<p>Smithieandproud, D appreciated your response and upon reading it, wanted to clarify (and I think had a bit of an epiphany).</p>
<p>At Wellesley & Bryn Mawr, her observations of the cafeterias, student centers, etc. were that the different types of students were more integrated – that is, a given lunch table or group of girls might include girls who on the surface appeared quite different and diverse. She liked that, as it said that students were “chill” – just took people for who they were at face value. At Smith & Mt H, her observations were more that the black girls sat at one table, the gender-neutral-looking girls (I don’t have a better way to describe this) sat at another table, the jocky-looking girls at another, etc. and she was concerned that it was, indeed, too much like high school. Now this may be a totally erroneous observation, and if so, then I’d like to hear that1 So it’s both a function of “finding her tribe” but not having it be cliquey, if that makes sense.</p>