PREMARITAL SEX

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I was dismayed by Dr. Graham Blaine's statement in the April 12 edition of Time (p. 60). In the space of less than one-third column were juxtaposed ideas about a rise in the illegitimate-birth rate, parietals, and morality. If I didn't misinterpret Dr. Blaine's message, he apparently finds a certain connection among these three phenomena. He "expressed concern" about a seemingly widespread "form of student behavior," then cited the fact that "illegitimate births in the U.S. have tripled in the past 25 years." Partly to blame are "college officials who, by allowing men and women to visit each other in dorms, have encouraged intimacy both on and off campus, and 'are actually giving tacit consent to premarital sex.' . . . But Blaine saw brighter prospects ahead. He reported on a poll of Harvard undergraduates, most of whom indicated that they hope their future children will live by a stricter moral code than they have."

Does Dr. Blaine really think the students who answered his survey equate morality with sex? If this were true, why would so many of them be pushing for liberalization of restrictive parietal rules, which, if affected, would pass on to their future children an access to further "immorality?" And by the way, most would agree that the rise in illegitimate births is bad (if the illegitimate child is unwanted), but who's morally wrong in these cases? It's just possible that a few of those students who came out for morals meant that they wouldn't want their kids to be as immoral as the people who today oppose revision of abortion laws, who harass and actually arrest a man for disseminating birth-control information, and who try generally to smother spontaneity--sexual or otherwise--and to perpetuate guilt and shame. I want my children to have higher "morals" than the present generation, too. I don't want to see them adhering to any double standard and immobilized by the hostilities which such hypocrisy engenders.

I only hope that the whole article was a terrible mistake, and that the concurrence of Dr. Blaine's statements, and their seeming "logical" connection was a mere editorialization on the part of Time. Maybe Dr. Blaine really does support mental health. Susan Mintz 1G