Editors’ Note: The Argus editorial staff would like to apologize for the publication of the opinion piece titled “Wesleyan v. Wellesley: ‘Rather Dead than Coed?’” on Tuesday, Oct. 11. We failed to uphold our duty to ensure that articles, op-eds or otherwise, do not unfairly target individuals or groups. Many of the author’s assertions in this piece were unfounded, and we apologize to those who were hurt or offended by them.
The article has been taken down from the Argus website and replaced by a statement from the author.
Author response posted 10/19 2:05 p.m.
Dear Readers,
I would first like to say that, like any opinion piece published in The Argus, “Wesleyan v. Wellesley: ‘Rather Dead than Coed?’” does not reflect the views of the general student body at Wesleyan or the newspaper’s staff. I apologize to the University for causing unnecessary animosity between liberal arts institutions.
I sincerely regret the generalizations I made in this piece and apologize to students and alumni of women’s colleges who do not share these experiences. My intention for the article was to showcase some of the stereotypes I encountered as a student during my first two years at Bryn Mawr and to explain why a women’s college was not right for me.
Additionally, Wellesley is mentioned in the title of the article because the two schools are often confused with each other due to their similarity in nomenclature. However, I did not intend to extend this comparison to the broader experiences of attending a single-sex and co-ed education. I did not aim to incite a debate over which school is “better,” nor did I intend to attack any specific institution.
While I should not have generalized beyond my own experiences, these assertions were based on incidents that I witnessed during my time at Bryn Mawr.
The bigger issue for me was how men viewed Bryn Mawr women as a result of our single-sex experience. What initially appeared to be quirks that were not necessarily representative of the majority of Bryn Mawr students nevertheless become a starting point for Haverford and Swarthmore students to ridicule us. We were looked down upon for our lower liberal arts college ranking and mocked for wanting to study at their institutions. At Bryn Mawr, my fellow hallmates were harangued by a female Swarthmore student at a party (“You don’t go here, do you? Oh, let me guess—Bryn Mawr!”). I was told by another male student that he intended to take a class at Bryn Mawr “because it was an easy A.” It was through degrading experiences like these that were imposed on Bryn Mawr as a result of reinforced stereotypes that I came to believe the self-segregation of women’s colleges had backfired.
The majority of commenters on this article are alumni and students and women’s colleges who adamantly assert that no such incidents occur at their institutions. Perhaps I was one of an unfortunate few at Bryn Mawr to witness events like this on a regular basis. However, many of my classmates at the time told me they also felt marginalized by the experience of attending an all-girls school, and I know many who transferred as well.
I do not dispute anyone’s satisfaction or happiness with her single-sex college experience. If my description contradicts your women’s college experience, I can only say I am envious. I intended to highlight a side of the women’s college experience that is less often portrayed. These negative stereotypes do exist and continue to be perpetuated and I condemn them as much as any commenter.
I came to Wesleyan because it was a good fit for me. I remain confident that I would have received a similarly exceptional education had I graduated from Bryn Mawr; the only change is that I am finally satisfied with my college experience.
I am glad this issue has brought about a public discussion, and have learned a lot from this experience as well. Again, I apologize for the generalizations made in my original piece, but I continue to stand by my opinion about same-sex education and invite readers to critique my arguments, not my personal character.
Comments
407 responses to “Wesleyan v. Wellesley: “Rather Dead than Coed?””
“Socially, going to a women’s college means almost literally screaming “Death to the Patriarchy!” all day, every day. It means bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor. It means glaring at the coed schools’ sports teams who come to your campus to eat your chicken wings. It means taking a bus to other schools on the weekends to do unmentionable things with aforementioned sports teams.”
And apparently, going to Wesleyan means relying on eye-roll-inducing cliches to make a muddled point.
I’m also confused about how women’s colleges are “isolated bubble[s] of women” when you specifically mention male students from other colleges. Would you mind clarifying?
Marion “I chose Wellesley over Wesleyan” Johnson
“All women—at both coed and women’s colleges—must seek to empower themselves by challenging gender inequities. The first step is not to whine about these inequalities, but to deal directly with the men who impose them upon us. There is still a Real World, and it’s been easier to learn how to contend with it and with men at Wesleyan than at a women’s college.”
Pontificate all you want about hypotheticals, but the fact is that Wellesley graduates a disproportionate number of women in top positions in corporate America, which is still very much male-dominated. Wellesley has also graduated more female directors of Fortune 500 companies than any other college in the country (in case you missed the point, that includes Wesleyan) and many of those highly successful women credit the single-sex environment as an element of their success. Who’s doing more to “empower” and “contend”?
If we’re going to go all anecdotal in lieu of using actual data, I’d just say that my four years at Wellesley were absolutely fantastic, surrounded by women who sometimes were the only females to speak up during co-ed classes at MIT, were used to seizing what they wanted because ambition wasn’t seen as “bitchy” or “unfeminine”, and who were and are fiercely, fiercely loyal to their school and their sisters.
I’m sorry Bryn Mawr didn’t work out for you, but by your own admission you have no direct experience with Wellesley, choosing instead to make ludicrous cliches and misuse the word “literally”. I respect your choice to prefer co-ed; it’s my opinion as a Wellesley alum to say that (1) this is a poorly-written piece that reads as self-validation, (2) perhaps you should graduate first before making grand statements about “Real Life”, and (3) it’s downright stupid to write about something that you know nothing about beyond a single point of similarity.
-Linda “I chose Wellesley and didn’t even apply to Wesleyan” Yan
well said Linda. I am the father of a Graduate to be class of 2012. My daughter had scholarships going a lot of different place’s but chose Wellesley. I believe this school builds leaders and wouldn’t have her attend any where else. Long Live Wellesely.
I feel like I should give you a hug or something. Well done.
I sincerely hope that you simply chose to drag in Wellesley because of its phonetic closeness to Wesleyan (and even so, I must say it’s a cheap shot and poor use of alliteration). While I gather that the main goal of your article was to stimulate Wesleyan pride, which is great, I think surely you could have found some way of doing that without relying on antiquated stereotypes or misguided assumptions.
Your baseless and emotional rant really has no place in any sort of news publication. And there’s no use explaining to someone, who clearly possesses neither ample intelligence nor maturity, that collegiate institutions (co-ed and single-sex) all foster academic and social developments and are ultimately what individuals make of them. I am a confident, perceptive, and healthy-minded young women– thank you Wellesley College. I am deeply sorry that your school has failed to do the same for you.
I am really sorry that your experience was not what you had hoped for at Bryn Mawr, and I applaud you for making the decision to transfer. It sounds like that was the best choice for you.
However, I am very disappointed by your article, and I believe that my opinion can be best articulated with the words from Wellesley College’s President Kim Bottomly in a letter to the editor for the New York Times article “Same-Sex Education”:
“The debate over same-sex education in public schools (“Single-Sex Education Is Assailed in Report,” news article, Sept. 23) is an important one. As a scientist, I look forward to the day when the data can be synthesized and presented by scholars more objectively.
This report correctly points to inconclusive evidence on one side, yet blithely lauds inconclusive evidence on the other. We need more good research, not strident advocacy.
What in my view is irrefutable — given the extraordinary success and satisfaction of Wellesley graduates — is that women’s colleges are a vital and vibrant part of the educational landscape and should be offered to all young women as a choice.
I know that our graduates (among them, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the secretary of state, and Madeleine K. Albright, a former secretary of state) would confirm that single-sex education helped give them the confidence and skills to contribute significantly in all arenas.”
“Wesleyan.”
“Wellesley? Massachusetts? The all-girls school?”
“No. Wesleyan.”
It was after this encounter – well, many encounters of a similar nature—that I realized I was doomed to an eternal association with that dreaded term, the “all-girls school.”
Interesting. When I say I went to Wellesley, people very rarely think of Wesleyan. It’ truly unfortunate that people recognize another school with a similar name more than your own school. No wonder you are venting!
“In terms of classroom environment, going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.”
How shallow are you?
“Socially, going to a women’s college means almost literally screaming “Death to the Patriarchy!” all day, every day. It means bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor.”
I’m sorry you were unhappy at Bryn Mawr, but if this is really what your former college was like, maybe you have a right to bitch. It’s just too bad your supposedly fantastic education — and I don’t use the word “supposedly” to be snarky or condescending; I’m only wondering what you’ve been getting out of it that’s caused you to write this article — hasn’t taught you not to generalize. Wellesley women don’t leave their tampons on the floor, and I don’t know of any woman who does. Hailing from fifty states and dozens of countries, we bring slightly broader views to our classrooms than “Death to the Patriarchy”. (I won’t even mention the hypocratic contradictions embodied in your second-to-last paragraph.) And I don’t even need to refute your comment about single-sex schools’ fashion choices; who cares what anyone wears to class?
I chose Wellesley over Ivy League schools and never even bothered applying to Wesleyan. And I have never regretted my decision. All-women’s schools aren’t for everyone, and I’m sorry you weren’t able to derive the same delight and gratitude from Bryn Mawr as I have from my experiences at Wellesley. It is silly to rather be dead than co-ed, but it isn’t silly to value an all-women’s college.
Bryn Mawr student here–the bloody tampons comments, the sweatpants comments, and pretty much every other stereotyped assumption are all manifestly untrue. You’re about as likely to see students leaving their used personal supplies lying around the dorms willy nilly as we are. Unfortunately, I don’t think the author would be happy at Wellesley either, despite the delight you have in your experiences there. In her particular situation, an all-women’s college just isn’t the right place.
This doesn’t need to be a battle between Wellesley and Wesleyan, or between any coed or single-sex institution. It’s great that you would choose Wesleyan over Wellesley “any day,” but it’s kind of a moot point to end what could have been an interesting article with such a glaring opinion. That may be true for you, but for others, it will be the other way around. And for others, it will be UCLA, or Georgia Tech, or UC Boulder, or University of Wisconsin-River Falls. There is no right education for any one person.
I say this as a Wellesley alum who, although she didn’t always enjoy the single-sex environment, is extremely proud of her education. Women have a long way to go in terms of achieving parity, and being in an all-women’s environment, surrounded by amazing, intelligent women, brought this issue to the forefront of my mind and I feel that it made me more likely to fight for equality (for everybody – not just women) in the world for the rest of my life, regardless of the fact that I haven’t chosen a blatantly activist path of life.
While this was intriguing enough to read, the argument you try to make in this piece is very unfocused. There’s no sense in pitting one institution against another because the names sound similar. I can say from experience that plenty of people think Wellesley is Wesleyan, too. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve told someone I graduated from Wellesley, only to have them say, “Oh, my brother went there!” “Ummm…I think you might be mistaken.”
We of the small liberal arts college population must accept the fact that not everyone in the world is going to know where we went to school, and they might get schools mixed up sometimes. But all that matters in the end is that we received a good education, were able to grow as young adults, and we graduated with an appreciation of all the other smarty pants out there that have an incredible amount of intelligence to contribute to the world, regardless of the name on their diploma. I am proud of Wellesley being on mine, but I fully embrace every other college graduate that loved their education, too.
It is truly unfortunate that your all-womens’ college experience did not work out the way that you had hoped. Transferring seemed like the best option for you. On the other hand, though, the level of generalization in your article of your single experience to that of all single-sex institutions everywhere is uncalled-for, and comes across as more than a little self-centered.
1. How do you know that all the women who went to Bryn Mawr had the same social or academic experience that you did?
2. How do you know that the environment at Wellesley and other women’s colleges is similar to the one at Bryn Mawr?
3. How on earth do you know that women in women’s colleges are “demeaning themselves in order to gain validation from coed students”? I can safely say that I have never seen the need to do this – and what’s more – I have not met a single Wellesley woman who has felt the need to do this. On the contrary, I see strong, successful women who do very well in the Real World and are slowly but surely breaking cycles of gender discrimination. Is this not precisely what every woman, whether from a coed school or not, wants to see?
Most of your experiences at Bryn Mawr seem painfully stereotypical. Yet, for each of your anecdotes, I could respond with 10 that convey precisely the opposite argument – and I’m just one Wellesley woman. Ask us all, and you’ll get a picture which might end up looking very different from the one that you have painted.
P.S. Never have I screamed “Death to the Patriarchy!” Perhaps I should do that tonight in my residence hall…
Dude – Wesleyan is not even comparable to the quality of Wellesley. Go ahead and choose your Wesleyan “any day”, but I am sorry to say, your decision seemed to be based exclusively on wanting to be surrounded by testosterone than wanting to be amidst truly passionate and brilliant students. I am a guy, and my girlfriend went to Wellesley, and believe me, she made a great decision. Wellesley will stay with her for the rest of her life, and the number of high-achieving and successful women churned out by your beloved Wesleyan will always pale in comparison to the success enjoyed by Wellesley. I think it is safe to say that majority of the people would have heard of Wellesley, and when they hear Wesleyan, think of Wellesley first than the other way around.
No need to hate on a school just because a) it sounds similar to Wesleyan, and b) it is a women’s college. No one asked you to go to a “women’s college” in the first place.
As a Wellesley student, I’m really glad that other people recognize the quality of a Wellesley education but I don’t think that Wesleyan “will always pale in comparison”. Wesleyan is a very good school and we shouldn’t judge the school based on this article. Specific school-bashing and generalizations based on emotional tirades are the causes of this conflict, so we should make sure that we don’t make the same mistakes.
Thank you swellz, we at Wesleyan know that our school is not well-known outside of the academic/entertainment fields, however we as an institution and class body hold absolutely no resentment against Wellesley (except for the unfortunate similarity of our names). Just because one member of our community chose to speak out so poorly means nothing about the opinion of the whole.
Plus institutionally we only have beef with Amherst and Williams.
As a recent Wesleyan alum, I am always excited when people send me articles about the fun and interesting things that are going on at my alma mater. Imagine my surprise when I read through this particular piece!
I feel that I must, first and foremost, apologize to the entire Wellesley community for having to read such a terrible piece of trash. The generalizations made here are outrageous and unwarranted and (in the best case) can probably be chalked up to immaturity. I loved my experience at Wesleyan just as my friends at Wellesley loved theirs, so it really pains me to see an article like this that not only seems to meaninglessly attack a school about which the author clearly know nothing, but also drags the Wesleyan name through the mud by association.
College is such a unique experience for each individual, one that cannot be completely understood by anyone other than yourself. For the author to carelessly assume that because SHE does not see the value of a womens’ colleges they are thus unnecessary is naive, and frankly quite arrogant. This attitude is something that I gladly never had the displeasure of encountering during my time at Wesleyan and I can honestly say from the wonderful current students I have met, it is extremely uncommon.
I truly hope that the author posts an apology (or at least a clarification) for this embarrassing article.
This is a gross generalization. The same professor who taught you that correlation is not causation should have warned you against generalizing an entire pool based on you rown VERY NARROW experience
omg are you talking about THAT professor? I hear he’s sleeping with the girl in the front row. just don’t tell her boyfriend, the boy in the front row wearing an MIT sweatshirt.
He can’t be sleeping with her. She’s too busy throwing her bloody tampons the floor.
I demand an apology.
Your generalizations infer that there is a lack of respect at Wellesley, and at womens’ colleges. Also, your definition of “feminism” is offensive. As a WOMAN, and a student you should be ashamed of yourself.
