SCARLET AND BLACK m Open Letter to President Leggett Ed. Note: Friday. February 3. |957 Page Three Texi of Leggeii Speech Delivered to Wednesday Senate Meeting to he informed of and to understand as fully as Ladies and gentlemen: I am grateful to Mr. Faulwoll for giving mo the opportunity to speak to you, for I thought the time had 00in when you would like to hear from me directly on matters that concern us all. One of my purposes is a wish to describe my attitude or posi- tion on certain college prob- lems which are of special con- cern to you _ concerns such asgwomen’s hours, open rooms, in.general what we might call the elements of student civili- zafion. Another purpose is to give you a progress report on collage matters which are now in preparation or conversation at stages —— matters such as building projects, curriculum changes, and long-range goals in general. The nice separation between college plans and col- lege problems is of Course arti- ficial. The truth is that now and tomorrow, you and I and a number of other people are involved in both matters to» gether, and, ideally, our rhetoric as well as our actions ought to reflect the inseparable feet. Just: before Christmas vaca- tion I addressed the faculty on the state of the College, com- menting on what 1 thought were four major areas of con- earn in a private, residential, liberal arts college: (i) the problem of increasing its fi- nancial support; (2) the prob- lem of improving the profes sional life of its faculty; (3) 'the problem of relating our commitment to general educa- tion with the demands of pre professional training; (4) tho problem of maintaining and im- proving the specinl educational virtues of living in a residen- tial college, Though I expect: to touch at least indirectly on all those matters tonight, I want to begin with the ques» tion of our residenceliall civil. ization. and I think it would be appropriate if 1 said to you what 1 said to the faculty, and then later, through the Alum- ni 5&3, to alumni and parents. You will agree at least with the first sentence. The events of the past oath ple of weeks have been hard on all of us, and it has been difficult at times to keep our humanity and humor ringing clear . . . The chief issue is whether the college as an institution has a right to judge whether the ont-af-cllss behavior of students is appropriate or in» eppropriate to the education- al mission the college sets for itself. 1 think the college does, and I am aware that it is the president of the col- lege who has to execute the judgment . . . 1 am also aware that the judgment should neflect an institutional responsibility, “that something it stands for," which adheres to a col- lege having a history and a living purpose and as such belongs not only to present day students and faculty but to generations of pre vious students and faculty \members. Edmund Burke said it bet- ter. so I, refer you to him, mindful flint Thomas Paine criticized him for “pit ‘iig the plumage and forgetting the dying bird” and that a constant reassessment of what we want to stand for is necessary. I mean only that See SPEECH on Page 4 P.E. Complex Plans— smurf-u. Mm ”valen— Endemic» sniping nmszvfih Wm Latit- Drlwlnfl of P. I, plan: by carol McConoohie Representatives of this group met with President Leggett Thursday to present and discuss the following letter and its implica- tions. The group will meet with Leggeti with- in the next week and specific answers are expected by the week’s end. Dear President Leggett, In order for there to be any chance of a mean- ingful dialogue on the problems with which the Griifnell community is presently faced, we feel that the student body must be fully and frankly informed on a number of specific areas of Con- cern. We call on you to publicly answer, by means of a published statement in the 5&3 or address before the Senate, the following ques— tions. It is extremely important that these ques- tions be specifically and directly dealt with, and, if there exists a sincere wish to discuss their implications, there be a reply in the near future. Our questions reflect a lack of student infor- mation on campus issues which vitally affect us and about which we feel we have a right to be informed. We ask that you bridge the existing in- formation gap which is causing students to ques- tion the aims and motives of those who deter- mine the direction of Grinnell life. It, as you insist, this college is a community, it follows that those who dwell in it have the right possible the policies which govern the concern. We present to you in this letter specific questions covering Six major areas of student concern. We ask that you reply to the following: 1. Question: What accounts for the extraordin- orily large size of classes this semester? What concrete plans are being made to remedy this situation? Comment: We deplore the existence of largo classes which decrease the effectiveness of tin struction by limiting instructional techniques to lecture. thereby inhibiting open class discussion that small classes encourage. We deliberately chose to attend a small liberal arts college pro. cisely to avoid the disadvantage of large, im- personal classes. 