Image 01 Image 03

Princeton U. Eating Club Changes Guest Rules After Students Complain Professor’s Presence Made Them Feel ‘Unsafe’

Princeton U. Eating Club Changes Guest Rules After Students Complain Professor’s Presence Made Them Feel ‘Unsafe’

“they were deeply upset by his presence”

This is so ridiculous. This professor is well-regarded and maybe right of center but so what? The minute people start talking about feeling unsafe in a case like this, they should be ignored.

From the Daily Princetonian:

We must not let eating clubs be ideological safe spaces

On Feb. 14, just like many hundreds of other Princeton students, I stopped by my eating club — Charter — to have lunch. I brought two guests, one of whom is a professor who has taught me in several courses and is also my senior thesis advisor.

The lunch was pleasant and uneventful; it was Ash Wednesday, so neither my professor nor I ate very much. I was careful to follow the club’s internal procedure for sponsoring guests, filling out the appropriate guest meal slips under the supervision of a club staff member. After we finished, we went to class — he’s teaching a graduate seminar this semester in which I am a student.

I thought nothing more of it — until more than a month later on March 26, when Charter’s president, Anna Johns ’25, announced an abrupt change to the club’s visitors policy. In order to maintain an “inclusive environment” and communicate that Charter is a “sanctuary” for its members, Johns wrote in a club-wide group chat, visitors who are not family members or friends would henceforth not be permitted to enter the club during its “hours of food service operations” without prior approval from undergraduate officers, club staff, and the alumni Board of Governors.

Within minutes following the announcement, I learned from friends that the policy had been crafted in direct response to student complaints about my Feb. 14 lunch with my professor. After seeking out the club manager, I learned more: A “group of membership” — whose identities and precise numbers were unspecified — felt “caught off guard” when they saw my professor in Charter, and they were deeply upset by his presence. In the future, at minimum, they wanted “the right to not be in that space” at the same time as him. After receiving their complaint, the club acceded to their demands.

While the club manager attempted to assure me that the new policy was viewpoint-neutral and not meant to single out any particular “belief systems,” claiming it was merely intended to further the value of “inclusivity,” she declined to affirm that my professor would be permitted to enter Charter’s premises in the future. The undergraduate officers, the alumni board, and club staff would have to consult with one another “to make sure it’s okay” — and, even in the event his entrance was approved, a “general consensus notice” would have to be sent out beforehand to all Charter members, warning them of the date and time the professor would be in the building so they would have the opportunity to stay away.

Despite the club manager’s assurances, the claim that Charter’s new policy was neither ideologically-motivated nor intended to target anyone on the basis of their beliefs is clearly false.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Henceforth, every sentence incorporating the phrase “feel unsafe” must also include the word “snowflakes.”


And again, in academia, someone is excluded in order to maintain inclusivity with no intention of irony or displays of cognitive dissonance.

Which reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:

“Without education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously.”
–Gilbert Keith Chesterton

Poor babies. I wouldn’t want them to feel unsafe because they might hear some facts they don’t want to hear. Perhaps a middle school would be more appropriate for them.

At real universities, bringing faculty members for lunch is encouraged, and often the faculty members are offered a number of free lunches per month.

This incident reflects badly on the quality of Princeton students and especially their eating clubs. Grow up.

    Dimsdale in reply to OldProf2. | April 3, 2024 at 10:43 am

    Gosh! My students would yell to me in the lunch room to come and sit with them, which I frequently did.

    Nobody left in huff. Or a minute and a huff (thank you, Groucho).

    When did the ivy league become the bush league?

Guaranteeing that Ivy League graduates will never make enough money to pay off their student loans one university at a time.
Were I still a manager, Princeton would be off the list.

Don’t hire from Princeton either. Disgusting people that the admissions office selected. Sure there are a few exceptions, probably not very many.

Ol' Jim, hisself | April 3, 2024 at 8:05 am

If the presence of a professor who is merely eating makes them ‘feel unsafe’, they need psychological counseling and treatment. They do not need to be in a university.

Think of these snowflakes in a serious situation. What would they do?

Old Navy Doc | April 3, 2024 at 8:09 am

Perhaps Princeton should replace the Old and New Testament shown on their shield with an infants playpen.

WildernessLawyer | April 3, 2024 at 8:17 am

How, pray tell, do these oh so sensitive Princetonians intend to survive when they leave Princeton and are subjected to an idea or a person they don’t agree with

    DSHornet in reply to WildernessLawyer. | April 3, 2024 at 8:57 am

    I dunno but they need to get on that soon. Where I live, they would quickly become amusement for Bubba, Earl, and their wives. Probably their kids too.

If a draft is ever needed, our country will be in trouble! Can’t imagine these college students feeling “safe” with a Drill Instructor, let alone under live fire from an enemy intent on killing them.

To think that Princeton used to be known as the most conservative of the Ivies! This shows how radicals can corrupt an institution if others don’t care to be bothered with their governance. Radicals were permitted to take charge of hiring and then admissions because less radically-minded professors didn’t want to be bothered with administrative duties. And because rich trustees didn’t care to interfere as the problem became more acute.

    henrybowman in reply to HarvardPhD. | April 3, 2024 at 9:43 pm

    “To think that Princeton used to be known as the most conservative of the Ivies!”

    Woodrow Wilson’s Princeton? Color me dubious. Unless, of course, racism was used as a proxy for conservatism.

George_Kaplan | April 3, 2024 at 10:18 pm

And if the student complains about being made to feel unsafe by Far Leftists or supporters of terrorism being invited to the club, does anyone actually expect it to be tolerated? Or is it likely to make said student a target?

Substitute the word “challenged” for the word “unsafe”, and that about covers it. They don’t ever want their beliefs challenged. What a shame,,I thought that was the whole point of so-called higher education. I am too old.

The professor would be my guest at least three times per week ~ perhaps with an “opposite viewpoint guest” the other two days … do my best to fairly antagonize EVERYONE.