1) “Going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.” I RESPECT what my professor is teaching me, so I treat the classroom space as a professional environment. But that is my opinion, I don’t GENERALIZE that the people who do wear sweatpants to class don’t have respect. Anyways, I don’t even own a pair of sweatpants.
2)”Inevitably, there will be rumors about the relationship between the professor teaching your class and some student.” Again, I RESPECT my professors. Implying that we all sleep with professors suggests a lack of respect.
3) “Socially, going to a women’s college means almost literally screaming “Death to the Patriarchy!” Your definition of feminism is offensive. You seem to be taking the same position as Rush Limbaugh and his term “feminazi.” You can be a feminist and not hate men, but just want gender equality.
4)”It means bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor.” I use the trash, because I respect my floor mates and the custodians. I have seen more unwanted male genitalia on subway cars in NYC, than tampon WRAPPERS in my bathroom.
Agreed. Have you ever read Freud? I think his description of the preoccupation with the size of these sweatpants would be of great interest to you. Great comment –RDBDC in Chippewa Falls, WI
2)”Inevitably, there will be rumors about the relationship between the professor teaching your class and some student.” Again, I RESPECT my professors. Implying that we all sleep with professors suggests a lack of respect.
Also, those kinds of ‘relationships with the professor” occur at co-ed places too
a) We don’t need to use tampons at Wellesley because we have brass ovaries.
b) You probably wrote this article in oversized sweatpants yourself.
c) Have you ever seen anything from a Wellesley publication dissing another school? No. We don’t do that. So you can go shave your back now. Bye, Jason.
YOU ARE MY HERO.
Love this as well. [Wellesley’13]
a) CLOTH PADS AND DIVA CUPS, Y’ALL
ENVIRONMENTALISM
and you know, the right to having a happy and healthy vag
Oh dear Ms. Chu– I hope you dont think this article will help you land a job as a journalist! Alert Cokie Roberts and Diane Sawyer immediately! Good luck living down this one my dear, you messed with the wrong college and the wrong alums!
P.S Diane Sawyer went to Wellesley.
ouch, burn.
Yes she did, as did Cokie Roberts and Lynn Sherr. I quick google search of the author however shows that she has an interest in legal practice as well. UH OH!!!! LOADS OF WELLESLEY ALUMS THERE!
Let’s not forget Linda Wertheimer of NPR…
pretentiousness to the maximum. so sad you need to use alumni to justify how wonderful your school is
Ew, I don’t hook up with athletes because I don’t like man sweat. Don’t insult me.
Click here to see the author’s response! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-B63Wy7i5U
“women’s colleges could not seem to function independently of coeducation institutions.”
I’m sorry…what!? I think we’re all doing just fine, thanks. I’m not so sure what you meant when writing that, did you mean that women can’t survive without men? Because scientifically speaking, that’s true, the human population does need to procreate (and thus take advantage of this fabulous uterus we women have) in order for women to survive. But as for women’s institutions not being able to stand alone from co-ed schools, I believe you are terribly mistaken. Many women’s colleges give students the opportunity to study at other institutions as a way to broaden the course offerings, not because they are inferior to co-ed schools. As a student at a liberal arts school, you should understand the abilities and limitations of a small school to offer diverse classes in varying subject matters. College exchange programs are in place to allow students more freedom in their education and support their interests.
Oh, and we’re thriving over here at Wellesley
Just another rabid sweat-pant wearing Wellesley girl here, come to through my lot in with my Sisters.
Wellesley is about legitimizing women in positions of power, (in all professions…including journalism Miss Chu class of 2013 published in the Wesleyan Argus). This common purpose isn’t just about Wellesley Women, but all women. We’ll keep representing your interests even as you disparage our efforts. That’s how we roll.
She doesn’t even go here!
She just has a lot of feelings.
She probably thinks we all have a big lesbian crush on her.
well after this article, she can’t sit with us!
SHE JUST CAN’T SIT WITH US!!
Yeah, like, it’s against the rules of femininity.
and you all don’t go to Wesleyan. Please get off our newspaper already
Why don’t you commend us on our multi tasking skills, Vicky? We all seem to be ripping your article to shreds while throwing our tampons on the ground, screwing our profs and still managing to get job offers from from blackstone and Morgan Stanley…. Not only do I go to Wellesley but I’m also a 12 college exchange student….woah! That’s a double doozey for ya! But dont worry, when I’m an er doc and you get brought in for psychotic symptoms, I’ll diagnose it as simply an incurable case of idiocy and discharge you immediately.
btw, this isnt Hannah Goldberg…just using her account.
First of all, this wasn’t a battle between schools, despite what numerous commentors have said. Wellesley just happened to be chosen because it sounds like Wesleyan, as indicated in the opening lines. Second, why does everyone condemn the author for writing her opinion? None of what she put forth was done so under the guise of being facts. It is under the opinion section for a reason. And for everyone who thinks they deserve an apology because of this hurt their feelings, grow a pear.
“a pear”
really?! is that what they teach you at the “illustrious” Wesleyan?
What’s wrong with ending a comment with a promotion of environmentalism? What are they teaching you at whatever institution you attend? I don’t even attend Wesleyan.
“grow a pear”….? If you’re going to imply that you need balls in order to be a strong person, you probably shouldn’t misspell that word with a fruit associated with a woman’s shape.
vaginas take a bigger pounding
Betty White?
Pair*. The only place i might grow a pear is in my back yard.
Corrected by a Wellesley Student.
Imagine a world where nobody ever told you when even just once, you thought wrong.
I don’t want to grow a pair, I prefer my female genitalia.
how about a pair of ovaries?
grow a pear is a kesha reference, guys.
I guess I’m just confused why you didn’t mention the uncanny ability of Wellesley women to multi-task, vicky? Not only are we all (at this very moment) throwing our tampons on the ground, deciding which sweatpants to wear tomorrow while screwing our professors, but we’re also simultaneously getting job offers from Blackstone and Morgan Stanley while still managing to rip your article to pieces. I’m not only a Wellesley student, but also a member of the 12-college exchange so I took a double jab from this delightful piece. Don’t worry though, when I’m a successful ER doc and you get brought in for symptoms resembling psychosis, i’ll simply diagnose you with an incurable case of idiocy and discharge you with a swift kick in the ass. #sorryimnotsorry
Girl, you better not step on Wellesley’s campus after this article. You’re going to get so many bloody tampons thrown at you….it’s amazing how many feminine products we can store in our gigantic sweatpants.
hilarious!!!
Vicky Chu, I’m delighted to be the first one to let you know you just pulled a Jeremy Pham. Let the schadenfreude begin.
loooooooove this.
OMG this is sooo great!!
I honestly cannot begin to comprehend the sheer audacity it must have taken for anyone to even consider publishing so poor an article. I’m not even sure it can be called an article. Maybe more of a senseless rant.
Here are only a few of the glaring problems present in this mess:
-Absolutely no use of empirical data or evidence
-Completely subjective with virtually no fact base
-Mean spirited and angsty rather than pondering and considerate
-Misuse of common vocabulary and blatant lack of prior research
The only class I have ever worn sweatpants to is zumba.
As my classmates have previously stated, you clearly lack the ability to distinguish from fact and cliché, preferring to rely on outdated stereotypes and personal vendettas rather than actually creating anything new and constructive.
I would say that I am appalled, but honestly I really feel more sorry for you than anything else. It’s too bad that you were too narrow minded to actually bother doing research and synthesizing data, instead choosing to rely only on your own skewed perceptions. It’s too bad that you had the gall to even publish this embarrassing excuse for an article (it isn’t doing you any favors). It’s too bad that you completely lack respect for the type of institutions that have fought to promote all of the progress and rights you enjoy.
I hope you enjoyed your fifteen minutes of [in]fame. It’s all I can conceivably see you getting unless you get a job writing for the national enquirer.
Insofar as this is an opinion piece and not a factual article, is empirical data really necessary? The point of an opinion piece is to be subjective (apologies, if you have yet to do the “prior research” to ascertain the meaning of opinion). Third, it is hilarious how the mean spiritedness of an article suddenly becomes a “glaring problem.”
I think the most important point of all is that you criticize her for being “narrow minded” because this article does not fit your opinion of Wellesley. No, this article is not perfect, and does not seek to examine all sides of the issue, but at least she is capable of expressing her views cogently. Where is your high-mindedness in accepting another person’s views as opposed to trashing it for “glaring problems.” The only glaring problem I see is the ignorant responses to an expression of one’s mind.
Had the author stated that she simply preferred her experience at Wesleyan to Bryn Mawr, I don’t think this article would have raised many issues. The problem is in her dismissive attitude and her characterization of single-sex educational institutions as “not normal” and “silly.” This may be the opinions section, but any writer who states his or her opinions as fact invites all readers to comment as they see fit. (As far as I’m concerned, any sentence that does not begin with “I think,” “I feel,” or a similar qualifier is an assertion of fact.) To say that disagreeing with an opinions article is narrow-minded to me seems equivalent to claiming that using one’s rebuttal time during a debate is belligerent and needlessly defensive. The author made a bunch of assertions that many of us found offensive, and offering our counterarguments in return is the most constructive response possible, given the situation at hand.
So no one else is allowed to have opinions except for the author? I believe everyone here has a right to an opinion and frankly, the author’s opinion is not one which holds much water considering she has probably never set foot on Wellesley’s campus or on any elite institution’s campus for that matter. I can say that everyone who has responded in comments for Wellesley can say that their opinion holds water since they actually attend or ahve attended the college. This article would have been a fine opinion article if it hadn’t included a school which the author knows nothing about. Then her opinion would be somewhat credible. She should have stuck to Bryn Mawr and Weslyan… (that’s just my opinion.)
Precisely. By publishing an opinion piece, the author must accept that those who disagree have the right to voice their own opinions. However, that should not be limited to pointing out inherent flaws in her argument, namely involving Wellesley without a sound basis for doing so. If Bryn Mawr was the only institution indicted, I would still claim the right to disagree.
Opinion pieces do not generally seek to make generalizations about the situation that is being discussed but, as you said, present a subjective view – one person’s. Maybe it’s just bad writing on Ms. Chu’s part, but her opinions about Bryn Mawr don’t seem the product of intellectual reasoning, but dissatisfied resentfulness. I don’t see how you can say she’s capable of expressing her views ‘cogently’.
An opinion should be the product of research and thought, otherwise, why would it be worth listening to? Go read the editorial pages of any legitimate newspaper, from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Post. You will find the opinion writers (even when you disagree profoundly with them) are expected to have researched their topic and considered other points of view. Honestly, as a Wellesley alum, I’m almost more offended by this idea that “opinion” is sacrosanct and should never be challenged than by the blatant lies this author decided to publish about my alma mater.
My opinion is: this article is yellow journalism, and I take it about as seriously as I take the the supermarket tabloid that tells me that Elvis has been reborn as an alien. I think the broader problem is the widespread belief that you are entitled to have your opinion respected no matter how little effort you put into forming it. Stupid opinions SHOULD be challenged on the merits. Who knows what poor Wesleyan student will read this article and walk away thinking that that’s what all women’s colleges are like, if we all quietly respect her right to have an (idiotic) opinion?
I agree, however, there should be more high mindedness. Fellow posters, please quit the slut-shaming and quit threatening her future employment prospects (although I got a laugh from the tampon-attack plan). If you are bored at work and want to go on the warpath, there’s plenty else to slam her on while keeping it classy.
Starting, perhaps, with the concept that a woman that goes to class in sweatpants and a sweatshirt is somehow inferior. I thought the point of class was learning, and I see no way in which sweatpants interfere with that. That that seems to her to prove her point about the horrors of single-sex education (gasp! women who aren’t trying to be attractive for a few days a week! how can that be acceptable?) is both telling and disheartening. I am almost as disheartened by the posters who felt the need to vigorously defend their alma mater on this point, because it buys into the same idea, that women’s thoughts aren’t valid unless they’re also looking good. Thoughts?
I’m disappointed by the caliber of the comments themselves–regardless of the content of the article, there’s no need to be rude. For all the negative stereotyping about women being catty and petty, I’m disappointed by how nasty these comments are. The comments section can be a place for actual discussion and dialogue, and not just mudslinging and announcing which school is better.
This is also an opinion article and should be read as just that–an opinion. This is the author’s opinion, she isn’t intending to announce it as journalistic fact.
This is also a comments section and should be read as just that — comments. This is the readers’ opinions, we aren’t intending to announce them as discussion and dialogue due to the poor quality and bashing provided in the main article.
I fail to see how you can point to the mean spiritedness of the comments and not to that of the article– are we not entitled to our opinions of this author’s opinion? and there is nothing catty or petty about defending one’s alma mater after its been attacked.
ms. chu joins the ranks of others who enjoy attack wellesley women for our decision to attend the a women’s college, for the clothing we wear, for the expression of our respective sexualities, for ability to adapt to the real world post college (and she’s one to talk, she has two years left of college?), for our menstruation (?), and finally our intellect (because all we seem to know how to do is yell about patriarchy). if one writes an opinion and posts it on an open forum, they should be ready for attacks, especially from a passionate alumnae network.
she ignores the experiences of so many individuals, of so many demographics, and instead of celebrating the similarities of our experiences as small liberal arts schools, she is the one seeking to put wesleyan above wellesley. and for what?
thousands of alums and students were attacked by this article for their decision to attend wellesley, i say what ever response ms. chu receives is what she deserves.
While some of these comments may be a little over the top, they’re responding to the very clear tone of ‘Wesleyan is better’ in the article (Need clarification? Last sentence, if you will.). As I’m sure you don’t appreciate the ‘Wellesley is better’ tone of the comments, maybe you can see why students/alums from Wellesley are upset.
It’s one thing to present her personal experience and explaining why SHE didn’t do well in all-female environment. She can even question the necessity of women’s colleges. It’s a completely different thing bashing the qualities of a particular school without having even attended that college. I’m sure if someone published an article with a school reversal, Wesleyan students and alums would be upset as well.
The only thing “opinion based” about this article is the section it has been placed under. There is a way to state an opinion such that it does not come off sounding like you are saying “my word is truth”.
You’re right, ideally a comment section should be a place for actual discussion and dialogue…but when the article itself leads with mudslinging and announcing which school is better, it’s not the readers’ job (especially those being attacked) to promote a higher standard of discourse.
More power to you if your first impulse is to be kind and civil when a complete stranger comes up to you and states it was “only their opinion” that all students who went to your college were promiscuous hypocrites, that their classrooms were not so much places of learning than gossip, that they were contributing to their social oppression despite clear evidence to the contrary, and that they were, to a one, possessed of filthy personal habits. One who never went to your school and only knew of it based on going to a school sort of like it but not really.
Personally, I’d tell them to go to hell and add in a few choice comments about goatf*cking, sh*teating, and their face while I was at it.
Maybe it isn’t that clear to you, but the reason why so many of us responded and why some of us were rude is because Wellesley is personal. We love it. We are proud of it. For many of us it is an integral part of *who we are as women and people*.
It’s not just “a school”; it’s us.
this article brings a tear to my eye (metaphorically.)
whoever this is, I love you.
Let me correct your poor logic and the ignorance of your entire article (which in itself is ironic to the topic you wished to get across).
“A women’s college may seem to have little relevance to your life at Wesleyan unless you’re one of the two students every year that participates in the 12 College Exchange Program.”
This definitely shows how enthusiastic the Wesleyan student body is to venture out and try new stuff.
