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)