CI at au at
Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
11 - - UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN/ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in at, reprints.
Each Time I Chanced To See Franklin Da I
yLocal Reaction to Sorenson Proposal
by H. Neil Berkson
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 1964
NIGHT EDITOR: KENNETH WINTER
New Rules for Women:
Welcome Flexibility
REGENT SORENSON'S PROPOSAL to dissociate the
University from the fraternity-sorority system has
been examined from many sides, but no one has yet
commented upon the reaction of Interfraternity Council
and Panhellenic Association.
When the fraternity and sorority presidents walked
out of their banquet last week after listening to Sorenson,
many of them were favorably disposed to his remarks.
The attitude was not that dissociation might be a good
thing for the University, but that it might get the system
out from under Student Government Council and the
whole discrimination issue.
As a matter of fact, the national sororities have
specifically considered taking their organizations "off
campus" because of the heat generated by the bias issue.
What neither the nationals nor some of the local presi-
dents apparently seemed to realize was that the fra-
ternity and sorority systems would quickly expire apart
from the University.
IFC AND PANHEL were quick to recognize this fact,
and they reacted almost immediately in opposition to
Sorenson's plan. In the case of the fraternity system,
this was not surprising. On the surface, at least, ,IFC
finally moved last year to take a strong stand against
discrimination in membership selection. Consequently,
it recognizes no conflict with University policy.
The sororities, on the other hand, have been strictly
controlled by their archaic national organizations. The
nationals were specifically responsible for the fight
against SGC; they have been generally responsible for
an elitist concept of the sorority system as "untouchable."
Consequently, Panhel's reaction to the Sorenson
proposal is particularly noteworthy. While the statement
opposing dissociation from the University was rather
nebulous ("contrary to the aims and purposes of Pan-
hellenic Association and the individual collegiate chap-
ters at the University"), the sororities took the aetion
in spite of possible disapproval from their nationals.
* * *
PANHEL PRESIDENT Ann Wickins clearly em-
phasized: "We must get away from the idea that
allegiance to the nationals means absolute agreement
with them." Obedience would have been a better word
than agreement.
Panhellenic is in a potentially explosive situation on
campus. By the fall, some sororities will almost certainly
be up before Student Government Council for violation
of Regents' Bylaw 2.14. Moreover, the whole issue of the
recommendation system has yet to be settled.
As long as Panhel and the specific sororities remain
tied to their nationals they will never solve their prob-
lems. They could very possibly wind up off campus.
In this context, Panhel's statement last week was
important. It didn't go very far, but perhaps it will be
followed by a persistent attempt on the part of the soror-
ities to gain local control over their chapters.
It's about time for sororities to become in fact the
student organizations which they pretend to be.
THE NUMBER of blank stares evoked by the title to
this column in the past two weeks has finally beoome
unbearable. The last straw came yesterday when, in three
successive phone calls, one identical question floated
across the other end of the receiver: "What in the world
does it mean?"
There must be one other person on campus who
can provide the answer. Please? Anybody?
AT LONG LAST, the doctrine of in loco
parentis has come up for scrutiny by
the University, resulting in a welcome in-
crease in flexibility of interpretation.
Slowly the administration is edging
away from its fetish for preserving the
University's "public image" by attempt-
ing to protect its women students and in-
stead is gradually handing back to par-
ents the responsibility for student con-
duct or misconduct here-and rightfully
s0.
The University in many ways in the
past has rationalized the fact that wom-
en are subject to numerous regulations
while men are virtually free of restric-
tions after their freshman year - i.e.:
women are less able to take care of them-
selves and therefore should be better su-
pervised (and hence "protected") by ithe
University; if women are subject to an
early curfew, men are more apt to keep
out of mischief (implying, of course, an
impending moral decline with any exten-
sion of hours); parents would be in an
uproar at the thought of their daughters
having complete personal freedom on a
"liberal" campus.
FOR THESE REASONS and others, the
University has long stretched the doc-
trine of in loco parentis to its limit in
women's residences-setting arbitrary
curfews; requiring detailed sign-out pro-
cedures; curtailing men's visiting hours
in the public areas of women's dormitor-
ies.