“In terms of classroom environment, going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.”
I see some women dressed up for class everyday here. In addition, in my coed high school there were females and males who wore sweatpants everyday to class. But most importantly, you judge people by clothing? Good to know.
“Inevitably, there will be rumors about the relationship between the professor teaching your class and some student. There will also be one male from a nearby coed school who sits in the front row. … He will be applauded by the professor solely for his willingness to learn in a female-dominated environment.”
No rumors here. The male students (plural) who take classes here are not any more conspicuous as the women in the front row. Your last statement is invalid to provide an explanation.
I have to return to my coursework, but just know that your article entertained me and made me realize the amount of ignoramuses in this world. Don’t write about something in which you have no evidence or substantial material to back up.
“Would I be unable to function normally because I was distracted by the influx of testosterone?”
Obviously the answer is yes, since a hormone-addled brain is the only excuse I can seem to find for your complete lack of respect.
While it’s unfortunate that your experience at women’s college was unsatisfying, don’t for one second think you have to the right to abuse this school or the amazing women who attend it. I chose Wellesley because I admired the drive within its students and its supportive community–something you’d know nothing about since you’ve never been here yourself.
“After all, it takes a woman of considerable character to commit to an all-female environment for four years.”
As you clearly seem to be deficient in this area, I can see why things didn’t work out.
I cannot wait for this article to get brought up when you’re being interviewed by a Wellesley alum. Good job.
“And I’d choose Wesleyan over Wellesley any day.”
Wellesley is probably not a choice you ever had, not even back in high school.
As another Wellesley alumna, I want to echo my sisters’ disgust over this article. It is unfathomable to me how a seemingly intelligent person, at least on paper, can have such convoluted and antiquated views. To make such false generalizations about Wellesley and women’s colleges alike, in light of the fact that gender inequality is still very much present in our and, in arguably, every society only adds fuel to the fire.
On a side note, reading the comments posted by other alumnae is a delightful reminder of just how articulate and passionate many of us are. So proud of my alma mater.
Much discussed content aside, your writing is really awful. Ending your article with “empowerment” and “gender inequities” is an overused trick that doesn’t fix anything.
I’m sorry but even a co-ed Wash U alum is not a big fan of your aspiring journalism.
As a Wellesley alumna who spent a good bit of time visiting her best friend at Bryn Mawr…if you did a little research, you would discover that Wellesley’s relationship to coed schools in the greater Boston area is in no way similar to Bryn Mawr’s relationship to Haverford. I know that a lot of Mawrters disapprove greatly of Haverboys showing up on their campus to eat their food and make no bones about it, but that doesn’t tend to happen so much at Wellesley. In fact, a guy sowing up in your dining hall tends to prompt questions of “Who’s boyfriend is he?
For your own sake, please don’t use your experiences at Bryn Mawr to make generalizations about every women’s college. It just makes you look ignorant.
Correction: In fact, a guy showing up in your dining hall tends to prompt questions of “WHOSE boyfriend is he?”
“A single-sex, isolated bubble of women contradicts what it sets out to do, especially in a time when society seeks to move past gender discrimination and stereotypes. ”
umm….NO.
Women’s colleges give women a place where they are given the assumptions of worth and competence, as opposed to the real world where typically only white men get these assumptions. They are still relevant because we are not in a society that seeks to move past gender discrimination but a society where gendered oppression is REINFORCED at every turn. YOU yourself played right into your HETEROSEXIST and CISSEXIST* ASSUMPTIONS which I do NOT appreciate.
I’ll be post-feminist in the post-heteropatriarchy
*cissexist=anything that erases the experiences of people who: a) are not cisgendered, b) are intersexed, c) define their gender outside of the traditional gender binary (genderqueer, third gendered, transgendered, transsexual, two-spirited, nongendered, etc.), d) perform/present their gender in a way that is not accepted in society
I find two major flaws in your argument.
First, you assume college is like real life. You are at a wealthy liberal arts school. You write papers. Your food appears in the dining halls. You discuss lit all day. You interact with few people that differ from your viewpoint or background. You work maybe a part time job. Your earliest class is at 8:30 and you party on the weekends. This is not real life. College is a bubble, bordering utopia if there weren’t for all the work to do. Enjoy real life. You’ll find you’re just as unprepared as you would be without men on campus.
Second, you seem to think that attending a single sex institution is “whining” and advise women to empower themselves. Your opinion is that empowerment doesn’t come from these institutions, but they are filled with women who came there looking for it. Many students would tell you they chose a women’s college for that particular reason. They are still capable of dealing with “the men who impose” on them, just not in the classroom.
Sincerely,
a “whining” woman
Death of Patriarchy = death to the “masculinized” hierarchies, status quo/norms, socially constructed ideas, institutions/structures that we see every day hurting and disempowering more women. It means that women can have a chance at really creating and enjoying equality.
You = Failure.
“We’ll give our lives and hopes to serve her, humblest, highest, noblest all. A stainless name we will preserve her, answer to her every call.”
– Wellesley College Alma Mater
We Wellesley women don’t just sing it. We live it.
Hey, why don’t you eschew (es-CHU) from writing about things in which you know NOTHING about. And how about you choose (CHU-se) another definition of “feminism” than the one you’re implying, because it’s (v)icky and offensive.
dear god you are so mature and witty
“A single-sex, isolated bubble of women contradicts what it sets out to do, especially in a time when society seeks to move past gender discrimination and stereotypes. On the contrary, I saw women reinforcing negative stereotypes by demeaning themselves in order to gain validation from coed students.”
I don’t know what part of campus you hung out on at Bryn Mawr, but I more often see queer people breaking all sorts of stereotypes as they seek to validate themselves in a world that heavily pressures not to do so. Better dead than coed? It’s a convenient rhyme, but what it really means is better dead than destroy this incredible safe space for non-cisgendered, non-heteronormative, patriarchy-defying queer and trans* people and allies.
I didn’t come to a “women’s college” because their alums constitute some disproportionate number of Fortune 500 CEOs or government offices — for all I care, those statistics are biased from the time when several of today’s coed institutions still only admitted men. This is a safe space where a lot of us who would feel pressured to otherwise stay in the closet are able to come out… which is a goddamn powerful form of challenging gender inequalities if you ask me. Instead, you shit on it with nearly every imaginable stereotype available to anti-feminists – everybody dresses like a slob! Constant man-hating! Bloody tampons (sorry, we’ve moved on to diva cups)! Wait, are these the ways that you saw women demeaning themselves in order to validate themselves? Didn’t think so.
So, in the end, you meet all kinds in all places. We have our bra-burners and our ditzy-for-the-sake-of-sex and everything in between (except the people who leave bloody tampons on the bathroom floor, I hope to God they’re not here), and I bet Wesleyan has them too. But both of those are far from what at least Bryn Mawr is about – we’re definitely in a bubble, but that bubble is a home we cultivate ourselves in so we can leave in a few years to take on the world more effectively than if we hadn’t been here at all. It’s a home that has empowered the fuck out of me in a way that I never would have been at a coed institution, because only retrospectively have I realized just how much I suppressed myself in high school due to crises in underconfidence brought about by all my male friends who never took me seriously. Yeah, my problem, right? Should have been empowering myself then? Probably. But I’m glad I had this option instead.
To Ms. Chu:
I am not from Wellesley, nor am I from Wesleyan. I’m from a quaint coed engineering school vaguely in the Northeastern United States. This little… piece of yours came to my attention through certain friends of mine who happen to be satisfied with their Wellesley experience.
I’m not really here to talk about that. The nature of a coed school vs. a single gender one. I have no right to speak to that experience (having only attended a coed school (*hint hint* *wink wink*). How you feel about single gender vs. coed colleges is entirely your business, and none of mine.
I’m here to talk about basic experimental design, because everyone should understand how science works, even if it not their field of study, and you have demonstrated a lack of understanding.
You are making some fairly broad claims regarding the nature of an all women college. Okay. Cool. You have a hypothesis, an argument, an idea of how the world behaves. That is a key first step.
Now, you need to back this argument up. You take advantage of your personal experience, which is a good start as a basis for your hypothesis. Your sample set is your experience at both colleges you attend (which may only actually count for one point). N = 1.
Then you talk about Wellesley. Something you have no experience with. You collected no information from the people attending Wellesley (or any other person for that matter outside of yourself). N = 1.
Then you bring the conclusion on.
Whoa. Hold on. You have N = 1. You can’t get rid of experimental error with only 1 samples. Hell, you can’t separate the error from the result! You might have fared slightly better had you chosen to at least include someone else’s opinion. But alas, you only have you. If you really wanted to prove your point, you should have done some more research.
Good starting point: Research the topic. Has this been studied before? Then, survey other people (your experiment). Make sure you have proper design, which includes equal, and LARGE representation from a variety of people with a variety of experiences. Then compile the results. See if trends appear in your data. Maybe they support your conclusion, maybe they don’t. Maybe there is variety.
Do it again.
That’s right. You heard me. Do it again.
Some people think they found something that broke the speed of light. You know what they asked?
For the global community to check their result.
The lesson you must learn Ms. Chu, is that when making any kind of statement as general as that, you must have proof. Back it up. You must exhaustively seek it, and you must push others to exhaustively seek it.
This is the core of science.
Our understanding of the world, our technology, our daily life, EVERYTHING depends on this process which demands that we be certain before we say something is truth. So don’t proclaim the truth in a public forum without being dead sure about it.
Sincerely,
An Engineer
P.S. I hope that you are actually able to learn something from this experience. About yourself, about how to write, I don’t care. Please. Learn something and become a better person for it.
Except this isn’t science. It’s an opinion article. Your entire point is moot.
I vehemently disagree with the idea that you can have an opinion on a topic of public knowledge and expect to have that opinion respected if you do absolutely no background research. You just validated every crazy birther in America. They have an opinion – does it match the facts? no? who cares! they have a right to an opinion, right!? right?!
Opinions should be the result of informing yourself through research and thereby drawing conclusions, not something you made up in the shower because it sounds pretty. While causes or solutions may be normative, the engineer is not wrong in demanding some positive data as a starting point.
Real journalists do some research, even for opinion articles. Therefore this young lady is NOT a real journalist. The least she could have done is skim the abstracts of articles written about single sex education or call someone who has made this their line of study. Instead she posted about the perfidy of sweatpants and hinted ominously of scandalous affairs with professors and entire sports teams. This is pure yellow journalism.
Fortunately for her, given the state of journalism in a America today, this will not hurt (and may help) her chances of getting a job at Fox.
you’ve really tried to appear smart, and failed.
It may not be a science article, but the point is entirely valid – don’t make a statement and try to pass it off as the truth when you have no proof or evidence to back it up.
I am going to address the main points of your thesis one by one.
“So what makes a women’s college as an institution different?”
1) “In terms of classroom environment, going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.”
I am not sure whether this jab is meant to display your shallow attitude toward body image and its relation (if there is a relation at all) to the actual character and goodness of a person, or your own insecurities that arose from seeing people so comfortable with their professors, fellow students, and learning environment that they can abandon the societal construct of degrees of formality in dress and simply come as they are…
Unfortunately for you, sweatpants are not banned, illegal, or even uncommon at coed schools–or in the real world, for that matter (I believe civilians are allowed to wear the dreaded article as well)–and you will have to grapple with your artificial judgmental bias in your mind and your insecurity in your body for the rest of your life. Not all wearers of sweatpants are evil sloth-like wastrels, in fact. Perhaps someday you will be comfortable enough in your own skin to wear pajamas to class without the fear of feeling awkward in any way.
2) “Inevitably, there will be rumors about the relationship between the professor teaching your class and some student.”
How dare you. If there are relationships between professors and students, it is no business of yours. What right have you to judge? What almighty power placed you in the position to decide whether the interaction between two people is valid and healthy or not? And besides, most relationships between professors and students–at least at Wellesley; I cannot speak for other women’s colleges–are deep, close relationships from friend to friend or from mentor to student. I will not deny the existence of sexual relationships between students and professors–but I will point out that those two groups are also people, endowed with free will and the ability to choose for themselves what type of relationship is right for the two of them. For you to place judgment upon two people whose interactions are none of your affair is presumptuous, immature, and rude.
And to imply that gossip and “rumors” are things that can only occur at a women’s college is outright absurd. Gossip is not a strictly female phenomenon, nor is it a phenomenon found strictly at single-sex institutions. I believe gossip is actually one of those ubiquitous, inescapable phenomenons that comes along with human nature. Where there are people, there will be gossip. Unless you mean to say that the individuals who attend coed colleges are not people, in which case they could very well be impervious.
3) “There will also be one male from a nearby coed school who sits in the front row. He will wear a sweatshirt with the name of his school prominently displayed at every lecture and will therefore be even more conspicuous to his glaring female classmates. He will be applauded by the professor solely for his willingness to learn in a female-dominated environment.”
I would be the first to admit that my eye is drawn to the male students from Olin, MIT, Babson, etc. This is probably because the average college aged male is approximately 5 inches taller than his female counterpart. I believe we are all too busy frantically taking notes to really wholeheartedly “glare” at the male students in our classes. Anecdotally, I can share that the male Olin students (2 or 3) in my music theory class are treated with warmth and welcome, especially because they round out the lower register of our impromptu sight reading of Bach chorales (one of them has a lovely baritone). Do the students at Bryn Mawr really have the time to glare at their male counterparts and hold intense, long grudges against them for their maleness? You are representing not only Wellesley students, but Bryn Mawr students in a very negative way. Perhaps you would like to think about what your friends at Bryn Mawr (I assume you had some) would think of the image you create of them in this public sphere?
4) “Socially, going to a women’s college means almost literally screaming “Death to the Patriarchy!” all day, every day.”
If this refers to the “feminists” at Bryn Mawr, then I may have to recalculate my estimation of Bryn Mawr. Of course I will not do so without further research, given your relative unreliability so far. Your understanding of feminism–and also of the word patriarchy–appears to be limited. If you actually hope to “move past gender discrimination and stereotypes” and “empower” yourself “by challenging gender inequities,” you probably will need to end patriarchy somehow.
Patriarchy: “Patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage” (Wikipedia).
You don’t agree that patriarchy should “die.” You will not shout “Death to the patriarchy,” nor will you whisper it. If there is room for both patriarchy and gender equality in society, then this is news to me. It seems to me that a system which “entails female subordination” cannot coexist with one which has “move[d] past gender discrimination and stereotypes.” But perhaps you intend your argument to read as an implementation of Orwell’s notorious “doublethink” (Doublethink, a word coined by George Orwell in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, describes the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts) and hope that we’ll adopt your own deeply confused beliefs.
If you were trying to the paint the infamous picture of the “rabid, man-hating feminist,” then your choice of the word “patriarchy” was probably wrong.
I’m afraid you also miss the point on feminism. A feminist does not hate her fellow man, but rather desires to have equality with him, as is her natural right. Even if you were attempting to paint a picture of the misguided feminism I mentioned above and accidentally used the word “patriarchy” where you really meant “men,” you would be doing the concept of feminism a gross injustice.
5) “It means bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor.”
Is the hygiene situation at Bryn Mawr so dire?
6) “It means taking a bus to other schools on the weekends to do unmentionable things with aforementioned sports teams.”
