<p>Sorry for the title, but I did not know how else to phrase it. For a more low key student, who is maybe a bit more sporty, mainstream/traditional and heterosexual, which of the 7 sisters might be a good fit? We have visited some, but won't be able to visit all before choosing where to apply.</p>
<p>I know that this is all speculative, but I am still interested in opinions without bashing. For instance, I have 'heard' that a HUGE strength of Smith is that it is very feminist and outspoken...while Barnard less so, but kind of urban chic.</p>
<p>I am confident that the academics of all are solid and rankings do not sway me greatly. I am confident that all have diversity on many levels. What I am NOT sure of is which are the MORE mainstream!</p>
<p>Any opinions please...and for the record I have a friend looking for the MOST 'Feminist Strong' Women's college while I think the other end of the spectrum might be for me. We both are curious about opinions on this!</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen (we visited all of the remaining 7 Sisters, my daughter applied to 3, and is attending Smith), all of the 7 Sisters might be a good fit for someone who is sporty and heterosexual. As for mainstream/traditional, it depends on what you mean by that. If you believe in feminism, you can be happy at all of them. If you don’t believe in feminism, I’m not sure you’d be happy at any of them. </p>
<p>There are a variety of dimensions of being mainstream. Smith students aren’t particularly preppy, whereas students at some of the other 7 Sisters are, so in that sense Smith is more mainstream.</p>
<p>While Smith is very feminist and outspoken, it doesn’t mean the students are confrontational or are all walking around carrying burning bras. There are 2700 students there, which is room for a lot of differences. As a male visiting the campus (which I’ve done a number of times), I’ve found virtually everyone to be welcoming and friendly.</p>
<p>I think the schools are closer to each other in terms of feminism than you think. There are areas where there are bigger differences, such as majors offered, location, size, housing system, local consortium, campus vibe, etc. You may find it more worth your while to focus on these factors.</p>
<p>My D is sporty (plays varsity sport for them), heterosexual, mainstream, STEM, not religious or particularly political but is socially liberal and LOVES her diverse friends and pretty sure Wellesley in general. Also, was not ever aiming for a women’s college and ended up there because it was close to Boston, great academics and her sport.</p>
<p>I think it is a campus full of diverse, smart and interesting women and you can find your place there no matter who you are. That may even be true for all the remaining seven sister for all I know!</p>
<p>Photodad: Yes, I am analyzing women’s colleges as I am others in terms of big ticket items such as majors, location, consortiums, size, etc and think that I have a solid understanding of these things with the 7 sisters. However, to ME vibe would also include the method of championing feminism. Through various searches on this board, it appears that they are different in this regard, but that could also NOT be the case…hence my post and request for help. I think it is kind of like asking “Which is least isolating for a very conservative person: Colby or Middlebury?”…that kind of question.</p>
<p>I don’t think there is one ‘way’ to promote feminism that is correct. But I think there are ways that suit some more than others. That is why I want to find out IF the colleges do this differently, which is less ‘in your face’ about it. While my friend, however, is all about loving (of those she visited) those that seem to be out front greatly. The diversity of women is wonderful, and I imagine how they promote it would be wonderfully diverse.
