Belser, Oxman Debate Bicker At Sophomore Class Assembly

November 22, 1966 — Clinch H. Belser Jr. '67 and Stephen A. Oxman '67 last night explained their positions on Bicker and the proposal of the Bicker Study Committee before an assembly of about 300 sophomores in Alexander Hall.

Oxman, chairman of the Undergraduate Council, stressed the need for the proposal to gain the support of "a sizable number of the sophomores." He noted that the "clubs on Prospect Street are extremely interested in the sophomore response to the proposal" and that if a significant number of sophomores favor the proposal, the graduate boards might be more responsive to calls for its adoption from the club members themselves.

Belser, this year's Interclub Committee chairman, countered by stating that the sophomores still really have no objective basis to judge Bicker because "you haven't been through the process yet." He added that discussion of changes in Bicker could best be carried out after Bicker, because at that time "three-fourths of the student body has been through Bicker, not just one-half."

Oxman further noted that he hoped that seven or eight clubs would adopt the proposal. Belser stated that "if this worked, it would be good," but that from the previous experience of Prospect and Gateway Clubs, a partial adoption of such a plan would eventually lead to the demise of those clubs adopting the proposal.

Both speakers gave short statements, which were followed by a lengthy question-and-answer period.

In his speech, Belser argued that each club "has its own distinctive atmosphere, where a member can relax and find camaraderie." He claimed that with an arbitrary system, "the clubs would lose their vitality and our already bleak social atmosphere would be even worse."

The ICC chairman contended further that the notion of a club hierarchy was "irrelevant to what the club system is all about." He added that people choose their clubs primarily on the basis of the club atmosphere rather than the club ranking and that the question of hierarchy is "quickly forgotten and doesn't make much difference for very long."

Oxman urged the sophomores to think "with their minds, not their hearts," in evaluating his arguments.

On the question of reduced selectivity, Oxman stated that under the present system, the likelihood that a sophomore would get into club with his friends is "the exception, not the rule."

The UGC chairman termed Bicker "a hoax, for it deludes the sophomore into believing that a group can select one's friends rather than the person himself."

In answer to arguments that the clubs would degenerate into nothing more than impersonal "restaurants," Oxman argued that the "personality or impersonality of a club rests on the value of friendship." He observed that the proposal assures a person that he would be with at least eight of his friends.

When the sophomore class officers were asked about their personal opinions concerning the proposal, class president Stephen S. Kennedy stated that changes are needed in the Bicker process, but that they "should come from within, rather than from without."

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Douglas J. Brown, secretary-treasurer of the class, asserted that he agreed completely with the proposal and felt that the present system was "detrimental and should be abolished."