Recently the editorial page of the University of Oregon Emerald revived a controversy which is being increasingly discussed by younger generations; namely, the "dutch treat date". After citing the cases of several collegiate dances, to which all the guests had been pledged to attend as "stags", and which had invariably turned out to be dismal failures, the editors of the Emerald proceed to declare their opposition to the idea. In thus recording their disfavor of the "dutch treat date" they were probably expressing the opinion of the majority of present day college students.

The question has essentially resolved itself into a quarrel between the romantic and realistic points of view. The battle opens with the realist protesting against the archaism and viciousness of the theory that the gentleman pays because he is more liberally supplied with funds. There is generally no attempt to refuse this realistic contention, and from this point the argument conventionally assumes something of the following form:

Romanticist: But you forget that the terrific outlay on gown of the modern girl is, in the long run, more than equivalent to the sums which the boy friend spends on her.

Realist: Then let her cut down on this expense and dress more simply.

Romanticist: The result of which is less dates.

Realist: I defy you to prove it. A fellow likes a girl for her own sake and not for a lot of glad rags.

Romanticist: I don't know about that, and anyhow that isn't the way the girl figures...Besides, there's something else, the most important thing, in fact... We're not living in the age of chivalry, but when I go out, part of the fun is in knowing that I'm doing the escorting. Don't deny it, you feel that way yourself, don't you?

To this the realist has no answer except a sneer, or if he is ultra sophisticated, a gentle smile accompanied by the formation of a perfect ring of smoke.