Under the current Bicker system, a person can either win the lottery (obtain acceptance into Cap/Cottage/Ivy/T.I./Tower) or have everything they own, including their self-worth, stripped from them (hosed). So why must our system be so extreme? The open Bicker system aims to gain a middle ground.
It is important to understand that this is not a new proposal but rather an old system which is being reevaluated and reformed to fit today's 'Street.'
The idea is that a person could bicker more than one club during Bicker week. The open Bicker proposal is not to be confused with the 100 percent Bicker proposal. The open system does not claim that everyone will be accepted into a club if they bicker.
The process is as follows: A person would bicker several clubs. Then each club, independently from all others, would decide whether they wanted that person or not. Then the club hands out its bids at that time. Anyone receiving a bid decides which club he or she wants to join.
Open Bicker bears a striking resemblance to our college application process. If you are qualified, then you will receive acceptances from multiple schools (clubs), at which point you are free to decide between them. If you are somewhat qualified, then you will receive acceptances from only a few schools (clubs). Finally, if you are dumber than a nail post, then you won't be accepted anywhere, at which point you are relegated to serve time at a community college (sign-in club).
Ideally none of us would fall into the latter category because if we got past Fred Hargadon, then we should be able to get past drunken club officers. Our current Bicker system would be the equivalent of saying that you are only allowed to apply to one college, and one college only. If you are rejected, then you have to wait until next year to see if we change our minds (re-Bicker) and oh, in the meanwhile, you have to go to school (eat) at community college (Burger King, Victor's). This is bad.
Another thing is that the open system would virtually eliminate hazing during the Bicker process because it would change the whole complex of Bicker from being one in which the Bickeree is forced to impress the club, to one in which the club is forced to impress the Bickeree. This is good.
Cottage President Grainger David describes the current process as "suicide Bicker." This system is like asking you to try to get a date with a good-looking girl and saying that if you get turned down you have to be celibate for the next year. It isn't fair to only get one shot - just because Christie Brinkley (Cottage) isn't smart enough to like you doesn't mean that Kate Moss (Ivy) won't say yes.
Another goal of the open system is that the clubs will be able to focus more closely on entertainment and activities for their members throughout the year, rather than trying to cater to the potential Bickerees all the time. It also hopes to curtail somewhat that annoying habit of social climbing. The open system would promote multiple visits to different clubs when out at the 'Street,' which in turn would increase diversity. This is good.
Look, we are not solving world peace here. We are talking about reforming Bicker. It is not that difficult. Open Bicker is a system that aims for inclusion rather than exclusion. No one is going to die, no one's life is going to be ruined forever, and the open Bicker system is simply going to make life fairer/better for many people. In a year or two, no one will even remember the old system (dry Bicker). My mom says the only ones that like change are wet babies. Well guess what, this baby (the Bicker system) is crying. Justin Kerr is a politics major from Newport Beach, Calif. He can be reached at jdkerr@princeton.edu.
Read More
Encampments are not ‘inherently unsafe.’ Princeton should not arrest or expel students for them.
Daily Princetonian Editorial Board“We urge Princeton to cease student arrests and to refrain from expelling students simply for engaging in prolonged protest.”
“We urge Princeton to cease student arrests and to refrain from expelling students simply for engaging in prolonged protest.”
On encampments, free speech, and ‘time, place, and manner’ rules on university campuses
Christopher L. EisgruberPresident Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 comments on encampments, free speech, and “time, place, and manner” rules.
Princeton needs to be a climate justice leader — emphasis on the ‘climate,’ emphasis on the ‘justice’
Alex Norbrook and Eleanor Clemans-Cope“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