Ah well there you have me; it is somewhat common (for the straight girls) to visit other campuses with the intention of having sex. (Of course this broad stereotype cannot be applied to many people at Wellesley, including the not insignificant Lesbian population.) One caveat: the men in the area–to make a GROSS generalization, which one should avoid doing–are probably more interested in engineering or business than in sports.
I must also take issue with the phrase “do unmentionable things”: is your sexual immaturity so great that you cannot spit out the word “sex”? Not only is this phrase written with weak English (the words “do” and “things” are so flat, and devoid of punch), but it also shows a distinct inability to face the issues you are writing about with honesty.
Perhaps you feel this word doesn’t do justice to the myriad sexual practices that college students engage in. In that case, you could easily exchange “do unmentionable things” for “engage in sexual behavior,” “sexual practices.” Really, must we always keep sex in a tiny, secret, dark place and continually hinder both the sexual health discussion and sex education? As long as we keep sexual topics “unmentionable,” we hurt the health of both men and women.
Perhaps you don’t like the clinical ring of that phrase “engage in sexual behavior.” It does have the sound of the doctor’s office. Why not say “get down,” if we’re going to be vague. At least the phrase “get down” has a little more color and life.
If you want to be some sort of “cutting edge journalist,” you might try facing your issues head on, not generalizing, and working on your word choice.
Congratulations if you made it to the end. This is a marathon post for me.
I’m going to address my comments to the Argus editorial staff:
I am a graduate of co-ed schools whose quality even Ms. Chu might recognize (Yale and Harvard), and the father of a women who attends a school whose quality she clearly does not recognize (Wellesley). I am also the board chairman of a university daily newspaper (The University Daily Kansan) and an instructor at the University of Kansas Journalism School, which compels me to ask you this question: why did you accept this article for publication? If you actually made a voluntary decision to print this article, you should all consider resigning. Now.
you’re also a huge tool
I do believe you are demeaning yourself in order to gain validation from coed students.
I am not usually one to comment on articles of this nature as I feel their sole purpose is to stir the pot, but I must given that I am a Wellesley student who participated in the college exchange with Wesleyan. I feel this entitles me to a response as I am able to understand experiences at both institutions. This article is sad. During my time at Wellesley, I’ve realized that my gripes about the school were really complaints I fostered about myself. I no longer believe in slandering others or their choices because in the end, I need to focus on myself. I will say though, I returned to Wellesley more productive in, appreciative of, and responsible for, my education. I respect your right to communicate your opinions but a dose of introspection and humility never did any harm.
Like many of the other readers, I am sorry that Bryn Mawr did not work out for you. It’s true, a women’s college is not for everyone–and it took an entire academic year and several months for me to realize that Bryn Mawr was the best decision I ever made–and my friend, who attends Smith, repeatedly says the same about her beloved college.
“In terms of classroom environment, going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.”
Although some of my classmates do wear sweatpants to class, the vast majority are professionally/well-dressed. And they make the effort to do so.
“He will be applauded by the professor solely for his willingness to learn in a female-dominated environment.”
From my experience, this is false. My professors, while appreciative of the variety, use male students as an example that female students must especially assert themselves.
“I sat through class. Men talked in class. Women talked in class. I talked in class. Class with men was the anticlimax of my transfer experience. At Bryn Mawr, I studied Foucault, Judith Butler, and discovered that virtually everything is socially constructed. At Wesleyan, I studied Foucault, Judith Butler, and discovered that virtually everything is socially constructed.”
Wesleyan and Bryn Mawr are both liberal arts institutions. Consequently, discussions are framed very similarly. On Tuesdays, I commute to Penn for a three-hour politics seminar, where I know I think differently from my pre-professional classmates. Furthermore, I have found that my female classmates are less likely to talk than my male classmates.
“Despite the ultimate similarity of the coursework, I transferred because I had come to disagree with the principles of a women’s college. A single-sex, isolated bubble of women contradicts what it sets out to do, especially in a time when society seeks to move past gender discrimination and stereotypes. On the contrary, I saw women reinforcing negative stereotypes by demeaning themselves in order to gain validation from coed students”
What exactly ARE these “principles of a women’s college”? Women’s colleges were founded in order to empower women, who sought higher education. Bryn Mawr, in particular, never offered courses in domestic subject areas, because its founders wanted to create an environment in which women could pursue intellectual discourse without impediment. Why? At the time–and even today–gender inequity still rears its ugly head. Because of institutional barriers, women are underrepresented in government, in academia, and in many other professional arenas. Why? Women are perceived as mothers first; if they cannot juggle work and family effectively, they are seen as failures–especially in politics (please pick up a copy of Jennifer Lawless’ book on the subject of women and political office), where the time commitment can interfere with childcare responsibilities.
Finally, we do not reinforce negative stereotypes. Rather, we adopt the rhetoric of those who disagree with us in order to empower ourselves. Read Mary Wollstonecraft, or even civil rights activists–especially Indian politicians advocating an independent nation in the 19th century. In order to demand equality, these people took turned the words of their opponents on their heads.
There are many more trivial pieces in this article, with which I disagree. However, those are the main points.
Doesn’t matter whether you’d prefer to go to Wesleyan over Wellesley…we’ll just sit in our sweatpants soaking up the fact that we have always been ranked higher than you and will always be ranked higher than you.
….wow, and this is why everyone thinks Wellesley women are pretentious and full of themselves… good job reinforcing stereotypes
As a participant in the 12 College Exchange, a graduate of Smith college, and one of the few employed 2011 grads I know, I feel like I have the authority to say that your article is poorly written, makes sweeping generalizations, and is downright exaggerated. Unless Bryn Mawr really does enjoy bloody tampons that much, which I doubt.
And thank you, I am managing the “Real World” just fine.
this is dumb on so many levels. or rather, to quote you “its a bit silly.”
Caltech-Cal Poly
Vicky, I believe that you and I are kindred spirits.
I came to Caltech after spending 4 years at Columbia University, a school that people do not confuse for other institutions… unless you count Columbia Colleges in Chicago, Sonoroa, Missouri, or South Carolina (which is–gasp! a dreaded “women’s college”)… but who would consider them to be on par? Certainly not me.
But now at Caltech, people often confuse our wonderful institution with Cal Poly. I am often so outraged that I am unable to complete my studies, and must take up the pen to clarify for the public the difference between our two schools.
Now, I’ve never spent any time at Cal Poly, but I’m certain that an institution with such low admissions standards lacks purpose in today’s modern society. I mean, just think about it–public education available to anyone! Hah, what a quaint and outdated notion.
It’s true: most of these comments are pretty callous and can come across as being “rude” – but that’s the internet for ya. If you post an article that not only targets and bashes a specific group but also does so in an inarticulate and holier-than-thou manner, you’re going to get backlash, and it’s going to sting harder than real-life backlash because the internet is, by nature, an unfriendly place. Check your feelings at the door.
Look, I’ve written and posted my fair share of crappy articles on the internet and received my fair share of netizen backlash. And sure, it hurts – because, as evidenced even in this comment section alone, people don’t hold back. But you learn to grow a thicker skin, and more importantly, you learn to be a more careful and tactful writer. Granted, I don’t think Miss Chu deserves the disproportionate amount of mockery and haterade that she’s getting from the Wellesley community and beyond – I’m sure she knows by now that this article was not well-written and that, as a writer, she has some self-reflecting to do. If anything, I hope that she learns a valuable lesson from this.
Just a tip, Vicky: When writing an opinion piece, don’t write in a manner that sounds more like a recitation of black-and-white fact rather than an actual opinion. It’ll save you a world of trouble in the future – if not more.
This article is ridiculous. I could go on forever, but I’m just going to say this: I’m hoping to go to Wellesley, and not because it’s an all-women’s college. In SPITE of it, actually. Wellesley has its unique traits other than just being a woman’s college. Seriously, grow up.
Very true. The ability to look beyond the sex ratio of a school and into its essential character is extremely important, and it saddens me that this author was unable to do it even while immersed in everything her school had to offer. It was not the right place for her and I’m glad she found somewhere that worked, but I wish she hadn’t gone on to further solidify the single-sex label that so few seem to get past.
A side note to the commenter above: As someone who chose Bryn Mawr for the same reason (for its unique qualities, in spite of its single-sex environment) I truly wish you luck. Even though I knew what I was getting into, it’s been tough finding the right social balance, especially given the unwarranted stereotypes that even the schools in our illustrious consortium tend to hold about women’s colleges. But Bryn Mawr has been an amazing, amazing environment for me, as I’m sure Wellesley will be for you. Best of luck =)
Psh, tampons? You mean bloody DivaCups, amirite?
All I ask is that you don’t judge Wesleyan based upon how terrible this article is, but that you judge the person who wrote it. Thanks
Trust me, no one is judging Wesleyan…that would be rude, right Ms. Chu??? As a BMC student I must say I have friends at Wesleyan and they are great..unfortunately Ms. Chu does not uphold the same character as the others attending that school.
On behalf of all Wesleyan students, I would like to distance myself from this article.
Yes, Vicky did make some overarching generalizations that fit the stereotype of women’s colleges in an unflattering manner. However, I think she is raising an interesting point as to the value of the only-women colleges’ place in society. Yes, Wellesley DOES graduate more people who go on to become extremely rich. However, I would argue that that is partially due to Wesleyan students (I am aware that I am also making a generalization right now) being more drawn to non-for-profits and other less profitable professions. I am not so sure I would credit the genders of the respective colleges to being the deciding factor of the graduate’s success, and I definitely would not define their success in terms of the money they make or the fame they’ve acquired. The colleges have two completely different educations and environments which attract totally different students. People who want to be CEO’s would be more likely to attend Wellesley. It’s natural for the author to prefer her current environment to that of an all women’s college. It would also be just as natural for people from Wellesley to prefer their environment to that of a coed college.
If Wesleyan students make less on average (and I should add here that I don’t think this factor is indicative necessarily of a school’s quality), it’s not because they are more attracted to non-profit work than Wellesley students. Many students here go into low-paying non-profit or government work. The ‘Wellesley graduates mostly CEOs and MBAs and JDs’ thing just isn’t that true.
If by ‘the genders of the respective colleges’ you mean the qualities of being single-sex or coeducational, I would give that some credit, but Wellesley is not the college it is simply because it is single-sex. It has more to do with an outstanding faculty, a highly motivated student body, an exceptionally loyal alumnae network and a relatively large endowment.
As a Wellesley student, I just don’t understand why people who have never and will never attend a single-sex college feel the need to question the value of my institution. Is it detracting from the value of yours? No. That’s silly. I am a student here, and I value my experiences. That is really all that matters.
And as far as the colleges attracting different types of students…the only generalization about Wellesley students I have ever been able to make with any confidence is that we’re all genuinely interested in learning and growing intellectually. That’s really where our similarities end. We are not all or even most future-CEO-types.
Clearly this article has been torn to shreds already, and one more comment seems superfluous, but nestled in what amounts to a heap of gross generalizations and harmful assertions there lies one gem which I would like to address, so here goes.
“The first step is not to whine about these inequalities, but to deal directly with the men who impose them upon us.”
Creating and supporting institutions run by and designed for women is not a form of “whining about” or trying to ignore inequalities, it’s about creating a space where many people can be empowered and enabled so that they may better address said issues both in and outside of that space. If you truly think that women who choose to attend a women’s college are unwilling to “deal directly with [those] who impose them [inequalities] upon us,” I might direct your attention to the length of this comments section, because I do believe that many of the assertions you have made here are detrimental and promote inequality. Anyone who is actually interested in thinking carefully about the ideas behind women’s institutions might enjoy this (http://www.feminist-reprise.org/docs/fryesep.htm) piece by Marilyn Frye.
Having spent time at both Bowdoin and Wellesley (and loving both schools), I certainly believe that there are many merits in both coed and single sex educational environments, and both are important in society today. I’d also like to point out that I’m acquainted with amazing people who attend or attended Wesleyan and from what I know it’s a great school with a wonderful community, and I hope that my Wellesley sisters might remember that and direct criticism towards the author of the article and those responsible for its publication, not Wesleyan as a whole.
-KB
Dear goodness, I must agree with Disappointed Wesleyan alum. I am a very old proud Wesleyan alum, and I went online when my college friend frantically told me about this mess.
Firstly, Wellesley ladies, I apologize on behalf of the reasonable Wesleyans left that this article was ever published. Mature collegiates do not pull this sort of stunt.
I was a biology major back in the day, and I can’t even begin to tell you how wrong this article and other opponents of same-sex education are.
I’m not going to preach here, but I just want to let Ms. Chu and others know that unless they practice and study single sex education as a field of study, they don’t even know half the story. Honey don’t go there.
I am still appalled that this happened, and I hope not all Wesleyans have this mindset.
I hope that just because the author made some awful generalizations about Wellesley and all-girls’ schools doesn’t mean that Wellesley students and others will make generalizations based on this article about Wesleyan students.
I understand the outrage of many people (especially Wellesley and Bryn Mawr students and alum for being called out on this article), and everyone has a right to their opinion but I don’t see how people can suppose that this one student speaks for the rest of us.
It is great that people have the opportunity to find a college that fits them, but that is a unique and personal decision and just because one school did not work out for you does not mean you have the authority to diss everything about it. I still love Wes, but the author would not be on the top of my list of people to make friends with.
I’m a Bryn Mawr student whose best friend is a Wesleyan student, and I entirely agree with your post. I don’t think the vast majority of these comments are directed at Wesleyan as an institution (except perhaps at the Argus for letting this be published, which is another issue entirely), and I hope you don’t feel that they are meant as such. Perhaps Ms. Chu made a poor decision in posting this article, which seems amateurish and mean-spirited, on the internet, and thus exposing herself to the responses of Wellesley and Bryn Mawr students and alumnae.
(I personally visited Wesleyan during my college search and enjoyed my experience there.)
I’m glad to get such a reasonable reply! And I completely agree that most of these comments are not directed as Wes, but I always worry that an awful piece like this can light a fuse for an unnecessary fire. It is a shame that this is the only thing many people will associate with Wesleyan and any of us related to it.
The traits (of character and otherwise) displayed by Ms. Chu in her article suggest she might have a difficult time in any environment, co-ed or otherwise. Perhaps with age may come some wisdom.
First off, I would like to congratulate you on finding a school that works for you. Obviously Bryn Mawr wasn’t the right fit for you.
As a student at a women’s college, I constantly have to validate my college decision to people who have the exact same attitude as you. While it simply sucks that I have to do that, I’m fine with doing it because I know the experience, education, and sense of self that I have gained here surpass anything that I personally would have gained anywhere else. I don’t judge you based on your college experience, so don’t judge mine.
Bryn Mawr has taught me so much more than what I learn in the classroom. My experience here has gone beyond academics on so many levels. There is a spirit about this place, the people, the faculty that has helped me prosper. That is what makes this institution. Its what makes any women’s college, and what truly makes us an independent institution.
Your perspective is disheartening and disappointing on so many levels. This attitude is precisely why we still need women’s colleges.
To all those who go to Wesleyan- fret not, we are not using this one article to make generalizations about the rest of the student body at your school.
Vicky Chu, I feel sorry for you and the fact that you had to write an article and publish it in the name of self validation. Good job embarrassing yourself to the rest of the world, and may this article follow you around for the rest of your life… Because it will
TRUTH. Seven Sisters alum are everywhere. Everywhere. Vicky has pissed off an enormous community and demonstrated her narrow-mind and immaturity. This is certainly follow her.
