0,
Daily
•34nita Holmes, Editor
Don Thompson, Business Manager
it Could Happen Here
Ten thousand tons of TNT ripped open the Bonneville Dam
yesterday.
Students at the University of Oregon started a mass pil
primage homeward, leaving the campus largely deserted . . .
A stray blockbuster put a large cavity in the Eugene air
port, dropped there by Soviet bombers that swung southward.
spanking new two million dollar Student Union build
ing at the University (it’s now closed) becomes a hospital
ward.
A communique from Military Headquarters (it s the old
faculty club, asks everyone to remain calm.
Industrial Portlahd gets a pasting from Naval launched air
craft—and University dorms and fraternities and sororities
open up their doors to wandering evacuees.
No, all this isn’t exactly science fiction or pseudo make-be
lieve. It’s a straight-forward indication of what the Univer
sity of Oregon may face in the event of war.
Dean Sidney W .Little, coordinator of campus civilian de
fense, says the UO will be able to assume its war-time duties
■ on 24 hours notice, after the end of this month.
Little says that if a bomb were dropped in the Northwest,
or even possibly the country—the UO would immediately be
come a defense service. Classroom work would be either sus
pended or greatly modified, unless you were a pre-flight stu
dent.
This is grim stuff. Maybe you believe its unnecessary, or
maybe you feel things have been moving too slow as it is.
The realities of war have not hit citizens living here in this
• country and on this campus yet.
But we’re getting a taste of it—just in case.—T.K.
Does Oregon Need NAACP?
Is a campus organization of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People needed on the Oregon camp
us?
That question was weighed last week at a meeting of a doz
en or so students, some of them members of the NAACP on
the campus last year. The ’49-50 group died because of inter
nal dissension, graduation of members, and general apathy on
the part of both colored and white students.
The four or five remaining members are considering re
organization. Several oppose it, several strongly favor NAA
■CP at Oregon.
Opposition to revival has the strongest case. A colored stu
dent who is charter-holder of the old organization strongly be
lieves that the 17 or IS Negro students on the campus are not
interested in NAACP here.
As colored students, they have no grievances against the
administration. The discrimination they face comes from indi
vidual students, but tolerance cannot be legislated. No NAA
CP can erase a mental set or 20 some years of background
which says “you’re superior to the black and yellow people. ’
This lack of interest by the colored students and absence of
immediate problems on the campus stands strong gainst re
organization of NAACP.
However, educational work could be done, several students
argue. And those favoring NAACP here say there are pro
jects such as establishment of a course on history of the Negro,
hiring of a colored professor at Oregon, organized movements
against discriminatory clauses in fraternity and sorority char
ters.
Anyway, there was enough disagreement within the meet
ing of the 12 students to warrant a test of all-campus interest
in NAACP. They decided to hold an open meeting (definite
time and place will be announced soon) to find out how many
.Webfoots are interested.
NAACP will plead its case there.
THE DAILY
to the Student Affairs committee for postponing action on
whether to discontinue desserts until all ramifications of
the question are studied. Student opinion was truly con
sidered.
THE OREGON LEMON...
to students who don’t call the Oregana office if their name
is misspelled or omitted from the rigger’s Guide. May
they boil in their gripes when the Oregana comes out with
incorrect names.
College Morals—A Series
Petting—One of a Few Appreciable Changes
This is the fifth in a se
ries of articles on the college
students of 1950—their out
look on life, their moral
codes and behavior, their
changing standards. The se
ries originally ran in the New
York Post.
By Max Lerner
It may surprise some people to
know that young people in col
lege lead a relatively restricted
sexual life. The figures in the
Kinsey volume, based on extend
ed case interviews with 8,500 men
and 8,000 women, show this fact
to be true beyond any reasonable
doubt. Kinsey has thus far re
fused to give any summary fig
ures about the women, until his
next volume appears. But the fig
ures on the males show that,
when compared with the same
age-groups on the high-school
and grade-school level, college
boys are far from leading the wild
and Bacchanalian lives that are
so often attributed to them.
The important fact about the
college population, both for the
boys and girls, is that they are
constantly aware of the moral
code, even when breaking it. This
does not mean that they are able
to live like saints and ascetics
until marriage legalizes a full
sexual life. The repeated point
that the Kinsey volume makes is
that the biological impulses may
be dammed up at one end only to
burst out at the other.
The young people on the col
lege level have found a way rela
tively to the other groups—of
staying technically within the
moral code, of salving their con
science to some extent, of not
jeopardizing the prestige of the
girls in the group in which they
will eventually marry, and at the
same time of. getting sexual re
lease.