Although the in loco parentis doctrine
supposedly holds the University respon-
sible. for aspects of the well-being of its
students, in fact there is virtually no
means by which the University can guar-
antee the "safe-keeping" of students
while they are here.
In its recent report to the OSA re-,
questing changes in women's regulations,
the Women's Conference Committee not-
ed that "it is known that back door exits
are being made after closing hours."
For that matter, it is also known that
sign-out requirements are often ignored
and back doors are regarded as conven-.
ient entrances for those who do not wish
to abide by the common curfew.
ANOTHER SIGNIFICANT POINT in the
WCC recommendation states that "al-
though the fact that rule is not readily
enforceable is not necessarily just ration-
ale for abolishing it, the problem must be
approached with realism."
A realistic attitude, then, is the key to
the OSA's recent decisions. Other than
the dubious "protective" purpose of wom-
en's rules, there has been no valid rea-
son for maintaining stringent regula-
tions. In liberalizing many of the cur-
rent regulations, the OSA apparently
acknowledged that the moral issue asso-
ciated with the question of greater per-
sonal freedom is a false one.
At long last, the University has faced
up to the public image dilemma. No
longer need it hide behind an arbitrary
curfew or sign-out system as "proof" that
it is fulfilling its paternal obligations. In-
stead, recognizing that morality cannot
be legislated, it has pointed up the initial
responsibility of parents to instill a mor-
al code in their children.
ACTUALLY, the University has long been
aware that its rules and the student's
moral code are not correlative phenomena
-a liberalization of the former cannot
be said to promote the loosening of the
latter. Never before, however, has the
University been so frank and open about
its attitudes and intentions.
Never before has the University so can-
didly turned tables on the public image
controversy. Even the decision last year
to grant apartment permission to all
senior women was not as significant a
liberalization as the extensive changes
which are pending. Prior to that time it
was relatively easy for any senior women
to get "special" permission from the OSA
to live in an apartment. The parallel de-
cision to grant "unlimited" hours and key
permissions to senior women living in
the dormitories was a necessary follow-up
to the apartment regulation, so that all
senior women would be accorded the same
relative freedom.
Through its approval of the pending
liberalization, the administration has in
effect recognized that the prime obliga-
tion of a university, after all, is to be a
shaper of minds and skills.
At the same time, it has called upon
parents to recognize their own duty to in-
still moral values in their offspring be-
fore they are packed off to the University.
THIS CANDOR is refreshing in that it
affords the student, the parent and
the University the dignity which they all
deserve.
It allows the student the right to be
treated as an adult outside, as well as
inside of the classroom. It accords par-'
ents the right to know the University as
it exists, not as its "image" would have
it-and to know their own responsibilities
to the University.
Most significantly, it allows the Uni-
versity to concentrate its efforts on pro-
moting academic excellence without hav-
ing to display pretenses of child-rearing.
-MARY LOU BUTCHER
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Readers Speak Out on Cleveland, Atlanta, the DAC
To the Editor:
I WISH to make some exception
to Michael Harrah's editorial
"Tragedy in Cleveland" appearing
in The Daily Thursday, April .
In these days, it may be said
that when a new public project is
built to perpetuate the injustices
of the system, a protest will soon
follow. What is already done in
the way of discrimination and seg-
regation is a mockery of demo-
cratic values to say the least; but
to allow such things to be included
in newly-constructed public build-
ings and projects is inexcusable.
It must not be allowed. We are
rapidly nearing the time when it
will not be allowed, regardless of
all else.
A picket of protest is only the
earliest manifestation of those who
are fed-up. If we think by squelch-
ing the open protest we squelch its
source, we are sadly kidding our-
selves. There are large numbers
of citizens in every major metro-
politan area of this nation who
are fed up. By refusing to ac-
knowledge this, the nation's fa-
thers attempt to make the pro-
tests appear unfounded. This re-
jection of credibility and legiti-
macy of the protest postpones ne-
gotiation and forces larger, more
angry demonstrations, eventually
with violent undertones.