So to that end, thank you for sharing thoughts on Smith.</p>
<p>Maidenmom: Nice to hear about your daughter’s background and adaptation to Wellesley!</p>
<p>Many women’s college students and grads would say “the method of championing feminism” is through focus and accomplishment.</p>
<p>I’m not sure there are truly significant, identifiable differences in social, political or community action or activism. Not at the 7 Sisters, where academic challenges are strong. After all, it’s not the 70’s or 80’s.</p>
<p>My friend took an admissions tour at Smith. The tour guide was a “guy” named Jake. That was pretty in-your-face for my friend. She applied anyway, got in, didn’t go.</p>
<p>Smith also had a student council president who was male (born in a female body, and was transitioning during his time at Smith, though I don’t know the parameters).</p>
<p>I do think there are differences. I do think Smith is more in-your-face regarding trans issues and the like, and there seems to be a greater preponderance of women who deliberately dress in an androgynous fashion. There’s nothing wrong with that, but I think it’s noteworthy enough to be considered in assessing relative fit. Note that I say assessing – not ruling out entirely. I’d put Wellesley on the more “conservative” end of the spectrum, though by conservative on this dimension I mean a 9 rather than a 10 on a 10 point scale. All of these schools are about strong, powerful women making a difference. </p>
<p>BTW, my D loves Wellesley. She is Midwestern, mainstream in dress, likes boys, and is more conservative than I (her northeast liberal mother) politically.</p>
<p>Well said, Pizzagirl when you wrote " it’s noteworthy enough to be considered in assessing relative fit. Note that I say assessing – not ruling out entirely."</p>
<p>That is what I am trying to do…assess, not judge or condemn, but get as much of a full picture you can get on this issue via a forum as possible.</p>
<p>I can’t see to get a ‘feel’ for where Mount Holyoke and Bryn Mawr fall in the spectrum. Open to any thoughts or comments on those or the others.</p>
<p>THANKS to those that have commented already!!</p>
<p>Bryn Mawr is the smallest seven sister at 1,300 undergraduate students (about 1,800 including graduate and post-bac programs). One of the things that lured me to Bryn Mawr as a prospective student was the sense that there was a little bit of something for everyone - the students I met were clearly intelligent and articulate, but also had great sense of humor, were down to earth, and generally interested and engaging. As a current student, that sentiment has remained true for me. Though we are small, it’s far from a homogenous environment! While there are groups of students that cover a spectrum of interests, hobbies, goals, etc., it’s very common for these groups to inter-mingle both socially and academically. Because we’re also so close with Haverford (and students can opt to live and major at either campus), that opens up an even broader pool of students to connect with. </p>
<p>While Bryn Mawr students at large pride themselves on being liberal, humanist, and open-minded, there are also conservative students on campus, although they are not in the majority. That said, regardless of personal beliefs, I have witnessed a general consensus that students want to learn from another and are interested in learning about each others’ perspectives. My best advice to you would try and arrange an overnight through the Admissions office to get a more thorough perspective on what it would mean to be a student here.</p>
<p>My daughter is an evangelical Christian, politically middle of the road (but very conservative on issues like abortion and euthanasia), hetero, artsy and musical, and she loves Wellesley. She was offered generous merit scholarships at Bryn Mawr and Mount Holyoke, but chose Wellesley, because she felt that it was more committed to “liberal arts” than “liberal.” Her sense is that intellectual engagement is more important at Wellesley than ideology, although she has encountered more than a few “in your face” types, most notably the person who got angry at her for selling t-shirts referring to W as a women’s college, because “not all of us subscribe to the gender binary.” But I think this is pretty rare!</p>
<p>My experience dates back to the 70s, so it probably isn’t particularly relevant. Smith, at that time, was not known for its feminism, having gotten their <em>first</em> female president in the 70s, while Wellesley, for example, has never had anything BUT a female leader. At Bryn Mawr, the population seemed to include more hipsters (people who went to Andy Warhol parties) and more intellectuals of the type that intended to major in Classics. MHC was a bit lower on the selectivity totem pole, and reputed to be more attractive to science majors. Wellesley seemed to have more of the types who were aiming at law, business, and medical schools. But other than that, I’m sure there was, and still is, a lot of overlap.</p>
<p>But in answer to your question, I would say that Wellesley is your best choice. Although a lot depends on what you mean by “feminist.”</p>
<p>Like yours, my D just rolls her eyes at those types and laughs. Someone on her Wellesley class of XX facebook feed posted something like "Hey, girls, come to … " or “Hey ladies, check out …” (whatever event was being promoted). And there’s always those one or two tiresome people who object to being called girls or ladies. Good grief, I have zero problem with this – if you really discover you are a male trapped in a woman’s body, then please do make whatever changes are necessary to live your authentic life – but you’re at a women’s college and yes, it’s a reasonable expectation that the students are female.</p>
<p>I’m also curious what is meant here by “feminist.” I’m also a women’s college grad (I don’t name it) and bff went to MHC, other friends/acquaintances were at all the “sisters.” We find the real curiosity today is often about “how gay are these women’s colleges?” Especially since the tag was added, “in your face.” is that what OP means?</p>
<p>In our day, feminism was about women reaching their fullest potential without artificial or tradition-bound limitations. Not only for ourselves, but for women around the world, sure. None of us hesitate to recommend our schools to young women today.</p>
<p>I second lookingforward. Feminism is often misinterpreted as some militant counterculture, when it’s true meaning is to assert gender equality. Period. That manifests itself in women’s colleges by promoting students to achieve their goals despite society’s odds stacked against them. Feminism is maintaining the right to vote, the right to own land, the right to be an independent human in every essence. If you believe in equality, you’re a feminist.</p>
<p>I personally agree and consider myself feminist. But the whiny in-your-face (and I don’t mean sexuality) types have coopted the term to mean the tiresome kind of person who, instead of being empowered, is routinely “offended” by everything. Young women, like my daughter, don’t consider themselves feminist and I have to remind her that there was a time when a woman could only be a nurse not a doctor or a secretary not an executive or have to quit a job upon becoming pregnant and so forth.</p>
<p>To answer looking forward, no…I am not asking how ‘gay’ the colleges are. That is not my intent nor is that the issue I am questioning. I am asking more along the lines of situations/people massmom and pizzagirl’s daughters have run across: Those that seem offended when you use the term Women’s College or say “Ladies, let’s get together and…” because they prefer not be identified as a gender and are upset if a gender specific term is even used in any situation. I am asking about those who might take a real issue with someone who chooses to continue to worship in the Catholic faith, though female priest are not allowed.