It sounds like the author had problems at Bryn Mawr.
Also, as a Wellesley woman, I am proud to say that I:
1) Never leave tampons on the floor
2) Wear “oversized sweatpants” to class only occasionally
3) Never “whine” about inequalities
4) Never EVER bash other schools
It would be easy for a Wellesley student to write about problems they have being confused with Wesleyan; turns out, confusion works both ways. However, Wellesley woman have chosen instead to show their pride in their school rather than diss on another based on strange presumptions.
Ew. I still can’t get over tampons on the floor. Never.
Neither can we. That’s disgusting! (And it’s something I didn’t see once in four years at Bryn Mawr.)
Are there any Bryn Mawr sisters that are outraged? I think they should be.
As a woman who transferred FROM a coed school TO Wellesley, I completely disagree with this article. I never even realized how unsupported and dis-empowered I was in the coed environment before I attended Wellesley. This article is extremely shallow and, as a woman who was the SPORTS EDITOR at my coed institution and extremely dedicated to journalism, I am “offended” that this article made it to print.
I’m another woman who transferred from a coed school to Bryn Mawr and I’m right there with you. My experiences in coed vs. single-sex environments were polar opposites and I would choose BMC again any day of the week. Not only were the classes more suited to my academic interests and needs, the community was more inviting and far more enriching than that of my previous college.
As a BMC alumna now working in the “real world” all I can say is that I feel my ‘abnormal’ education prepared me for life in ways that a coed school never could.
I, too, transferred to BMC from a co-ed college.
Miss Chu’s comments are disheartening and upsetting.
I chose to come to Bryn Mawr because I was serious about academics and because I wanted to be in a community that embraced knowledge, diversity, and sisterhood. Period.
Miss Chu, if you were not happy at Bryn Mawr that’s fine, but don’t put down such formidable institutions such as Bryn Mawr and Wellesley simply because you like Wesleyan more.
A girl who attends Wesleyan comments about being tired of having Wesleyan confused with Wellesley, and decides to bash Wellesley College and women’s colleges in general. As a Wellesley woman, I definitely have a few things to say about her arguments.
She says, “…going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants.” Correction: Wellesley is one of the best dressed campus! Have you not seen all the girls with the Longchamp Totes?
She goes on with more stereotypes about women’s colleges and claims them to “not be normal.” Hello, just because you didn’t have a good experience at Bryn Mawr, another women’s college, don’t lump them all. Furthermore, you only went to a women’s college for a year, calm down. You don’t know everything! And you definitely don’t know everything about every women’s college.
I seriously couldn’t believe it when she said, “women’s colleges could not seem to function independently of coeducation institutions.” Oh really? Really? No she didn’t! Women’s colleges function just fine without coed schools. I, as well as other students at women’s colleges (I assume) appreciate the chance to learn in an environment outside of the college for a different experience. But how is that any different than a coed school having a consortium with other coed schools and study abroad programs? It’s another outlet to learn in a different environment, atmosphere and widen one’s perspective. So get it right!
Furthermore, she asks, “Would it be true? Would I be unable to speak up in class? Would I be unable to function normally because I was distracted by the influx of testosterone?” trying to disprove the fact that “graduates of women’s colleges perform better in their careers compared to women who graduate from coed schools.” She is missing the point entirely. Women’s colleges are not claiming that women are not able to speak up in class and function normally with the presence of men. NOT AT ALL! Women’s colleges do not claim that women cannot accomplish this by going to co-ed schools, just merely that women’s colleges help build women’s confidence and self-esteem so that once women get out into the “real world” that is dominated by men, we are able to speak up and confidently have our voices heard.
She states that women who attend women’s colleges claim “We’d rather be dead than coed!” NO, that is not true. I would not rather die than have men in my classes and on my campus. She also says, “A single-sex, isolated bubble of women contradicts what [a women’s college] sets out to do,” but that is far from the truth. Women’s colleges make sure not to isolate their students… That’s why they have a consortium with co-ed schools and offer study abroad programs, to widen the students’ perspective, and this is in despite of her earlier criticism of these very programs. She claims to have seen, “…women reinforcing negative stereotypes by demeaning themselves in order to gain validation from coed students” as a final attempt to convince us that women’s colleges are actually bad and backwards. But what she doesn’t realize is that some women reinforce negative stereotypes everywhere. Not just at women’s colleges. She adds, “All women…must seek to empower themselves by challenging gender inequities.” THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DOING AT WOMEN’S COLLEGES!
She argues that, “The first step is not to whine about these inequalities, but to deal directly with the men who impose them upon us.” Correction: The first step is to realize that these inequalities exist, and to challenge them by analyzing society and the world around us. By talking about it and discussing solutions, building confidence, and empowering women to take action. This is what women’s colleges do! She seems to think that women’s colleges ignore men, but that is not true. We have male professors and staff. We have many opportunities to discuss issues relating to gender equality in both classroom and “outside the classroom” settings.
Wellesley, and other Women’s colleges hold a special place in our society. That is the point. They allow women like myself to grow and develop into “women who will change the world.” They specifically focus on educating “women who will change the world” and I would not trade going to Wellesley for anything. If you don’t want to attend a women’s college, fine by me. But don’t try to bring women’s colleges down nor try to deny a woman who isn’t afraid to declare herself a feminist and who wants to become a “woman who will change the world,” like myself, the opportunity to go to a women’s college.
I feel like it is my social responsibility as a woman and a Bryn Mawr alum to point out that your poor decisions while attending Bryn Mawr need not reflect the general experience of being in an all Women’s college.
In the future, please refrain from making such generalizations because it reflects badly on institutions you represent – whether it is Bryn Mawr or Wesleyan.
Vicky,
If I remember correctly, you spent most of your time as a student at Bryn Mawr off campus at one of the coed schools that you claim Bryn Mawr so desperately “depends on for survival”…. so I don’t really think you have any right to speak condescendingly in reference to our student body or about any Bryn Mawr student wishing to take advantage of opportunities to expand her friendship and academic circles at other schools. I think the ignorant, sweeping generalizations you made in this article only illuminate your close-mindedness and provide an excellent explanation for why you didn’t fit in here. After reading this article I can’t exactly say we miss you… so I guess I’ll just say this instead: DEATH TO THE PATRIARCHY.
Oh yea…. and Anassa-fucking-kata! BLOODY TAMPONSSS WOOO
I don’t have time to write a crazy intellectual comment, so I will come to you with a more personal form of writing. Every person has their own personal experiences, good or bad, with college and I’m wondering who gave you permission to speak for all of us. As a current senior at Bryn Mawr, I’m proud to say that I survived four years in an all-women’s environment. It definitely takes a lot and certainly provides you with a new appreciation for things that are lacking. I can’t say I’ve ever “glared” at a male in any of my classes. In many cases, I’m actually pretty excited at first, but then over time I actually kind of stop noticing them. Maybe you’re mistaking those “glares” for crushes?
AND you’re bashing us because some of us like to wear sweatpants to class? I’m so sorry that I don’t have time to throw on make up and look like a runway model after reading 120 pages and writing a 20 page paper for three nights in a row to please you, is fashion what you value in an education? And the tampon accusation? Wow. I’ve never seen a used tampon thrown anywhere. In fact, the bathrooms in the dorm I live in are pretty spotless if you ask me. Where did you live?!
I look around this campus and I can say that I’ve seen women grow and while I don’t know them personally (only meeting them a few times around campus over the course of four years), I can tell that a lot of these women have transformed in ways that actually make them seem happier, whether it’s being able to express themselves more openly or being able to open up socially, so while you may not enjoy being surrounded by supportive women who allow you to be who you truly are, there are PLENTY of women here who do. I’m sorry that your experience here at Bryn Mawr wasn’t all that amazing, but you’re going to have ups and downs at any college you attend. I’m not always happy at Bryn Mawr and I doubt there are people at Wesleyan who are always happy. Times get hard, you get sick of being in the same place for a long period of time, you don’t feel like working your brain any longer, that’s college. That’s life. And if you don’t know how to adapt or even look at the brighter side of things, you won’t go very far in life.
I don’t know anything about Wellesley or Wesleyan (aside from the high school visits five years ago) so I can’t and I won’t comment on the differences and similarities between the three schools, but I am sure there are some. If you didn’t like Bryn Mawr, that’s fine, but please do not throw us under the bus with your generalizations.
I’m a Bryn Mawr student as well and your comments about the social life represent nothing I’ve experienced thus far. It did succeed, however, to cover every stereotype and ignorant assumption made by those who have never stepped foot on our campus. I’ve never encountered a bloody tampon on the floor, or “screaming feminist.” Nor do I have any idea what you’re referring in your the comment about student/teacher relationships. I’m not sure if you were exaggerating to make a point, but to try to pass off these stereotypes as characteristic of the entire Bryn Mawr community or women’s colleges in general to back up your claim is offensive. It’s the reason we need places like these.
I feel the need to stand up here because Bryn Mawr women tend to be more reticent in protecting their school. However, my friends and the majority of women I’ve spoken to love it here. As for myself, Bryn Mawr has exposed me to a much larger variety of women than at any prior school I’ve attended. Unlike your article claims, I haven’t found that there’s a typical “Bryn Mawr student.” Each has her own identity. The women here, as well as the ones I’ve met at other women’s colleges, have been some of the most intelligent, self-assured, and interesting that I’ve ever met. I feel honored to be amongst them.
I’m sorry you had such a poor experience here. But please don’t chalk up your own experiences as the “Women’s College Experience.”
As for myself, I’ve had no regrets.
In reference to your argument about “glaring at sports teams” while they eat in our dining halls, I would like to say that we honestly don’t mind when Haverford students eat at our dining halls. It kind of creates a co-ed feeling honestly. But on the flip side, we also have this complex because Haverford students have a tendency to make disparaging comments about Bryn Mawr students to each other, incoming freshmen and even to Bryn Mawr students. So, in some ways they have this “we talk bad about you, but we’re going to eat your food” -type of aura about them. Not all Haverford students are this way, but as a Bryn Mawr student, knowing this, we do get somewhat frustrated because stereotypes are constantly placed on us and all we can really do is grit our teeth and bear it because there’s no real way to disprove them inside of our “bubble.” And in the end, you’re only adding to the stereotypes that we already have to deal with, so thanks for that.
“It really isn’t normal.”
This statement shows, basically, why you didn’t understand or enjoy Bryn Mawr, and is a testament to your own narrow-mindedness. ‘Normal’ for who – for you? You do not carry the responsibility or the privilege to decide what every individual at Bryn Mawr or Wellesley or, even, the students of Wesleyan see as ‘normal’. Apart from the fact that your generalizations about Bryn Mawr misrepresent the community and our attitudes, your playing off Bryn Mawr and women’s colleges as some kind of aberration that isn’t “normal” is embarrassing for you.
Your attempts to conceal poor writing skills with tactless ‘shock’ value (i.e. your charming anecdotes about illicit student/staff relationships and decorative, drenched tampons) are not only fictitious and damaging; they are also cringe-worthy and creepy.
As a proud, hygienic, semi-stylish Bryn Mawr woman with a future in the ‘real world’ to attend to, I bid you adieu and wish you the best of luck in any and all self-destructive articles in which you choose to lend your name to.
Lastly, don’t think that we who knew you when you were a Mawryter way back when have forgotten your indulgence in said “unmentionable” activities with the members of “aforementioned sports teams.” A good memory just happens to be one of the unlimited beneficial attributes commonly found in us BMC ladies.
ANASSA KATA
Woah woah woah, no need to slut-shame!
But I do agree with your other assertions. BMC for life.
“Lastly, don’t think that we who knew you when you were a Mawryter way back when have forgotten your indulgence in said “unmentionable” activities with the members of “aforementioned sports teams.” A good memory just happens to be one of the unlimited beneficial attributes commonly found in us BMC ladies.”
Someone had to say it…
Just wanted to add my thanks for all of the comments expertly dissecting this unfortunate piece. I’m an alumna of Sweet Briar College, and I am, as usual, so impressed by the classiness and intelligence (and wit!) displayed by other all-women alums. Thank you for defending our educations. This article is truly disheartening.
From reading the comments from Wellesley Nation, I’m beginning to think that Vicky Chu’s piece may be a brilliant piece of “journalism” in the league of John Stewart or Steven Colbert. Whether intended or not, Chu’s personal reflection on her experience apparently is so threatening to that it has smoked out the vindictiveness, elitism, and arrogance that characterizes the worst stereotypes of Wellesley (and many other women’s college) grads. So far in these comments, I’ve seen threats of blackballing Chu in future jobs, references to the status of Wellesley alums as CEOs and power brokers, and much more. Really ladies? Is this our best? It is tempting for a reader to conclude: stereotype proven. The evidence? 100 posts and counting from Wellesley students and grads. Maybe you believe that the measure of how far feminism has come is our ability to cannibalize each other. From where I sit it just looks petty and unworthy of the alums of a great school.
No misogynistic rant would be complete without this followup comment, claiming its critics are elitist, uppity, meanie-heads who don’t understand satire.
I’m glad you pointed this out. While the rebuttals made are absolutely well-taken and important, I think we can do better than stooping to making comments about how slutty the author must be. Did Mean Girls teach us nothing???
Couldn’t agree more, CS. I heard about the comments before I heard about the article. I’m embarrassed to think that pride and hubris have overtaken tolerance and good judgment in the culture of the women’s colleges.
Just to make sure all the lovely Wellesley students and other readers don’t get the wrong impression of Bryn Mawr, this is not what Bryn Mawr is like. I never once saw a bloody tampon, and, as another commenter mentioned, the bathrooms at Bryn Mawr are much cleaner than those at other institutions I’ve seen (including the one I’m attending now for graduate school).
Ms. Chu’s other accusations, to use her own terminology, are “a bit silly,” at best. They are misconceptions about women’s education as a whole, and stereotypes that she has slapped on Bryn Mawr. Perhaps she wasn’t okay with being stereotyped this way as a Bryn Mawr student, and then felt the need to dish it out in self-defense after her transfer.
Lastly- her point about males in Bryn Mawr classes getting “lauded” by Professors? Professors do not care whether there are 10 or 1 males in their class. The class is taught the same way and no one receives public praise for something so ridiculous.
I hope Ms. Chu and the staff of the Argus apologize to Bryn Mawr and Wellesley, and that Ms. Chu publishes a second editorial admitting to the stereotypes used in this one.
An apology is an excellent idea! Perhaps Ms. Chu could actually visit Wellesley and let it inform her opinion. Though she may want to do so incognito.
As a Wellesley graduate (’04) I can almost guarantee you that NOBODY thought that Ms. Chu’s descriptions of Bryn Mawr were remotely accurate.
As a recent Wellesley grad who almost picked Bryn Mawr, back in the day, I’ll echo the reassurances that we aren’t letting this color our opinions of BMC.
And although one of the (many) complaints I have about the original article was that it assumed all women’s colleges were one and the same, I do think that our two schools are similar in some of the ways that matter most – that we are both diverse, creative, inclusive, intellectual communities whose members are more than happy to rise to their passionate defense when necessary.
By which I mean: we love you guys, and we know you don’t leave your bloody tampons on the floor.
Uh, just want to say: Been at Bryn Mawr three years, never seen someone else’s used tampon in my life. Ever.
