Stigma towards women's colleges

<p>It seems like whenever I mention that I'm applying to an all-womens liberal arts school I get these cliched responses--"Like, oh my God, there's no guys! You'd have NO social life" or "Why? Are you a lesbian?" Some say that women's colleges are nurturing, hand-holding environments that don't prepare you for the proverbial "real world" where men rule the roost. And students at women's colleges are thought of as either cloistered nuns or radical, militant, hairy-legged feminists. Why do these mindless stereotypes still remain? When they start searching for colleges junior year, many girls immediately rule out some excellent schools like Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, Mt. Holyoke, Smith just because they are womens colleges and they "wouldn't be caught dead there". Seriously, grow up. You go to college to get quality education and sharpen the skills you need later on, not for guys, frat parties, and beer blasts. (Besides, at several of the schools I mentioned, students can cross-register at co-ed institutions, so it's not COMPLETELY devoid of men!) And sure, there might be a more visible lesbian population at women's colleges, but it's a far cry from saying they "all" are. And politically, they lean towards the liberal side of the spectrum, but not EVERYONE there feels that way politically. You can't just box a diverse array of students into one group. I hope more young women look past the stereotypes and consider all the opportunities they'd have at women's colleges.</p>

<p>I got some of those responses, too, when I was applying to Smith. These days once in a while when I tell people I went to a women's college they're a little surprised. As for the social life thing, I think by going to a women's college you can have a social experience that is unique and that others will never experience and cannot imagine.</p>

<p>It is indeed annoying when people think that women's colleges are, as you put it, "nurturing, hand-holding environments that don't prepare you for the proverbial 'real world' where men rule the roost". This preaching about the real world is something that irritates me to no end. I wish some people would have a little more imagination in thinking of the "real world". Smith may be what some would consider an alternative sort of environment, but the fact that it may be less sexist and less homophobic than some other communities does not mean that it is any less a part of the real world! Yes, people have challenged the status quo by creating and sustaining this type of community, but that doesn't mean that the experience of being there is any less important than the experience of being in any other college. Is there some benefit to us or to the world in having everybody's college experience be the same? </p>

<p>AND not all of life has to be entirely focused on preparation for something else. The college years are actual years of your life, and it makes sense to spend them in an environment that you like. </p>

<p>Furthermore, too many people assume that the best preparation for the "real world" is to live every moment of your life in an environment that replicates that real world in its male-female composition. It might be good for people to examine this assumption. Many people may find a better learning environment and more opportunities at a women's college. And someone who has been in a different type of environment may have a different perspective on some things or may develop in different ways. The existence of a variety of different college environments benefits everybody. Everybody wins!</p>

<p>Elbereth, welcome to the board.</p>

<p>I'm a Smithie's dad and I agree with everything you say and more. (Do check out the Smith, Wellesley, Barnard, and Bryn Mawr forums under the Top LAC's heading.)</p>

<p>I saw Smith on the original mega-list of schools and thought, "No way." But it kept hanging on as the list got pared down. The two major turning points for my D were the first local Smith prospect party when she was a junior and she met about 15-20 current Smith students who collectively were the best advertising any college could hope for. The second was visiting during April of junior year. Up to that point, she had been looking at schools that were all larger...Georgetown, Columbia, Yale, etc. The visit to Smith <em>really</em> shot it up the charts.</p>

<p>Their propaganda says "four years where it's all about you" and I think it's true and not in a cloying hand-holding way. After one semester, she already has a credit in a published research paper in Computer Science. She also has been offered (and accepted) a National Science Foundation-funded research position for a few weeks this summer. And has been invited to apply to a fellowship that would fund a semester at the Hungarian National Math Institute in Budapest. And will be playing at Carnegie Hall in May.... Comparing to the opportunities she would have at some other very good schools, Smith is coming off very well.</p>

<p>Elbereth, its a good thing that you're standing your ground.....True, womens' colleges arent' for everyone, but the remarks that people are making to you are ones of pure ignorance......I went to Wheaton when it was still all women and my sister is 3rd generation Smith.....We're strong, extremely independent women who're better for the experience.....go for it if it suits you!</p>

<p>I absolutely love Smith. It felt like I was at summer camp, that kind of tight-knit closeness. I loved the sisterly feeling. I don't like the "girls are intimidated in classes with boys" arguement, because I don't think that's the case, but I absolutely love Smith anyway. If it had a stronger math program, it would have been my number one.</p>

<p>I went to a woman's college, and those sort of attitudes were a real drag. Of course, it didn't help that I shared so many of them, before I looked seriously at the issue.</p>

<p>I think the best response to anyone is says women's colleges aren't "the real world" is laughter. Lots of laughter. Because college--any college--isn't quite the "real world" either. You don't have to exactly duplicate the real world to prepare you for it. I trust that you learned how to relate to men in the previous 18 years of your life, so they should hardly be worried that you'll forget it all if you go to class without men.</p>

<p>As for the social life comment, I used to point out "If you're a guy, where would YOU go to find women? How about a campus with all female students? Right, which is why we have as much social life as we cared for--sometimes more."</p>

<p>Also at women's colleges, one has a chance to observe women in leadership positions since usually more than half of the profs are female. This is uncommon at most coed schools.</p>

<p>Women's colleges are great academically and have many advantages in terms of community feeling/friendships and living environment, as well as good role models. But they are not great for establishing casual relationships with men as friends, colleagues and classmates. You can find someone "to date" but not a wide range of male conversation partners. Of course, you can compensate for this deficit with internships, summer jobs/programs, year abroad or joint activities at nearby coed-schools but, before you go to a women's college, you should take this disadvantage seriously if it matters to you. All that being said, in some cases the educational opportunities outweigh the "sacrifice" and make the choice worth it.</p>

<p>Wells College in Aurora NY has been all-women for almost 150 years but is going co-ed beginning fall 1995 due to declining enrollment much to the dismay of many current students. Too bad the all-women option seems to be dwindling. My Aunt graduated from Smith and was always very positive about her experience there. I think there are some negative stereotypes about the all-womens colleges unfortunately. I hope they remain a viable option for women who want that kind of experience. I have wondered whether part of the enrollment problems some women's colleges are having is greater competion from coed colleges that are not as male-dominated as they once were. Perhaps coed has become more egalitarian.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I hope more young women look past the stereotypes and consider all the opportunities they'd have at women's colleges.

[/quote]

A school's stigma is a factor every potential student should consider (not as the single deciding factor but as part of the mix of analysis). Stigma is simply the negative form of a school's reputation. The question is whether the quality of a school's education outweighs the stigma associated with the school. If so, then apply to the school. On the other hand, if you can find a school providing a similar education without any stigma, that may be the better choice.</p>

<p>The atmosphere of a single-sex college is certainly not for everyone. For the excellent reasons people have mentioned, my girlfriend visited 4 of them, under strong influence from her father. She found the environment stifling, and did not apply to any of them.
By contrast, a friend of ours-- a real social animal-- decided to go to Smith, in part because of the exciting social life there. She doesn't (yet) mind the male-less environment at all, and seems happy not to have to deal with the politics of romance that can get overwhelming at our small, rural boarding school.</p>