The Brown man is a "young adolescent, not too intelligent," woman's college undergraduates claim in a recent poll on the gals' preferences for their dates, and the "Yale Daily News," broadcasts the fact, putting it in the light of a severe beating for the Bruin.
However, the girls go on to say "he is average, not particularly interesting, enjoys carefree simple pleasures, and has a high opinion of his athletic prowess." The terse comments leave us to draw what crumbs of satisfaction we can in asserting our ego.
But the Harvard man, according to the Smith girls, is an "effete, supercilious, broad A, intellect," an a Yale man, says Radcliffe, is one of a group of "rah, rah boys who ask silly questions like this one." Dartmouth is, however, "good for weekends" (Winter Carnival stuff). Williams and Amherst are dismissed with even less courtesy than the Bruins.
Where, we rise to enquire, and on what grounds should we feel disheartened? Our slap in the face comes from our general lack of desire to browbeat intellectually our dates. We're proud of our athletic prowess, but we don't wear our Phi Beta Kappa Keys to dazzle our girl friends.
As a matter of fact we are so little disheartened by the poll that we will probably continue to send down delegations of young adolescents, who don't try particularly to show off their intelligence to Smith. Connecticut weekends, et al. They haven't sent any back yet as goods damaged in transit and the "Daily News" may go merrily on with its polls.
Or, perhaps, we should demand why Pembroke was not included in this poll of emotions. --The Tech.