TRUTH. What the hell is Chu talking about?!
You should never start a sentence with “however.” You would probably know that if you had stayed at Bryn Mawr. Just saying.
I am truly sorry about your experience at Bryn Mawr. Judging solely on your opinions and the way you back them, I can see why it was not the place for you. I have only been a Bryn Mawr student for two months, and the amount of love I already have for my fellow Mawrters, the academic environment, and our traditions is a testament to not only Bryn Mawr but also to all-women’s education as a whole. Just because it was not the right fit for you does not mean that it isn’t the right fit for the thousands of women who continue to choose all-women’s colleges and never regret their decisions.
As a Bryn Mawr grad (2010), and as a woman who now works mentoring other young women, I constantly speak to the benefits of a women’s college. One of the facts I continually mention is the difference between confidence and assertion– that a women’s college taught me to not only be talkative in class, but to lead projects, to speak my mind without apologizing for it, and to speak up when nobody else would. This article saddens me because I feel, fundamentally, that you failed to fundamentally grasp the point of a women’s college education; if you measure a women’s college based on the very minimal role of men on campus, then you are still guilty of the exact elitism that causes women’s colleges to exist.
For the record, as an alum, my pride in my women’s college never did (and never will) have anything to do with the consortium, and the benefit of Bryn Mawr was never from those schools.
Honestly, I feel like this article is aimed more at Bryn Mawr than Wellesley. All of Vicky Chu’s experiences with women’s college come from her time at Bryn Mawr. Wellesley is really only in this piece because it sounds like Wesleyan and acts as a bridge to the topic of women’s colleges in general.
Now, I must say that, for some reason, I was more shocked by the sweatpants comment than the bloody tampons comment. Why? Because I distinctly remember my freshman year being surprised at how almost everyone I saw wore very cute clothes. I actually felt under dressed–while not wearing sweatpants, mind you. I don’t own any. The whole bloody tampon tangent? I simply took it as an extreme over exaggeration simply to point out (the fairly obvious fact) that at a women’s college only women live in the doms. Obviously single-sex dorms only exist in single-sex colleges.
About being dependent on coeducational institutions–I could easily complete my major at Bryn Mawr, without ever stepping foot on another campus. However, since there is the opportunity to take advantage of other classes offered at other colleges of course I will do so!
I have found Bryn Mawr to be an excellent learning environment, though very rigorous and at times the workload is almost unmanageable. It doesn’t matter to me if there are males in my classes, though they are in at least one of my classes every day of the week, because I am here to learn. I am not here to get a husband. I am not here to stick it to the patriarchy. I am here to be part of a community of strong, independent women and to graduate with a degree that will help me begin a career.
To Ms. Chu:
I’m sorry that you did not have a good time at Bryn Mawr. However, plenty of people transfer from one college to another–you are not unique in that respect. However, your need to attack BMC leads me to believe that you refuse to acknowledge that it was not Bryn Mawr’s fault that you did not belong, as it is an institution where many women flourish and have done so for 125 years, but it is the fault of your own for choosing a school at which you did’t belong (again, not that you should be blamed for it since many people have been in the same situation).
Single-sex education is not for everyone, which is one of the reasons we call it ‘self-selectivity’: just because you did not fit Bryn Mawr does not mean that Bryn Mawr is automatically worse than the institution you transferred to.
Sincerely,
Miffed Mawrter
If you’re going to be a writer, you’ll learn very quickly that offending people is the quickest way to be out on your ass.
I won’t bother defending women’s colleges, many other people have done that. But I will say that the WESLEYAN alum who has written here apologizing to the Wellesley community is clearly someone who received a better education at Wesleyan that you did.
Clearly, you don’t belong at ANY liberal arts college, since not a one of them has been able to teach you the value of viewing things objectively.
You really don’t get it, do you?
I go to Bryn Mawr, we’re in the same class, actually, and for some reason, I don’t remember you at all. I’ve met quite a few Bryn Mawr girls like you who spent a lot of time off campus, observing us Bryn Mawr women from a distance. In all honesty, you have no idea of what Bryn Mawr is like. There is none of this man-hating, tampon throwing business. We don’t really care about other schools, coed or not. We have all taken coed classes and we acknowledge that it doesn’t matter. Frankly, the reason Bryn Mawr women go to Bryn Mawr is to get one of the best educations in the entire country. It’s a supportive environment where you are constantly surrounded by like-minded women who you can both befriend and look up to.
Why did you feel a need to write this article? Honestly, Bryn Mawr has turned out (and will continue to turn out) far more spectacular graduates than Wesleyan. I have a feeling you’re a little bitter for not being able to hack it. Just ‘food for thought’ as you would say….
Vicky came in with class of 2012. She transferred out at the end of sophomore year.
Echoing 99.99% of what other Bryn Mawr alums have already said, I only regret for Vicky Chu that she was dragooned into going to BMC in the first place. Clearly it was not the right place for her.
Responding to this article is rather difficult for me. On the one hand, I am a Bryn Mawr grad, Class ’09, and I do take offense to some of the accusations made against my undergraduate institution. On the other, I agree with some points made here. More importantly, I think that an unexamined decision to commit to a single-sex educational environment is just about the worst move that any college or university can make. Please, do not mistake this as some infuriated rant to defend the honor of my college- I think that the value of a single-sex college needs to be evaluated, and I don’t know on which side of that argument I necessarily fall, but I also think that this article contains some glaring misrepresentations of all women’s colleges (Bryn Mawr in particular) that need to be corrected.
So, let’s start with the points on which Ms. Chu and I agree, moving to my disagreements and points of contention later:
I did not consider the fact that I would be attending an all women’s college when I decided to go to Bryn Mawr. Instead I was drawn, as I believe Ms. Chu was as well, by the small class sizes, the commitment academic rigor, the truly outstanding faculty, and the high quality of living enjoyed by the students (dorms are beautiful, and meals are superb). It wasn’t until about three months into my first semester that I was walking across the campus’s crowded central green one afternoon, and realized that I could not see a single male person. Not a one. That’s when I realized that I had really chosen to go to an all women’s college, and that decision was going to affect my life for both the next four years and beyond.
Throughout my time at Bryn Mawr I struggled with the idea of an all women’s college: when you strip away every thing else from the central concept, my college practiced discrimination on the basis of gender. I was not (and still am not) entirely comfortable with that notion. And I completely agree with Ms. Chu when she says that “All women—at both coed and women’s colleges—must seek to empower themselves by challenging gender inequities.” I some times wonder whether promoting single-sex education merely highlights these inequities, rather than challenges them.
I also think that there is something to the thought that Bryn Mawr does depend on the Tri-Co and Bi-Co relationships for social interaction with members of the opposite gender. I spent much of my time at the other two (co-ed) members of the Tri-Co consortium. Full disclosure: I completed one of my two majors through Haverford’s Philosophy department, and I am currently engaged to a man who graduated from Swarthmore, whom I dated throughout my time at Bryn Mawr. So, yes, I took full advantage of the Tri-Co consortium, and I think that Bryn Mawr students can benefit from this association both academically and socially…
Now- moving on to the aspects of Ms. Chu’s article with which I disagree:
I do not think that Bryn Mawr (or, I assume, other all women’s colleges of the same caliber) is in some way incomplete without the co-ed members of the Tri-Co consortium (or its equivalent). I know many students who never took a class and never pursued social relationships at either Haverford or Swartmore, and they seemed to think that their collegiate experience was completely satisfactory, thank-you-very-much. I think that Bryn Mawr benefits from the consortium, but I do not think that it is the only college to do so, nor do I feel that it is reliant upon the consortium in a way that the other two member colleges are not.
Furthermore, having split my academic pursuits more or less half way down the middle between single-sex and co-ed environments (I graduated with a Bio major completed entirely at Bryn Mawr and a Philosophy major completed entirely at Haverford), I feel like I am in a pretty good position to compare the two. Both environments provided me with an excellent education- mainly because Haverford and Bryn Mawr are both very similar schools: small classes, wonderful faculty etc. etc. I did not feel as if I had additional challenges in my co-ed classes to be heard alongside the male voices in the class. I don’t feel as if I participated more in my all-women’s classes. But, I did feel as if the culture at Bryn Mawr was one of cooperation, more so than at Haverford (Sorry, Haverfordians, you guys are great, but there it is, that’s my honest opinion) The entire ethos of my single-sex academic environment was one of team work, and competition with oneself rather than one’s classmates. I really enjoyed that, and I missed it from my co-ed experiences. Never having attended any other all women’s colleges, I cannot say that this cooperative academic endeavor extends to their campuses as well, but I believe that it was the result of being in an all women’s environment, particularly one as healthy and robust as Bryn Mawr’s.
Which brings me, finally, to the things about this article I believe are just plain wrong:
The women with whom I associated with at Bryn Mawr are some of the most socially well adjusted people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. Yes, we have some nutters- what college doesn’t?- but most of my peers were outstanding women with whom I am proud to associate. The social environment at Bryn Mawr is far from “normal”- it is exceptional.
I never saw another woman’s bloody tampon at Bryn Mawr: in the bathroom or anywhere else. And yes, some students did dress in baggy sweatpants and over-sized sweatshirts, many more wore completely normal tee-shirts and jeans combos, while a few dressed themselves to the nines, with formal western business attire, traditional clothing from their ethnic or religious groups of identification, and one woman in particular who always looked fabulous: like she had just walked off a haute couture runway.
I never noticed undue attention paid to the male students in my classes at Bryn Mawr, but for a more accurate assessment, you’d really have to ask them for their thoughts on the matter…
Finally, and most importantly: never during my four years at Bryn Mawr did I scream “Death to the Patriarchy”. I never proclaimed that I would “rather be dead than co-ed”. Nor did I ever feel pressured to do so. Certainly some woman at Bryn Mawr (and other all women’s colleges, I’d imagine) for whom these statements ring true- but they are not shoved down your throat at admission, you are not required to recite them every morning pledge-of-allegiance style, and I strongly resent the implication that they are notions which are endorsed by the Bryn Mawr student body as a whole.
Hopefully this response will contribute to this discussion more than some of the more emotionally motivated responses that have been generated, because I think that the value of co-ed vs single-sex educations ought to be something discussed, if only so we can isolate those aspects which are beneficial from those that are detrimental. But, at the same time, I feel I must express the offense I took to this article: I found it both inaccurate and slanderous of women’s colleges, Bryn Mawr in particular. So, while I applaud Ms. Chu’s efforts to examine the issue of single-sex education, I must say that I am disappointed by the way in which she has done so.
-Molly Pieri, BMC Class ’09
—Not having had time to proof read this, and having to go to work, I hope you will forgive any typo’s or minor grammatical errors I’ve made in this response—
Molly,
An extremely well-written response and I thank you for your perspectives on this issue. I agree whole-heartedly that while I understand where Ms. Chu was coming from, her execution was rather unfortunate.
Glad you appreciated it. I think that we who attend or support all women’s colleges are far to quick to extol the benefits of single-sex education without acknowledging that there are, in point of fact, costs as well. Not that I don’t think the benefits outweigh these costs; however to ignore the costs, or not reevaluate them is just as wrong as to ignore or not evaluate the benefits an all women’s colleges provide. I wish that the conversation here could have more deeply examined this cost/benefit ratio, and how we measure these costs and benefits, for whom they are assumed, and by whom they are evaluated… and less on the need to defend specific institutions against specific accusations. But, I think that the nature of the anonymous internet forum may be against us on that one: the allure of a quick, snarky, smack down is just too great. Hence the top rated post right now is Regina’s: “But sweatpants are all that fits me right now”. Hilarious, yes (laughed my head off the first time I read it), but not exactly substantive.
-Molly, BMC ’09
Dear Ms. Chu,
I can clearly see why you didn’t last at Bryn Mawr, a school that values making arguments based on valid reasoning and clear evidence, rather than stereotypes, personal prejudices, hearsay, and pettiness. Your arguments are baseless, and your article, trash. I believe that the atmosphere at Bryn Mawr helped me and my friends succeed in various ways, including being admitted to the top graduate/medical/law programs in the world, receiving prestigious fellowships (I, myself, am on a Fulbright right now), and helping our communities in various ways.
As a German/Comp Lit double-major, I can say with confidence that I could not have received this caliber of education in almost any other institution in the country. Did you know that Bryn Mawr produces more alums with PhDs in foreign languages than ANY OTHER SCHOOL in the country? That means more than Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and, yes, Wesleyan. As someone who hopes to pursue a foreign language PhD very soon, this statistic is significant. Moreover, Bryn Mawr is ranked number 8 in the country for producing PhDs in all fields. That’s above every single ivy league school. (http://www.reed.edu/ir/phd.html)
Here’s some more cold hard facts to throw your way (sorry, I understand that actual, statistical information may be a little out of your league, but here goes): The Washington Monthly ranked Bryn Mawr College as the number one college in America based on social mobility, fostering scientific and humanistic research. (http://www.mainlinevideoguide.com/education.html)
Some more awesome facts: Bryn Mawr was also the first institution in the country to offer graduate degrees to women. Bryn Mawr students began the first student governance association in the country. Bryn Mawr was the first institution in the world to offer degrees in social work. Bryn Mawr has several programs that are widely regarded as some of the best in the country, including history of art, archeology, and Russian. Bryn Mawr was one of two schools in the country (the other being Georgia Tech) to receive a $1 million grant from Microsoft supporting a ground-breaking robotics program.
As far as our college consortia are concerned: we share resources and we coexist quite nicely, thank you very much. Some majors are offered at Bryn Mawr that are not offered at Haverford and Swat, and vice versa, so many, many students from Haverford and Swarthmore major in, or take a significant number of classes at, Bryn Mawr, and many Bryn Mawr students major in, and take courses at, Haverford, Swarthmore, and Penn. For example, history of art is not offered at Haverford, so Fordians major in it at BMC, while BMC does not offer fine arts, so Mawrtyrs major in it at Haverford. Comp Lit is a bi-college major, which means students take core courses and electives at both schools. You clearly only took advantage of this consortium to get drunk and make a fool of yourself at Haverford, but not all of us are interested in wasting our valuable college years in the dark daze of a hangover.
I really could go on all night about how wonderful Bryn Mawr is. I’m sure that Wesleyan is a very special place, as well, although clearly you aren’t learning very much there.
I hope that your classmates are ashamed at your shallow thinking, and that you and the Argus editors issue an apology immediately. Maybe spending a few more years at Bryn Mawr would have done you some good.
Sincerely,
Someone deeply concerned for your higher reasoning skills
Amen
Tits or GTFO!
By the way: I wonder if people who go to Harvard get to make completely ridiculous comments about the validity of a historically black education just because their name sort of sounds like “Howard”. Oh wait. No, they don’t. Because that’s ABSURD.
you make some good points, but this is really harsh!
Shame on you. This type of judgement and negativity is harsh, hyperbolic, and simply rude. Just because a women’s college was not for you does not give you the liberty to trash it. I strongly suggest a public apology.
There are many personal comments that I’d like to make to you right now, but will refrain because that type of hatred–akin to the content of your article–is poisonous and hurtful. Truly, shame on you. Congratulations on spreading more unnecessary hate and prejudice in this world.
Didn’t realize women’s college were the only places where people did “unmentionable things.” That kinda sucks.
