Wild Hotel Why Fred Young Thinks Deferred Rushing is Bad Inf, fyved tyauna, Deferred rushing' has been one of our profound interests ever since its mention as a possibility on the Oregon campus. It’s been cussed and discussed to considerable degree, and the wisest conclusion to have yet been reached is the admission that de ferred rushing is a very important problem. A prob lem which deserves much consideration, and which will be severely handicap ped by being forced. We had better warn now that this article won’t dis cuss both sides of the issue. It has been said that de ferred living would I 1 N work out the best if / deferred rushing were initiated along with it. Since deferred living has been decreed a necessary evil, we will herewith offer reasons why there is little or no basis for blindly adopting deferred rushing, and its many shortcomings, along with it. First, let’s toss in this bit of background for what it’s worth. In 1945 President Newburn’s Univer sity of Iowa employed the deferred rushing plan in conjunction with their fine dormitory system. In 1947 they abandoned deferred rushing since they felt it didn’t work. This is but one of many ex amples which we’ll cite on request. Let's enumerate some of the obvious shortcom ings of the deferred rushing system. First, defer red rushing rules set up an "artificial barrier be tween the fraternity members and the freshmen. This is because rushing rulings usually do not al low any more than a casual "hello” between the fraternity member and freshman prior to the offi cial rushing period. Deferred rushing creates suspicion and friction between the fraternity groups from registration until the final pledge day. This suspicion is not un like any encountered between active competitors in any of the phases of our dynamic countryside. This will disrupt the usual harmony prevalent on our campus and in the dormitories. Deferred rushing results in a continuous rush ing period—formal, informal, and even secret from the day of registration until pledge day. Among the new students it stimulates the perpetual think ing of and discussing of the possibilities of “mak ing a fraternity.” Within the fraternity chapters deferred rushing generates constant preoccupation with rushing plans and the new student personalities. It is detri mental to the good scholarship of the fraternity members and the rushees. Deferred rushing is also the most expensive form of rushing financially. This increased expense would have to be added to the already high cost of college living. Deferred rushing causes being invited to join a fraternity to assume too much importance in the eyes of the freshman students and their families at home. It puts fraternities so much in the limelight that they seem not only to be desirable but also “unique institutions,” instead of just one of many campus associations. It has been acknowledged by University offi cials that deferred living will leave fewer than ever upperclassmen in the dormitories. At the same time when freshmen need most the friendly guid ance, encouragement, and contact with upperclass men; when the University needs the aid of such upperclassmen in the work of introducing and assimilating new students, deferred rushing rules bar all such association with these acknowledged campus leaders. Some mention has been made that deferred rush ing allows the freshman more time to take a look at University living organizations. However, it seems reasonable that whether the freshman has four days of four months to establish his prefer ence the question will sift down to the same two, three, or more equally divided groups of friends, and the final decision will be just as trying. The first consideration in evaluating any rush ing plan should be, “how will this plan help the freshman student find a place on campus, and how will it aid him to become an intelligent, well-ad justed college citizen?” This lends all the more reason why the “deferred rushing question” should receive a great deal of consideration, and the bod ies formulating the policy should receive the stu dent-body’s patience and assurance. Columnist’s views are not necessarily those of the editor. (See below).—Editor. An Editorial And Why We Think He Has Little Faith in Fraternities Elsewhere on this page, Emerald music colum nist Fred Young blows out some sour notes about deferred rushing. Young is entitled to his own opinions; however he presumes a great deal about deferred rushing that “ain’t necessarily so.’’ And it is on these pre sumptions that he bases his arguments. For example, “deferred rushing rules set up an ‘artificial barrier’ between the fraternity members and freshmen.” At present there are no deferred rushing rules at Oregon. Any such rules will most likely be made by the Interfraternity Council and Panhellenic. Young must have a rather low opin ion of these groups if he thinks they are so stupid as to follow the bad examples some other institu tions have set up concerning deferred rushing. If fraternities can trust one another to abide by the rules which IFC does set up, then they need not fear that houses will attempt to rush individu als early. If the fraternities cannot trust one an other to this extent, then there is something basic ally wrong with the fraternity system. There should be no “suspicion and friction” be tween fraternity groups unless fraternities hbeave in such a way as to arouse the suspicion of one an other. If fraternities behave this way, they should not blame deferred rushing. There is no need for a continual rushing period of any type. New students will undoubtedly dis cuss fraternities. This is an indication that they will know by the late rushing period what they are getting into. Fraternities should welcome this dis cussion. And there is no need to assume that the freshman and new students will talk themselves into a fraternity frenzy. We do not see where deferred rushing would be the most expensive form of rushing. Young does not elaborate on this statement ; perhaps he should. If the fraternity wishes to constantly preoccupy itself with rushing plans, it is asking for work that is not necessary. With rush week at the beginning of a college ca reer. as it is now, the joining of a fraternity is given emphasis way out of line with its true value. By placing rush week later in the first year, a student is better able to judge the role of the fraternity in campus life by having seen the fraternity in rela tion to the other elements of the Unievrsity. Far from making the fraternity seem a “unique institution,” the student can see it as one of many campus associations, since he has seen more than just the fraternity. During rush week, as it is now, the fraternity is the only campus association the student sees; the rest he merely hears about. The administration has realized it must organize an effective counselling program for the dormitor les. It will accept this responsibility, and we must see to it that the responsibility is not shirked. Where Young received the idea that “deferred rushing rules bar all such association with ac knowledged campus leaders we do not know. He has presumed far too much. Deferred rushing does not mean they will take no participation whatever in campus activities. It merely means they will not pledge a fraternity the first week of fall term. This is not fatal. It may seem reasonable to Young that a student will make the same choice after four months as he would have after four days; but it does not seem reasonable to us. It may be the decision will be as “trying,” but the student will be more fully aware that his living group is not the only living group; that it is the one he pledges. With Young’s last paragraph we agree. With most of Young’s arguments we do not agree. Simply because we feel he presumes a great deal that should not be. His attitude seems to be, deferred rushing will not work because the fraternities will not let it work. Whether he thinks this, or whether it is now we who are presuming too much, we do know this: If a group sincerely wishes to help the individ ual, it must put side selfish interests for the com mon good. Ormon daily EMERALD Opinions expressed in editorials are those of the writer, and do not claim to represent the ions of the ASUO or of the University. Initialed editorials are written b\ associate editors. . i « ‘ ' t..1*1 ... 1... el... ...lit , >e opinions ui »««.- v. .. ' •••---.*•■ - 1 nS'f)idnhms°expresseriWint;itt1 editorial paRe hy lined column are those of the columnist, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editor or hts associates. lot necessarily lencci me ojium'ii ^ .. The OREGON DAU.V F.MERAl 1>. published daily during the college vear except Saturdays Suudavs. holidays and final examination periods hv the Associated Students, University of Oregon. Suhscription rates: $-’.00 a term, $4.00 for two trims and $..0t a year Entered as second class matter at the postoftice Eugene. Oregon. _ Don A. Smith, Editor Joan Mimnaugh, Business Manager Harbara IIeywood, Helen Sherman. Associate Editors. Gi.enn Gillespie. Mohosihsi Editor Don Thompson, Advertising Manager r~' .... . » ' ' Vljimin Ken Metilfr. Sports Kditors: John Barton, Sam Fidman. Dclsman. ckief N.ght Editor: Lorua Lars«. dxoicltetq, Old Vet Cold Feet and Veterans' Dentist Bills Lu Steve Jlou, Problem, what to say about the weather? We all agree that the weather is just two steps away frm terrible. The people at the in firmary know that slush is conducive to wet feet and sore throats. The guy with only one pair of shoes knows slush soaks through faster than rain. The gals with the sore noses know snow is tough on the complexion when applied by an overzealous adolescent. “Let it snow, let it snow . . Do all you vets know you may have free dental work coming ? If you need work on any teeth which were treated while you were in the service they can be fixed free. Xaturally there is red-tape. It begins when you go to the \ A contact office in Emerald Hall. They send to Portland for your record, (if it is there yet), then you get an examination here in Eugene. The examination report gots back (Please turn to page three)