CLEVELAND FATHERS, like
Ann Arbor's, cannot make the
problems go away by ignoring
them. The more they ignore the
problem the more violent the con-
ditions become.
Senator Stennis and Mr. Har-
rah would have a half-hearted civil
rights bill dropped until violence
stops. They would have considera-
tion of a possible solution to the
problem ignored in the name of
peace when doing nothing is sure
to produce only greater violence.
Perhaps that would be their un-
doing since more violence of the
Birmingham type creates convic-
tion among Negroes that mobilizes
them for stronger protests in
larger number with greater anger
and retaliation.
If it is really violence they are
trying to avoid, then rush the
token bill through Congress and
see if the black leadership can't
be bought off with it. They have
been successful in this so far. One
of these days, it may not work.
MOST CIVIL RIGHTS demon-
strators these days do not view
the world on a man-to-man basis.
The focus is on social groups and
trends. They see the individual
acting out a role within larger so-
cial movements.
So the tragedy in Cleveland was
not between the minister and the
bulldozer operator but between the
civil rights movement and the
city fathers. The fact is that the
construction workers there have
chosen to reject solidarity with
other people of lower status and
instead have done what they are
told to do by the powers-that-be.
That perhaps, is the greater
tragedy.dOne sometimes wonders
what side labor is really on.
Why must the American desire
for order and justice always be
that way: order before justice; in-
deed order at all costs? Is justice
attained by disorder illegitimate?
The question may be academic,
for the temperature of the black
masses is rising much faster than
the white community's attempt to
cool it off. As the temperature
rises this summer, the kindling
point may well be reached.
Yes the Negro wants peaceful
coexistance but after he has a
job, a decentneighborhoodrand
respectable schools, not before.
-Frank Starkweather, '61
To the Editor:
' mTT-, m TATTVof Anril 0 an-
lieve that he is unaware of the
numerous peaceful protest move-
ments conducted in recent months.
Does he not know of the many
people who are involved in human
suffering protests who have no in-
tention of "exterminating" those
who oppose them? Must he wrong
this group and, as it were, drive
"his tractor" over them?
* * *
WE AGREE that "there is no
sense to this struggle," but only
if man's humanity to man ceases
to exist, and we firmly do not be-
lieve that it ever will. It is not
,surprising to note his agreement
with the opposition and to openly
say that he sees "no hurry to enact
the legislation" that will bring
an end to the legalized violence
which has existed for so very long.
It is not surprising then that he
would not find those of us who
protest worthy of the redress we
seek.
Finally, it seems most signifi-
cant to us that Mr. Harrah refer-
red to "integrationists" and "seg-
regationists" in the third person
rather than the first person. Sure-
ly he must be on one side or the
other, for in this, can any man
be " . . . an island entire unto
himself . . .?" A negative answer
to this can avert the "real trag-
edy.",
-Singer A. Buchanan, Grad
H. Lenore DuPree, Grad
To the Editor:
" VE+GROVIOLENCE ... would
undo many years of painful
progress in the civil rights- move-
ment," states Robert Johnston in
his editorial against DAC. I too,
at one time, believed that violence
was absolutely the wrong way to
influence the good white man.
True, a Negro cannot drink at
just any drinking fountain, or
sleep in all hotels-or eat in all
restaurants, but I felt that through
patience and passive demonstra-
tions, whites would come to have
at least a small amount of com-
passion for athose people they try
so hard to ignore. I thought that
they did not really know how
much the Negro suffers from his
degraded position in society, and
that if they could be shown how
the Negro feels, they would surely
change their hostile and superior
attitudes.
So I was patient. I watched
white men set dogs on non-violent
demonstrators who merely sat and
sang songs. I watched policemen
throw tear gas bombs at women
and children who walked silently
and peacefully in freedom
marches. I read of ministers who
were shot to death on the steps
of white churches as they tried, in
the name of a peace-loving God, to
create true peace on earth. And I
read about the atrocities com-
mitted against more passive Ne-
gros who don't join marches or
civil rights groups out of fear,
and just want to be left alone. And
I realized that the white man can
be just as indifferent and apathe-
tic as he wants to be (re Mr.