Bryn Mawr Students! I’ve been holding this back, but I can’t any longer. I’m ashamed! I agree with many of your objections to this article, but for the love of all that is decent, take some responsibility for your opinions. Particularly those of you who address Ms. Chu personally. Enough of these anonymous attacks. Sign your names. Or does Bryn Mawr no longer teach students the importance of this practice? I know when I was there every poster, every publicly viewed sentiment was finished with “???’s -youremail@address.here“. Show some respect for both your opinions and the woman whom you are confronting. Sign your responses.
-Molly, BMC ’09
Good point. I’m Pragya Krishna, class of 2013, and I made the Mawrter’13 comment about never having seen someone else’s used hygiene products during my time here. I keep rechecking the article too, hoping to see that she meant to state them as stereotypes and nothing more, but it is solidly there, presented as ‘fact’.
That is a good point. Now I can’t stop thinking about all the controversy with the ACBs. I’m Rayna Andrews, class of 2011 and I posted as ‘Ia Ia Ia’ regarding transferring TO BMC.
I feel that going to Bryn Mawr was the best decision of my life and has made me the person I am today. When Bryn Mawr is represented in such a way, it feels like a personal atack.
Let’s be completely honest here, Vick. College life here at Bryn Mawr just wasn’t what you expected. What you really wanted was to be around members of the opposite sex. It’s ok, some of us have those moments when we wonder what it would be like to go someplace else and have that “typical college experience.” The difference between you and us is that you are weak. Your own preconceived notion of what’s socially “normal” for college got in the way of what is really important, education. To say that all you saw was “women reinforcing negative stereotypes by demeaning themselves in order to gain validation from coed students” is a disgustingly false accusation. I see more of this behavior from sorority girls who constantly take pictures of everything while holding up poorly made Greek letters with their bodies constantly seeking social acceptance. I don’t know what crowd you were hanging out with at Bryn Mawr, clearly the kind who transfers.
As for your statement regarding women wearing sweatpants, show me a college or university where people don’t wear sweatpants and you can say I told you so.
I’m glad you transferred out of our class because frankly, you are a disgrace. You have no respect for your (ex)fellow classmates and the women who are taking the strides to further their education at a women’s college. This article is nonsensical doesn’t accurately represent at all what it means to go to Bryn Mawr (or any women’s college).
I’m sorry Wesleyan now has you as their poster child. I’m sure there are a lot of great people there, but you are not one of them. Maybe you should transfer.
“…I see more of this behavior from sorority girls who constantly take pictures of everything while holding up poorly made Greek letters with their bodies constantly seeking social acceptance. ”
I am in Copenhagen this semester and I never knew PEOPLE conducted themselves like this until now (my ignorance I suppose). As a Haverfordian, who did not appreciate what she had til abroad, I look forward to returning to a tri-college community of motivated and insightful intellectuals who are cultivating the skills to change the face of world tomorrow, for the better, in unique and nuanced ways.
I am privileged to be inspired by the light of my peers at Bryn Mawr. Some people just miss the opportunity. And although Ms. Chu chose to view her experience at Bryn Mawr through myopic lenses of black and white, perhaps Weslyan will offer the necessary skills for her to critically challenge her uninformed conceptions… or at least teach her not to publish them as fact.
I went to Wellesley. Nothing in this article remotely resembles my experience at Wellesley, but that makes sense considering the writer never went to Wellesley. I suppose the point is she would choose any co-ed institution over any single-sex one. Which is fine. The women’s college education is not for everyone, just as the big state school or geographically isolated school isn’t for everyone. I know the Mawrters are upset with and offended by this article (which is fair. tampons? really?) but take it for what it is: not much.
I also went to Harvard. I think there is an interesting dicussion to be had about the differences between co-ed and single-sex schools, but none of that conversation is present here. It is a rant by one girl (who probably shouldn’t have been at a women’s college to begin with) crediting her single experience and gut assumptions more than the studies and data that consistently show the benefits of women’s colleges to the women who attend them.
So, Ms. Chu, I have had the same Wellesley/Wesleyan conversation at times and it can be annoying, but please, back up off Wellesley; you did not go and have precisely zero credibility to talk about our college. And as far as Bryn Mawr, you ought to consider your words and how they are recieved and potentially used by others. And if you want to be a writer, you ought to have more respect for facts and perhaps a little less respect for your own assumptions. It is a shame that between the two wonderful schools you have attended, you have not learned that anecdotal evidence is not evidence. Or that stereotyping and generalizing are wrong. You did not learn that projecting your assumptions onto others does not actually make those assumptions true.
BMC’10
I second her points.
I’m fairly certain this is my big sister, and by fairly I mean it is. Seven Sisters Family!
I’m a male Haverford grad from the class of 2011, and I’m currently teaching at a single-sex private school. Some of my closest friends are Bryn Mawr women, and my girlfriend just graduated from Smith College, so I (like nearly everyone else who’s commented on this article) take GREAT exception to just about everything you say here.
The woman who posted below about Bryn Mawr’s academic record is right on the money, but that doesn’t seem to be your problem. Your problem is the culture of the school, the aesthetic of the single-sex college, the relationship between men and women that you think such a system allows. Unfortunately, your perception of that culture is so skewed as to be laughable; I was the only man in several of my literature classes at Bryn Mawr, but never once did I feel uncomfortable (or uniquely comfortable) simply because of my gender. The fact that your great awakening came from reading Judith Butler and Michel Foucault is also worth a giggle.
What’s less funny is your assertion that feminism and femininity (you disturbingly link the two, another habit of a small mind) are things that can ruin a college experience. Yelling “Death to the patriarchy!” is not, as you call it, an instance of repeated whining, but rather a sign that the reconstruction of social order is part of the very culture of the school and not something that students encounter only for three hours a week in their copies of “Gender Trouble.” It’s a GOOD sign, a healthy sign. Feminism is not a part-time job.
I used to roll my eyes with every other Haverford student when Bryn Mawr women performed the “anassa kata” cheer, but it seems particularly powerful and relevant in the face of such willful ignorance as yours. “Hail, victory,” they shout, and in that victory they call for is an end to the ridiculous oppression and double standards that still plague our society. They’re not sorry for annoying you by yelling it a little too often or too loudly for your taste, because it’s something that needs to be shouted.
Ia, ia, Nike. Bryn Mawr, Bryn Mawr, Bryn Mawr.
As a Bryn Mawr alum, I appreciate that you, Ford alum, left off the Annasa Kata part. You learned well from your friends, apparently!
Sara,
I’m not dumb enough ever to start the Anass. I may be a feminist, but I’m also very fond of my balls, and I’d like to KEEP them.
Thank you! <3
“”Hail, victory,” they shout, and in that victory they call for is an end to the ridiculous oppression and double standards that still plague our society. They’re not sorry for annoying you by yelling it a little too often or too loudly for your taste, because it’s something that needs to be shouted.”
Well spake, my friend.
wow ladies, the sad fact remains that it took a man to say what you could not convey coherently… just reinforces the dominance of the patriarchy
To the contrary, I have read several responses by fellow alumnae that were articulate and coherent. I appreciated this Haverfordian response for conveying an alternate perspective to the personal accounts of the many Mawrtyrs who had already posted. I also appreciated his take on the whole Butler/Foucault awakening problem….cheers to your giggles, sir! Just because a man comes to a woman’s defense (or her school’s defense) doesn’t mean she has failed to do so herself, Notaman. It means he’s a gracious person. I appreciate it.
It is far better that Ms. Chu left for a school that was a more appropriate fit for her, than to remain at a place where she did not feel comfortable, thereby missing out on a positive college experience. I don’t feel offended by her choice to leave – the Bryn Mawr community has a strong personality and it’s not for everyone. That she chose the wrong college and then extrapolated her bad personal experience into a more general, public condemnation of both my college and single-sex education is what I find disappointing, and an example of lazy thinking.
I suggest that she consider that not all discomfort is equal, and that sometimes we feel uncomfortable because we are being challenged to grow beyond our fears or misconceptions. I am sorry that Ms. Chu felt embarrassed by the Swarthmore hazing, but I wish that she had taken the opportunity to stand up to it, and to learn to feel confident in her own abilities in the face of these taunts. Honestly, what can you expect at a school where students wear “Anywhere else it would have been an A” t-shirts??? (I love my Swattie friends, I do! I don’t take their tendency to boast personally.) Certainly, life is not going to get much easier in this regard, and the relatively tame (lame?) things she heard from these college kids could have been an easy way to learn this lesson.
I chose Bryn Mawr base on its academic excellence, and did not go fully informed about the realities of single-sex education. There were certainly times during my four years there that I questioned my choice or wavered in my defense of it when challenged by others. In fact, I am still challenged by colleagues and friends who doubt the advantages of a single-sex education. It is in the fourteen years since I graduated from Bryn Mawr that I have come to understand more fully the benefits of single-sex education.
Let me be clear about one point: during my time at Bryn Mawr, I did not learn to hate men, or to scorn them, or to avoid them or hold them apart. I didn’t obsessively compare myself to them, or tally up the ways in which I had managed to be their equal or their better. The same goes for my attitudes toward women. I was encouraged to determine my own standards for myself, and to compare myself not to others but to the person I wanted to become (free of any expectations of what someone of my gender or background should become), and I still strive to do this, though it is a life-long undoing of the pressure to compare myself to others. This is not a rejection of others, but an affirmation of myself (or perhaps development of self). In that environment, I didn’t waste a lot of time thinking about how others might be doing, where I could get an easy A, what others thought about me…and that freed me up to be supportive and forthright and less threatened by and more compassionate towards people who disagree with me.
Quite frankly, life after college IS different – it has been less supportive, less about merit and more about politics and appearances, more fraught with gender-based assumptions and divisions…and my college experiences and my relationships with other alumnae have proven to be a wellspring of lessons learned about myself that I have been fortunate enough to draw upon for balance and perspective time and time again in the face of “real world” challenges. Let’s face it, this notion of co-ed colleges being better preparation for the “real world” is silly. You don’t really know what the “real world” is like until you’re in it, and four-year liberal arts college is not it.
Yes, I’ll admit it – there’s an initial very big imposed us/them division in the admission process, and it’s a contradiction I worry over (is this a case of selectively seeing discrimination as a good thing when it benefits me and a bad thing when it hurts me?) but in my personal experience, the environment that this initial sex-based discrimination created during college actually engendered more thoughtful and open interactions with men and women, and freed me from thinking about everything in terms of Team Guys vs. Team Girls. I have seen more of the category-based “girls vs. boys” thinking in everyday life among female graduates of co-ed schools than among my peers from single-sex schools.
I hope that Ms Chu does not recoil in the face of these impassioned responses to her article and criticisms of her argument, some of which are admittedly a little hot-headed, in response to the careless accusations and unfair generalizations she made in her opinion piece. I hope that this experience reminds her of the importance of demonstrating a respect for others regardless of whether you agree with them or not, as well as the importance of taking ownership of one’s opinions, and responsibility for how they are expressed.
Amanda Buster
BMC 1997
Why do you think that hating the patriarchy is the same as hating men?
Being a feminist is not about hating men. Why shouldn’t we appreciate a good argument and a good defense from someone?
Dear Vicky,
You are entitled to your own opinion, however when you stereotype a whole institution that is simply absurd. People obviously recognize Wellesley over Wesleyan because of the distinguished women that graduated from the school. It is ironic how you advocate for gender equality and the empowerment of women, yet debunk the institutions that try to promote that. This article failed to articulate any message. It successfully displayed your ignorance and frustration. It is a shame you did not enjoy your time at Bryn Mawr, but keep your resentment to yourself. You just did not take advantage of the wonderful opportunities! I hope you immerse yourself into the campus life at Wesleyan and find a love for your new school without demystifying our schools.
Goodluck!
A proud bmw
PS- It is unfortunate that Wesleyan even let this article get published.
As a student at Bryn Mawr, I am VERY offended by this article, and I’m pretty sure other Mawrtyrs are too, probably much more than I am. I’m sorry you couldn’t find your place here. It’s not that I enjoy every minute of being here either, and I’m going to be honest and say that I have considered transferring to a different school at one point too, although my reasons were much more complicated and personal, at least compared to the reasons you list here. I didn’t consider transferring because of bloody tampons in the bathroom (where did you even find bloody tampons in Bryn Mawr bathrooms? Are you sure they weren’t YOURS?), and I have never doubted the quality of Bryn Mawr’s academics, ever. I decided not to transfer, and I am absolutely happy that I gave myself more time and made efforts to stay. It is clear to me that you weren’t so successful in Bryn Mawr, seeing the poor quality of your writing.
Are you sure you even tried? In fact, I remember you were in one of my classes last semester, and I don’t think I ever heard you speak, nor did I see you paying attention. I guess you were just too busy “glaring” at the guys in our class.
It’s clear to me that your mind is completely shallow, so please allow me to make this one shallow statement. If you are so disgusted with girls wearing oversized sweatpants (which is NOT true at Bryn Mawr), how is it that you don’t even shave your pits and wear tank tops to class? I’m not going to lie, I didn’t recognize your name at first, but I remembered later that you were the girl with the unshaved pits.
I don’t like to be mean, but guess what, you’ve just offended the entire Bryn Mawr community. This article is clearly targeted at Bryn Mawr, and you’re making it even worse by talking about Wellesley; now you have offended every student, professor, and alum of women’s colleges, and I hope you realize what you’ve just done with this article. Hopefully Wesleyan is working out for you.
(I also hope that you shave before you go to class there. I’m pretty sure guys can tolerate oversized sweatpants, but not hairy armpits.)
yeah…. no. she wasn’t in your class last semester. she transferred before you got to school. nice try though?
I realize that I’m essentially doing the same, but anonymous personal attacks are not at all helpful. Condemning anyone for something so superficial as whether or not they choose to shave their armpits is just as bad as, if not worse than,ju the sweeping judgements made in this article, especially since you seem to base your opinion of that choice on precisely the type of socially imposed gender norm that we are taught to question at Bryn Mawr.
Also, Vicky was a junior transfer, so she left in May 2010.
and congratulations, now you have just brought in a new stereotype for us about unshaved armpits, and you have essentially confirmed the stereotypes she listed of women’s colleges by judging her yourself. thanks for that!
While a lot of the author’s comments are up for debate…her comment about tour guides constantly referencing the closeness of co-ed schools nearby is dead on. If we have so much pride as a woman’s school, why does it always seem like the absence of men is something women’s colleges feel the need to compensate for?
Also, speaking as a junior at Bryn Mawr…women’s colleges and Bryn Mawr are not for everybody, and the atmosphere is definitely not what you would find at a larger or co-ed school. Whether that suits you or not is a personal matter. It didn’t suit the author, and if you don’t agree with the campus majority’s opinions, things can get tiring and frustrating. A lot of people who love Bryn Mawr have reacted very strongly against this article, and that’s legit; but not everyone flourishes here.
(Also: personal pet peeve, I hate the ‘better dead than co-ed’ slogan. Something about it just really gets on my nerves…maybe the implication that nothing can be worse than the presence of student penis on campus? Is there really no better way of getting your point across? It’s catchy but grahhh.)
“A lot of people who love Bryn Mawr have reacted very strongly against this article, and that’s legit; but not everyone flourishes here.”
Of course a women’s college isn’t the right fit for everyone. No one is arguing against that. It’s the “authors” decision to conjure up offensive and untrue “anecdotes” and her choice to slander a school that didn’t work for her that is so offensive. It is one thing to speak highly of your school; I do that regularly for BMC. But you don’t have to lie about the downfalls of another school in order to recognize the benefits of your own education.
