The Harvard Undergraduate Council is circulating a poll to establish new parietals: noon to midnight every day with an extension to 1 a.m. on Saturdays. These parietals would bring a qualitative change in the House system and Harvard life in general. It would be a change for the better.

The objections to such far-reaching parietal changes are by now familiar. Roommates, it is argued, will face cooperation problems they've never had before. A steady girlfriend could become a crisis. Additional noise on weeknights could disturb people studying in their rooms. And finally, increased parietals risk another round in Harvard's now-legendary sex scandal.

These arguments have a common rationale: Students do not have the maturity to govern their personal lives in college; or if they do have the maturity, they do not have the right. Such paternalism has no place at Harvard. It ignores the College's responsibility to educate its students in the uses of freedom. Restrictive social regulations prevent students from learning to deal with their own social problems--as they must the minute they leave Harvard's Houses.

Some people still insist that the all-male atmosphere at Harvard is sacred--traditionally and educationally. It is part, they contend, of that unique "Harvard experience." But surely, the Harvard experience would be yet more unique and satisfactory if it provided a relaxed and natural social environment. As one HUC member puts it, "We live in a pretty damned artificial environment when Sunday through Thursday you can't even talk to a girl and Friday and Saturday you don't want to waste time talking." The permanent availability of a quiet private place would make it possible to be friends with girls in something approaching a normal way.

Efforts to increase parietals havealways been pains-taking, and the increases themselves have been miniscule. This time the HUC shows a new militancy in its demands. Its determination should not be put to the test.