Harrah's statement: ". . . millions
of Negroes and whites . . . do not
look upon civil rights as a burning
issue (and) must be allowed to
exist in peace") while the Negro
is, a priori, a victim of tragic cal-
lousness and hatred.
* * *
JUST WHAT is "painful prog-
ress," Mr. Johnston? Does prog-
ress mean to begrudgingly grant
one or two Negroes a place in a
few universities or token integra-
tion in order to mock their ef-
forts? Is progress the white man
saying "tsk; tsk, too bad" and then
refusing to greet a Negro socially
or accept him in his-home?
The small concessions which
have come recently have come,
unfortunately, only with a real
show of force and/or violence, for
force, along with money (the fear
of losing it and, along with it, ones
total identity and security) seem to
be the only thing the white man
understands. I am not advocating
misdirected and futile outbreaks
of aggression. I am convinced that
strikes, boycotts and other forms
of force such as these, are a begin-
ning.
The white man fears aggression
more than anything else because
he no long r has the forces-phys-
ical or moral-to back up his
cowardly, irrational, or indifferent
(which amounts to acceptance of
the crimes) position unless he
hides behind a police dog or a
gun. And that's why he is going
to be forced now to pay attention
to the crimes committed every day
in this country and not, I hope,
wish the same reaction as those
New Yorkers who watched pas-
sively as a woman was stabbed to
death before their eyes. No, force
is going to be used now until the
whites in this country get it
through their heads that by say-
ing that one segment of the
world's people is inferior and not
fit to live next door to them,
they are degrading all human
beings-themselves included.
Miriam Dann, '64
To the Editor:
WITH A PREPONDERANCE of
the white people carrying
wholly, or in some mutated form,
the Negro stereotype, (of mental
and physical inferiority) how is
the Negro to find "a generally
favorable environment?" The an-
swer is that it does not exist, if
you are black. The type of so-.
called direct action that "reached
the limit of its effectiveness" ac-
cording to editorial writer Robert
Johnston is non-violent direct ac-
tion, as advocated by CORE. Black
James Baldwin says "Non-violence
is a white mans virtue."
There is a more effective type of
direct action advocated by the
Direct Action Committee, which is
violent. Violence, in this case,
means if a picketer is attacked
by a dog, he tries to kill it; if at-
tacked by a drunk or cop, he
fights back. The attack comes
from outside his person, and he
defends himself. This is quite ef-
fective, it scares some people and
lets authorities know that the Ne-
gro is not going to take it much
longer.
Direct action is most useful when
an apathetic public ignores what
is happening to Negroes (i.e. as,
in the North). "An increasingly
severe response," as Mr. Johnston
says, from white people, to direct
action, might indicate that the
Negro has gotten through to some
whites. It also might give an idea
of the latent forms of prejudice
in our society. Direct action makes
people take sides. I don't think it
would be, in Mr. Johnson's words,
"more harmful to the Negro's
goals" if he knew who was a bigot
and who wasn't.
* * *
WHAT Mr. Johnston calls "fear,
dislike and distrust with regard to
the Negro's aspirations" is ac-
tually the work of the stereotype.
The Negro, not his aspirations,
since he is sub-human, and has
inferior aspirations, can't be trust-
ed. As for the Negro's "weak pil-
lars," who do you think built them,
if not the white men?
The Negro has waited for the
benevolent white man to give him
equality for hundreds of years. He
has not gotten it. Many Negroes
are tired of waiting. They are go-
ing to do something, anything to
change this system.
Direct action is the best method
to fight an apathetical citizenry.
But direct action better hurry, or
true, large scale violence is going
to happen. In fact,;it already has
started. I am told that in Harlem
it is a common sight to see signs
that say: "Kill the whites." People
are now getting killed in Cleve-
land. It's time for the white lib-
erals to wake up, including Mr.
Johnston.