2. Question: In your speech on Wednesday, and in the report of the Faculty Committee on sm- dent Affairs, the abolition of women's hours was consistently related to the “problem” of open dorms. How do you see the relationship between these two issues? Comment: There seems implicit in your state- ment at philosophhy relating the women's hours proposal to the issue of open dorms. Moreover, there seems to be an explicit condition that any change in women’s hours is contingent upon you! See LETTER TO LEGGETI‘ on page 1 Book Review — Part It A Sociological Look at Sex By Melinda Ward Ira L. keiss, in Premarital Sexual Attitudes in America, divides America's standards into four major categories — the double standard, permis- siveness without affection, permissiveness with affection, and a single standard of abstinence. Reiss deals with each standard separately and outlines each at their negativesvalue consequences (pregnancy, venereal disease, guilt) and positive- value consequences (physical and psychic sati faction, aid to marital adjustment). The double standard “entails using one stand- 8rd to evaluate male behavior and another stand- and to evaluate female behavior, making it pos< sible for a man and a woman to be judged quite differently on the identical sort of behavior." According to Reiss, it is our dominant informal sexual standard. He also found that many men approving the double standard often held absti- nence as their ideal standard. Reiss maintains that the double standard consists of two types; the orthodox (premarital sexual freedom for men and abstinence for Women) and the iranSi- tiorlal (leeway is given to the Woman who is one gaged or “in love”). Reiss feels that this stand- ard gives rise to more conflicts and contradic- tions than any other standard. “it is evident that the feminist movement with its platform of equality, greatly week- ened the double standard. Furthermore, the development of contraception meant that the fear of illegitimate offspring and venereal disease was no longer applicable as a support for female virginity. Romantic Love also he voted, in its later stages, on equalifarlan atti- tude towards women. Women were in be loved psychlcolly as well as physically. Love nnd sex could be joined according to the later knmanticists; this was opposed to the double standard. Finally, the Industrial Revolution and urbanism gave women greater opportu- nities to exercise their new found rights with- out the restrictions of small town gossip and social controls." Nevertheless, the double standard seems most popular, especially in the lower classes, and conflicts with the cul- tural changes cited above. Another contradictory and negative aspect of his Standard is the labeling of “good" and “bad" women (after all it is the “bad” women who make this standard possible). Sexual adjustment in marriage may be more difficult for the ad- herents of this standard, say! Reiss, because the male's learned behavior will tend to be body- centered rather than personcentered. A certain amount of guilt may also be associated with tho male's sexual behavior because before marriage, his partner had always been an unrespected "bad" girl. Permissiveness with affection is just a step beyond the transitional double standard. This il a single standard in that “it accepts coitus as right for both men and women when a stable affectionate relationship is involved. This Stamf- ard implies personcenfered behavior, rather than bodyrcentered, since strong affection or love is a prerequisite to sexual intercourse. The affeov fion involved also tends to make the person: cautious about pregnancy and venereal disease. Because of the growing popularity of this pen missive standard and the accent on affection, the guilt in this case is not associated with sex or with a relationship in which sex is an integral part. (Permissiveness with affection is not to be confused with trial marriage.) Reiss notes, “Peoi pie who accept permissiveness with affection do not usually intend their behavior to be a trio] marriage—in many cases, the people concerned are not definitely interested in marriage. Sexual intercourse is viewed as an expression of their feelings for each other and not usually as a test of their compatibility." There does seem reason to believe, Reiss comments, that a person adher- inging to this standard will have an easier, mot! satisfactory sexual adjustment in marriage, A third current sexual standard is permissivo< ness without affection which consists, Reiss says, of two main kinds: there is the orglastic, “those who seek highly promiscuous coitus with precau. tionary measures of secondary importance,” and the sophisticated, “those who seek physical pleas ure in a more controlled and careful way.” The latter type seems to be more prevalent as u Sits ciolcgical factor and the former more often than not should be reserved for psychological study. This standard flies against many of our Convic< lions, religious beliefs being the oldest. As Reiss explains, it emphasizes body-centered coitus and most often does not lead to marriage, However, it is a single standard and it. keeps one from thinking his sexual partner is “bad”. The last category that Reiss discusses is absti- nence. Even this standard has undergone a change in the last century. A Swedish student interviewed by Reiss noted that although Ameri- can women abstain from intercourse, they will engage in all sorts of sexual behavror up to that point. Although this behavior prevents pregnancy and the spread of venereal disease, it also leads to frustration and psychological problems, we cording to Reiss,