnancy, not fertilization. Pregnancy does not begin until the egg implants in the womb, when a host of hormonal responses are triggered in the mother. An egg does not become pregnant; a mother does.
This gray area between fertilization and implantation continues to be the source of stubborn disagreement between pro-choicers and antiabortionists. If Mr. Weber thinks that he can settle this argument by simple proclamation, he is quite misguided. This ambiguity in the development process makes it ultimately arbitrary to draw a hard line to define the beginning of independent life, which is precisely the point of pro-choicers. Any point you choose will be arguably wrong. Life does not become sacred in an instant. Rather, it is a gradual process, with no hard dividing lines except ones that are arbitrarily determined by those who wish for them.
Perhaps religion in simple form is a search for absolutes. But spirituality in its deepest and most mature form is a journey into the mystery and nuance of life. It's like a Heisenberg Principle of human values-you just can't nail it down absolutely without doing injustice to the truth. This doesn't mean that there is complete randomness. Like clouds, we know when we are in the middle of one or outside of one, but try to find the edge, and you will be looking forever.
Daniel Krimm '78
Yonkers, N.Y.

PRINCETON ATHLETICS
As a former Princeton scholarathlete, I was greatly troubled by Doug Lederman '84's November 6 cover story on Princeton athletics. I struggled not so much with the subject matter (the vast compromises that Princeton makes to maintain excellent results in athletics), but with the manner in which the author makes his argument. Mr. Lederman fails to present any conclusive evidence that athletes contribute to an antiintellectual environment. More disturbingly, in an approach unsuitable for an alumni magazine, he neglects to introduce the benefits of collegiate athletics for both the participants and the university community as a whole. Princeton is unique in its ability to provide its students with the best undergraduate education in the country along with athletics teams that can compete successfully at the national level. Mr. Lederman's article only perpetuates the stereotype of the academically inferior athlete, against which I fought during my undergraduate career as a devoted member of the women's varsity swimming team and an equally dedicated student.
Mr. Lederman often refers to the existence of sources and statistics, but fails to cite them in his argument. For example, when he contends that athletes are supplanting applicants better equipped to handle Princeton's academic rigors, he writes: "Some people complain that athletes displace students better prepared, and more inclined to thrive academically at the university." I would like to know the identity of the "people" protesting. Are they horrified professors, disgruntled administrators, jealous students, or, perhaps, enraged parents? When discussing the allegedly poor behavior of athletes on campus, the author writes: "Statistics show that athletes get into disciplinary trouble more often than other students." Who tracks these statistics and what are the specific results? Later, when the author attempts to make the point that athletes post lower average SAT scores than other students, he writes: ". . . by most accounts, the gap between athletes and others is reputed to be about 100 SAT points." By whose accounts? Such unqualified assertions only serve to fuel stereotypical classifications and fail to demonstrate thorough investigative reporting.
In the rare instance that Mr. Lederman does include statistics, he appears to state them incorrectly. In discussing the poor academic performance of athletes, the author erroneously cites a studyin-progress by Professor of Psychology Deborah Prentice and a former colleague of hers, Nancy Cantor. He writes, "And athletes, Prentice says, get about 40 percent of the C grades awarded at Princeton, a disproportionate share." When I spoke with Professor Prentice about this statistic, she informed me that she was misquoted and that she did not provide Mr. Lederman with specific data on grades. Furthermore, she explained that her information is derived from a sample of three (soon to be four) schools and that she could not address specific data regarding Princeton. In fact, she revealed that she did not know where the statistic the author cited came from and referred me to the registrar's office! As a muchneeded followup to this article, PAW should publish the results of Professor Prentice's completed study (as well as those of the Mellon Foundation's examination of athletes' postgraduate professional lives).
Mr. Lederman likens participation in intercollegiate athletics to a parttime job and implies that such a commitment contributes to lower grades and academic underachievement. Does it then follow that those students who are forced to maintain parttime jobs to fulfill financial-aid requirements or to have spending money are also contributing to an antiintellectual environment? Should the university only admit those students with enough financial resources that they can afford to spend every waking hour in Firestone Library?
Mr. Lederman's inadequate examination of athletics at Princeton only promotes a stereotype of antiintellectual athletes which plagues the campus. He quotes just one athlete and portrays the experiences of two in the course of an eight-page article. In his onesided analysis, he makes few if any references to the benefits of athletics at the university level. In my experience, the brain of an athlete does not cease to function once he or she hits the track, field, or pool. The education continues through the practice or game, and it is a rich one. In keeping to rigorous training and Princeton's demanding schedules, athletes learn discipline. In balancing their academic and athletic pursuits, they learn to organize their time and to be efficient in their work. In a university environment where teamwork is under-stressed, athletes also learn to communicate with others, strategize with others, help others, rely on others, and strive for common goals. The ability to work in teams has become a primary skill in today's working world.
By virtue of their presence at Princeton, athletes are just as dedicated to their intellectual enrichment as they are to their athletic development. Many athletes have turned down scholarships and chosen Princeton because they value an undergraduate education above all else. They compete at Princeton because athletics is an option there, not an occupation.
I ask professors, teaching assistants, and administrators to examine their preconceived notions about athletes and to keep their minds open when athletes enter their classrooms or offices. I encourage athletes to challenge the anti-intellectual stereotypes that pervade the campus and society. I also urge PAW to address fairly and accurately the many benefits of Princeton's extraordinary athletics program.
Grace S. Cornelius '95
New York, N.Y.

The very idea that being an athlete somehow restricts academic opportunity or well-roundedness is ludicrous. As an athlete at Princeton, I never felt limited, and I had great relationships with all my professors. If athletes' grades and test scores are lower than those of career students, it is because our other endeavors limit our time. We learn how to budget time, and we balance our lives around different challenges.
I would never trade my experiences on the playing field, for I have learned more about myself and life in battles on the gridiron than in any classroom. College is supposed to prepare you for life, and football taught me about discipline, teamwork, pride, determination, toughness (both mental and physical), and how to succeed. Athletics produces winners and leaders because it teaches how to lose and deal with failure by picking yourself up and trying again. A trial by fire can destroy you or mold you into a champion, but until you feel the flame you may never know.
Keith Elias '94
New York Giants
East Rutherford, N.J.

HUBERT ALYEA
Your obituary for Professor of Chemistry Hubert N. Alyea '24 *28 (Notebook, November 27) reminded me not only of his pyrotechnic lectures but of a dictum he often quoted: "I say not that it is, but that it seems to be; / As it now seems to me to seem to be." This epitomized Professor Alyea's trenchant position on the nature of scientific discovery, and I offer it as an epitath for this engaging and kindly gentleman.
George C. Sponsler '49 *52
Bethesda, Md.