-David Amante, '64
Masculine Mystique
To the Editor:
F I CAN JUDGE by the chatter
of college students, the questions
addressed to Betty Friedan, author
of "The Feminine Mystique" and
comments heard and overheard in
the Union, "the feminine mysti-
que" is still very much present
and Mrs. Friedan's attack against
it is still going to be misunder-
stood. "The feminine mystique" is
going to be defended by those who
believe that Mrs. Friedan's re-
defining of femininity is equal to
the castration of man. This is not
so! No mature woman 'wants to
destroy a man; she merely wants
the chance to be alive and to be
allowed to demonstrate her own
maturity. I propose that while we
look at the feminine mystique, we
also look at the masculine mysti-
que.
I speak not only as a college
student, but also as an observor
of teenagers-and especiallythe
boys-on the playground where I
worked for two summers in an ur-
ban neighborhood in Cleveland,
Ohio. For boys there is no sub-
stitute for a man, or a father; the
most alive and loving woman can-
not provide a growing boy with
what he needs most-a man to
model himself after. And always
for growing boys and girls, the
man of the house-the father-
will reflect a picture of therout-
side world, will offer a way to set
up one's own family, and ultimate-
ly a system of values to live by.
I submit that if we chain the
mother to the house, send her
man out into the world and refuse
to let the two work together, we
present to the growing child a
lopsided picture-a picture show-
ing the family as a woman and
children with a father who is
never around. The masculine mys-
tique then becomes that of the
lawgiver, the breadwinner, the dic-
tator, and possibly, but not always,
the ogre. While America sees suc-
cess as amassing money and
creating the good life, a man may
gain this, but lose the pleasure of
his children. And to rephrase the
Bible, "What profit a man if he
gain the world and lose his own
son (and/or daughter)?"
I DO NOT believe that the new
woman that I believe in, which is
I think what Betty Friedan hopes
for, and hopefully in which every
thinking man and woman believes
in, is one that wishestoedestroy
the American man. I believe it is
really a question of creating new
men and new women to live a
new world-which must not be
TODAY AND TOMORROW:
Washington Change-Over
by Walter Lippmann
WASHINGTON IS HAVING a fairly mild
case of the unease which invariably
accompanies a change at the top. The,
best remedy for it is to recognize it for
what it is, as a normal human experience
which only time can cure entirely.
For no succession can be wholly smooth,
human nature being what it is. Too much
is at stake-too much has been lost and
too much has been gained. But a suc-
cession can be kept smooth enough if the
principals and the supporting casts, the
mind-readers and the key-hole peepers,
the inside dopesters and the tale-bearers.
can be made to remember that the mole-
hills, which they would work into moun-
tains, are normal.
THE OBSCENE and wanton nature of
the assassination in Dallas was such
that the fact itself and its consequences
were at first impossible to accept.
Multitudes, even at great distances, felt
at first that this could not be because
it should never have been that so young
and brilliant a figure was wiped out unex-
pectedly and in a few minutes. For the
inner circles, this was even more so. Be-
cause the crime was unacceptable, grief
was insufficient if it was not inconsol-
oaht P_ toa' a kind of dinvovlty tn sav
as I know there has been no instance of
the new courtiers crowding the old ones.
The terrible blow fell directly on the
Kennedy circle.
There are already visible those who are
speculating for their own advancement
on the restoration of the Kennedy power.
They are the Democratic politicians who
would run Robert Kennedy for the Presi-
dency via the vice-presidency. And there
are, of course, the Republican opponents
who see, as Mr. Nixon has already made
manifest, that if only a fight can be insti-
gated between the Kennedy following and
the Johnsonians, the Republicans will
profit by it.
IT WOULD HAVE been better if the at-
torney general had disassociated him-
self at the outset and completely from any
organized attempt to unsurp-that is the
right word for it-the prerogative of the
President in office to say the final word
about his own vice-president.
The mistake has now, it would appear,
been rectified. But it was a mistake, and
it is the reason why the inevitable unease
of almost every succession has threatened
to become inflamed and angry.
The unease will not, we may believe,
become divisive. It goes without saying
tite "'1N
.1
47 , -. ..
.000 , t ; A l r