In sum, I am ALL FOR people supporting the rights of us all and equality, as I too believe in those things: That is one reason Women’s Colleges appeal to me. BUT I have a hard time when that same group jumps on someone who is conservative with her person choices or uses gender specific terms. So, I am trying to figure out which of the 9 sisters is the least likely to have large groups of people offended on those types of circumstances (as examples only).</p>
<p>Am I making sense at all here…or digging a deeper whole? Sigh.</p>
<p>I think the answer is the same, then. If what you’re asking about is - to what extent is campus culture influenced or dominated by those tiresome types (we’re at a women’s college but heaven forbid you say, “Ladies, check out the XYZ Club meeting tonight at 9 pm”) - then I’m going to say, from everything I’ve seen and heard, that Smith will be more on that spectrum than the others, though you will find some of it everywhere, and undoubtedly more of it at any of them than at a “typical” co-ed research university.</p>
<p>Put another way, I have twins at Wellesley and Northwestern. So I can observe the differences in tone. There is a PC-ness about Wellesley that surpasses that at Northwestern. It’s just not as important at NU to take oneself So Very Seriously that you can’t say “Ladies, check out the XYZ Club meeting tonight” for fear of offense.</p>
<p>It IS tiresome, and it IS what drives young women (oh, excuse me, womyn) from calling themselves “feminists” if they think that feminism is about crap like that, rather than empowering women to go out and do whatever they want.</p>
<p>My two D’s have looked at several of the schools in question, over the past year–one as a transfer, and the other as a hs junior. In fact, the transfer is currently at Hampshire and as a Five College Consortium benefit has been able to take classes at both MoHo and Smith. The younger one is very interested in Barnard and Wellesley.</p>
<p>These are our combined impressions (based on classes, tours, interviews and overnights)–</p>
<p>DD found the Smith students to be more assertive and opinionated in the classroom than MoHo students (and my daughter is more outspoken than ANYBODY!). Both MoHo and Smith classmates work very hard and are conscientious, but the MoHo ones come off as a little less edgy and aggressive–they are much more “polished.” She found that her MoHo classmates attended study sessions in order to learn exactly what the professor wanted on the exam, while the Smith ones were ready to argue about their own ideas. Academically it may be because we’re comparing apples to oranges (Gov at Smith vs. Psych at MoHo), but she did have a classmate in the MoHo class from Smith–even the Smithie said that she sought the less combative environment in the MoHo classroom as a change of pace. Her overnight stay bore this out, as well–the MoHo students were very soft-spoken, almost a throwback to the 50’s, compared with the more outspoken students she met at Smith. This is not a knock on MoHo in the least–it’s just her observation that the two schools were more different than one would expect. She hopes to be at Smith, since she thrives on that kind of environment.</p>
<p>From younger D’s experience on the tours, which is hardly as reliable: Wellesley seemed more focused on science than Barnard. Physically, it’s a much more sheltered environment. In general, I’d say Barnard students were the most savvy/sophisticated, forced as they were to deal with the challenges of New York City. Although they may take semesters abroad and internships during summers, both Smith and MoHo grads will have a bit of a culture shock returning to the real world from their peaceful days in the Pioneer Valley.</p>
<p>We visited Vassar, which is no longer a women’s college but IS a former 7 sister–not sure what you’re basing your grouping on–happy to give our impressions off line.</p>
<p>Re. “in your face feminism” per se–you’ll find some at each campus, but tempered with the above caveats. I think it’s kind of nice that there are so many varieties of “women’s colleges,” that people can find their own flavor. Sounds to me like you might be more comfortable at MoHo.</p>