• * *
The most important form of
--Letters—
The Campus Answers
Nothing Controversial
Emerald Editor:
I have followed your editorial
page and your editorial policy
with deep interest in the past
three years, and now I have read
a statement which gives The Ore
gon Lemon to "far right Repub
licans who have kept Oregon’s
Wayne Morse off the Senate for
eign relations committee.”
My political views are of no
consequence in this letter, nor am
I ignorant of the fact that it is
quite correct to write personal
views on controversial subjects
on an editorial page of a private
newspaper.
However I believe that you
have no right to taint our news
paper with your political beliefs.
I believe that you have done this
by implying that to be a far right
Republican is wrong and that
such men are bad for our coun
try.
In most newspapers the staff
derives this opinion-giving right
through private ownership, thus
making the opinions not official
but personal. This is quite under
standable. But here at Oregon
you are not working for a small
group of private individuals but,
in effect, us—the students at the
University of Oregon. You are
usihg our organ to print your
views on important subjects in
which there are great varieties
of opinions. As I see it, the func
tion of your page is to inform and
to write opinions on which there
is no, or little, serious contro
versy.
William A. Mansfield
Just Deserts
Emerald Editor:
The current moans and groans
against the oppression of super
vision of student affairs is just a
little late to receive any real sym
pathy. We are now burdened
daily with elaborate complaints
against the administration, the
state liquor commission, and any
one else who has curtailed some
of the “rights” of the students.
These complaints would be truly
justified if the student body was
composed of adults. Such is far
from the case.
Let’s go back a little. Remem
ber the beginning of last fall
term? As far as beer drinking
goes, things were wide open. Stu
dent conduct certainly did not
tend toward moderation. The fi
ascos of Homecoming and the
Freshman bonfire did nothing to
endear us to the hearts of the ad
ministration or the people of the
state (and we musn’t forget, this
..is a state institution) There were
many more lesser known instan
ces of trouble, usually to minors,
where beer or other liquor was
involved. Even at this time, the
administration was willing to let
the students handle the problem.
Meetings were held and discus
sions with student leaders were
long and verbose, but the plan
failed. Why? Because the stu
dents refused to accept respon
sibility for their own actions.
Any amount of privilege entails a
certain amount of responsibility.
If you refuse the latter, why
should you have the former?
On the other hand, if there is a
sincere desire on the part of the
student body to do something
constructive and stop griping at
the inevitable consequences of
their actions, they should cease
blowing off steam, roll up their
collective sleeves, and go to work
and prove they mean it.
But, it’s far more easier just
to complain and I strongly sus
pect this is where the matter will
end.
Sincerely,
Richard Laing
such, release—not statistically,
but in the attention it gets from
commentators On college morals,
and from students themselves—
is petting. Its importance must
be found, as Kinsey puts it, not
in quantitative terms, but “as a
means of education toward the
making of socio-sexual adjust
ments.” And he adds that “pet
ting as a source of outlet has ac
quired vogue only in more recent
decades.”
One of the notable facts about
petting is that it represents one
of the few respects in which sex
ual behavior seems to have chang
ed appreciably from the genera
tion of the mid-nineteen-tweri
ties to the present one. In spite of
world wars and tensions, eco
nomic depressions, periods of
moral disillusionment and of mor
al crusade, the pattern of actual
behavior seems to stay pretty
much the same from one genera
tion to another. But there arqifc
few shifts of emphasis, of whidffl
the greater frequency of petting
to-climax is one.
Such is some of the factual ma
terial. What its meaning for the
students and for us may be is
quite another matter. The ques
tion of meaning is one on which
no two psychiatrists are likely to
agree with each other, and neith
er of them is likely to agree with
whatever implications Kinsey
draws from his own material.
I think it is dangerous to con
clude that the sexual life of the
college student is a badly frus
trated one. In an essay on “Sex
on the Campus,” Prof. G. M. Gil
bert of Princeton writes: “The
bulk of the nation’s leadership.in
all fields today comes from the
rank of the college population,
but society seems to demand pro
longed sexual frustration as the
price of training for such leader
ship.” Prof. Gilbert goes on to
suggest as a solution the encour
agement of early marriages
while the students are still in col
lege.
I doubt strongly both the con
clusion and the solution. One can
be frustrated just as much from
later unhappiness from a choice
of mates made too early as from
a period of experiment and ad
justment while waiting for a ca
reer and marriage. Nor do I find
(Please turn to page three)
It Could Be Oregon
“Now let ’em try dribblin’ all th’ way down th’ court!”