I’ve never
Simply examining the means by which students approach gender and/or sex equality and empowerment and later applying the means of empowerment into the larger society means taking into account the different ways in which students may choose to go about this. At a women’s college, we choose to empower women in the collegiate setting by providing them with the resources they need to be competitive in a male dominated society. Women who come here chose this type of environment. They choose to have the single gender experience (in conjunction with having co-ed opportunities).
Any college can be a bubble. Our bubble, like all others, does not remain in its normal form for very long because our women go out into the world during the academic year, over the summer, and after college. They do not interact solely with other people in the campus community but rather the campus community acts as a means of making sure women are going about these things to the best of their abilities. With this community of common goals of learning and going out into the world as respected as our male counter parts, we are able to work towards avoiding any position of subservience due to our gender, whether with people within a consortium or a future co-worker.
Also, what is wrong with wearing sweatpants to class? Sweatpants are by no means indicative of relationships with professors. As a matter of fact, had the weather been cooler, I would have worn sweats everyday to the summer course I attended at a large co-ed state school.
I wonder if you would have had this perspective on how to deal with men had you never attended Bryn Mawr, because the way I see it, your background at a Seven Sister’s school likely helped shape your perspective on the ways to deal with men because you were not in a position that forced you to be subservient but rather in a position where you saw something else, where you saw equality and learned the ways to talk to people. Please give credit where credit is due.
-Emma, Bryn Mawr College ’14
I am incredibly offended by this. I NEVER wore sweatpants to class at Bryn Mawr. the Haverford girls did.
(I mean, obviously there are more glaring inaccuracies at work here, but I’m far too busy taking a bus to a coed school and doing unmentionable things to their WHOLE ENTIRE sports team, while also hurting my brain trying to figure out how to function independently from coed institutions, that I can’t possibly comment on all this ridiculousness all at once. So, just know that the sweatpants thing is a myth.)
-BMC ’09
I’m a little worried that the comments here are becoming denigrating to Wesleyan. Even if people tell me their boyfriend goes to my women’s college, I still respect the school, even if it’s not ranked as high as other colleges mentioned here. It graduates really great thinkers, just like everyone else.
I’m sorry if that’s condescending, I just really enjoyed reading the highly developed critiques as something to look forward to as I become a college student and really don’t want this to become a mudslinging.
Hi Vicky,
You are probably not interested in anyone’s comments here relating to the benefits of a women’s college; you’ve already made your opinion quite clear. And I am not going to bore you with my perspective as a Bryn Mawr alum now working as a software engineer at MIT’s national security research lab, which you can imagine is quite male dominated. Rather I am going to address the fact that you chose to bash an entire community of people online. Literally hundreds of thousands of women have found women’s colleges to be extremely relevant for literally hundreds of years.
And you, Vicky Chu, you spent 1 year at Bryn Mawr.
Its fine that you didn’t like it. I don’t think anyone cares that you didn’t like it. People care that you attempted to demolish the reputations of these schools on the internet, with no real evidence other than your anecdotes. Did you really learn so little at Bryn Mawr/Wesleyan that you’re ignorant enough to post sweeping statements about large groups of people online, with no evidence to back it up?
Also, with all your talk about how obsessive Bryn Mawr women are about bringing down the patriarchy, and the embracing the sisterhood, or whatever, did you not predict that we would be ALL OVER THIS SHIT?!
I love this. Best argument on here!
I’ve got to say for the valid points that you made in your first comment, to try to call out Vicky Chu’s intelligence and reasonable was completely asinine and quite a bit classless. I understand that Ms. Chu’s article may have struck you the wrong way but I would like to point out that nothing in her article disparaged any part of Bryn Mawr’s education which I’m sure is fantastic but instead talked about why it wasn’t right for her. I think that your frustration stems from the fact that it seems that Vicky is talking about the openness that she felt at Wesleyan and how she didn’t feel it at Bryn Mawr. I also feel that her discussion of her opinions of single sex colleges don’t attempt to discourage anyone from going to them. All I know is that if i was considering Bryn Mawr (I can’t, I’m a guy) this article would certainly not affect my outlook and I think that’s true for most PEOPLE. I hope that your love for school isn’t what’s leading you to make such inflammatory statements but I can’t think of anything else that would lead to such vitriol.
All you’ve done with this article is embarrass yourself and the Wesleyan institution.
Wellesley and other women’s colleges, GET OVER YOURSELVES.
This is an Opinions piece; she is describing her experience at a women’s college, and her preference for a co-ed school. Her utilization of “Wellesley” is admittedly misleading, but I think it was more to poke fun at the fact that Wellesley is often confused with Wesleyan.
All your outrage at this article only proves how much you need to confirm the validity of your women’s colleges as institutions. Threats of blackmail? Do you really have to try so hard to prove you’re better than us? Because frankly, we don’t care. Classy, ladies. Real classy.
Wesleyan students aren’t even bothering to comment on this because, unlike you, we don’t feel any need to validate our school.
I personally came to comment here because I know Vicky well enough to say she does not deserve all this flak. I can’t tell if she is or is not making gross generalizations because I’ve never been to a women’s college, but I would suggest you criticize her opinion respectfully; don’t make ad hominem attacks against someone you don’t know.
Speaking of which; I heard Wellesley women ride something – oh wait – what’s it called – oh that’s right THE FUCK TRUCK to MIT and Harvard. Face it, you can’t survive without co-ed institutions.
Your pretentiousness demonstrates you are all deluded, narrow-minded and completely full of yourselves. These comments are disgusting.
-Current Wesleyan Student
I’m a current Wesleyan student and I’m embarrassed by your response to this article. Do all Wesleyan students a favor, and don’t embarrass our school anymore. These generalizations are truly mortifying and your comment regarding the “FUCK TRUCK” makes you sound ignorant and judgmental. It’s obvious that you are a friend of Vicky Chu and you want to defend her, but that does not make it alright to go online and validate her totally useless argument.
I am proud to go to Wesleyan but people like you and VIcky need to learn a little class. Being able to have an opinion does not make it alright for you to make cruel assumptions and bash colleges that are different than your own. I have many friends who attend Seven Sisters colleges and, while the experience is different, it’s just as rewarding.
– Current Wesleyan student
Frankly, your school wasn’t attacked. We aren’t trying to “prove” that we’re better – only that we’re relevant. And our relevance has nothing to do with the integrity of Wesleyan (which is a fantastic school, by the way, and one that my younger sister is considering attending).
– BMC ’12
I’m going to take the time to respond to this comment because it’s posts like these that really upset me. I would also like to acknowledge the fact that you made grand statements about a place you’ve never even visited before. Way to go confirming your ignorance on the subject matter.
Yes, the article is an opinion piece, but the author is backing up her argument (the necessity of women’s colleges?) by claiming that her one year at a women’s college has provided her with enough evidence to assert (somewhat indirectly) that the entire system is irrelevant. It’s offensive. Furthermore, her experiences at Bryn Mawr paint such laughably exaggerated stereotypes that it’s difficult to her seriously. Perhaps to someone who has never visited a women’s college these arguments appear valid, but as a student of Bryn Mawr myself it reads as if the author never tried to engage herself in the community. Maybe if she took the time to get to know the school, she would’ve felt differently? Or perhaps it was just a bad match. Either way, neither option gives her the credibility to claim that women who attend these schools are being “a bit silly” by making and supporting those decisions. Is that a respectful enough critique for you?
The outrage also comes from the author making insulting claims about our schools that veil insulting claims about women in general. Her views don’t reflect Bryn Mawr, but rather demonstrate what many perceive to occur in situations where women live and learn together without men. They’re outdated stereotypes built upon ignorance and it’s exactly what Bryn Mawr strives to move away from. It’s unfortunate that after attending this school for a period in time your friend couldn’t move past those stereotypes and discover the numerous positive experiences Bryn Mawr has had on other women. Or the ways in which the students here DO defy those stereotypes to create refreshingly new examples of women.
You had a point; some comments were harsh, but maybe I’d take your comment more seriously if you actually followed what you preached. Instead, you attacked everyone. Try to be more mature and not resort to obvious “insults,” (the fuck truck? Really?), and we’ll listen.
Also, I’d suggest you visit a women’s college before making sweeping generalizations about them or the women who attend them. It’s not quite the place of screaming, tampon-throwing crazies that she’s making it out to be.
Thanks to Kate for her post. It’s appreciated.
Wow. I don’t know what’s worse: this article or this comment.
I’m sorry, hold on. You read this an opinion piece? Are you sure we’re referring to the same article? Vicky used exaggerated personal anecdotes and applied them across the board as if they were facts of ALL women’s colleges in general. Aside from most of the claims she makes about Bryn Mawr in this article being founded in utter and complete falsehood, she did NOT present this article as an opinion piece. The claims she uses to substantiate her “opinion”, dare I call it that, are false, disgusting, and horribly offensive.
In response to your comment about Wellesley women riding “the fuck truck” to neighboring institutions: I assure you that term is not used by a single Wellesley student. Rather, I hypothesize that demeaning term was coined by students at other institutions that harbor misguided resentment towards Wellesley women that have decided to seek out social events at their schools*.
Is it likely that women from Wellesley occasionally engage in sexual or romantic activity with students from those schools? I’m inclined to say yes. Perhaps it’s because I’m unfamiliar with the nature of Wesleyan’s social life but I’m assuming those kinds of interactions occur just as frequently at your school as they do at any other college, all-women’s college or not. I will not defend the actions of any student at Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, or any other all women’s institution that shares an academic or social relationship with their neighboring schools because THESE ACTIONS DO NOT NEED DEFENDING. Attending an all women’s college does not commit me to celibacy nor does it restrict who I can or cannot be friends with, sleep with, party with, etc. I’m sorry that going to an all women’s college means I can’t just walk down the hall to watch a movie with or sex up my boyfriend/girlfriend. I think it’s really unfortunate that you seem to think that having to ride a bus in order to do that gives anyone the right to look at and refer to me in a derogatory manner.
The fact that you even used the “Fuck Truck” as an example of why women’s colleges could never “survive” without their hypothetical coed counterparts only improves upon arguments echoed by others in this thread in favor of attending an all-women’s institution. Fuck truck? Yea, Vicky… I’m gonna’ say it. Death to the patriarchy! DEATH to the fucking patriarchy. How dare anyone condemn a woman for how she chooses to use her mind OR her body. Your use of the term “fuck truck” only reinforces the ever-present dichotomy between how men and women’s actions are perceived in current social and political realms.
While I agree that some of the responses to Vicky’s article are unnecessarily aggressive and spiteful, the criticism of what she has presented in this piece is most definitely warranted. Your attempt to defend her is noble, however, your own misguided and offensive response further proves that our own responses are justified.
*Disclaimer: I’m a student at Bryn Mawr so this statement was simply a projection of how I feel some Haverford and Swarthmore students view Bryn Mawr students “invading” their campus on the weekend. I am unfamiliar with the nature of the Wellesley/Harvard/MIT relationship.
This. Exactly how I felt reading that comment.
– Recent Wellesley Alum
“Wesleyan students aren’t even bothering to comment on this because, unlike you, we don’t feel any need to validate our school.”
Also a current Wesleyan student. Actually, I just haven’t commented on this article because, frankly, I just want it to go away. It’s so embarrassing! Please stop posting. You are making it worse.
I’m pretty sure something labeled the “Fuck Truck” isn’t a necessity to the survival of a university…..and I’m also sure that if you thought a moment about what a gross generalization is, you’d realize that this “opinion piece” (oh please) is full of them.
Clearly we at women’s colleges really missed out on having people like you in our classes. I am glad Vicky has the opportunity to attend an institution where her friends will try to slut-shame an entire campus in order to support their opinion that co-ed schools are better. “You have sex with boys at MIT and Harvard! Therefore clearly your college has no value.” Really? She’s right, there’s no need to kill the patriarchy, it’s clearly already dead. /sarcasm/
Generally there’s no point to arguing with people like you, but I’m going to comment for the benefit of other readers. I went to Wellesley. I was straight, so I dated MIT boys, I dated Harvard boys, on weekends I danced at finals clubs, and drank beer at frat parties. And on Sunday I was back at Wellesley studying and kicking ass in my single-sex classes. Boys and girls at co-ed institutions have relationships with people at different schools – does that invalidate the whole institution, which, I might remind you, is one of learning? Why does the fact that women from Wellesley and Bryn Mawr sometimes party and date men (and women) at co-ed institutions completely invalidate the concept of single sex education, in your opinion?
I chose Wellesley for the academics. I chose Wellesley for the W network and alumnae support and community and friendship. And I chose Wellesley because I liked the idea of classes where women were encouraged to go-get-em, where women were encouraged actively to be confident in themselves and speak up and challenge glass ceilings. When Madeleine Albright gave my commencement address, she said that when she graduated Wellesley, her commencement speaker told them they would be the mothers of tomorrow’s leaders. She told us that we could BE tomorrow’s leaders. I chose Wellesley as a school that can and will produce those leaders. No weekend fun off campus changes that fact.
I did not choose my undergraduate institution based on what my dating life would be like there any more than I chose it because it was supposed to be a good “party school”. That was a lot less important to me than going to a really good school with excellent professors and opportunities. And so I got a phenomenal education and had some fun on the side. Basically, I win at life. Where’s the problem?
I apologize for the personal attacks. No one should be slut-shaming Vicky for whatever happened with Haverford sports teams. No one should be threatening her future employment opportunities. No one should be threatening to attack her with bloody tampons (snicker). But, an opinion as such is not something that should just be respected. Opinions should be based on research, not hearsay. Opinions should be defensible. She didn’t research her opinions, she spoke from absolutely no experience of Wellesley, and she said some really inflammatory things. She deserves to get called on that. If she doesn’t like it, she can come back and defend herself with reasonable and well-researched arguments.
you guys are really fucking vicious
Hi Vicky,
You are probably not interested in anyone’s comments here relating to the benefits of a women’s college; you’ve already made your opinion quite clear. And I am not going to bore you with my perspective as a Bryn Mawr alum now working as a software engineer at MIT’s national security research lab, which you can imagine is quite male dominated. Rather I am going to address the fact that you chose to bash an entire community of people online. Literally hundreds of thousands of women have found women’s colleges to be extremely relevant for literally hundreds of years.
And you, Vicky Chu, you spent 1 year at Bryn Mawr.
Its fine that you didn’t like it. I don’t think anyone cares that you didn’t like it. People care that you attempted to demolish the reputations of these schools on the internet, with no real evidence other than your anecdotes. Did you really learn so little at Bryn Mawr that you’re ignorant enough to post sweeping statements about large groups of people online, with no evidence to back it up?
Also, with all your talk about how obsessive Bryn Mawr women about bringing down the patriarchy, and the embracing the sisterhood, or whatever, did you not predict that we would be ALL OVER THIS SHIT?!
I wouldn’t worry too much, Ms. Chu. I mean, you’ve definitely managed to humiliate yourself, your institution, and your peers, but you haven’t completely shot yourself in the foot yet (unfortunately for the rest of the world). I’m sure you can find a nice job in the future at Fox News. Your internalized misogyny, lack of writing skills, and general idiocy are exactly what they are looking for.
In the mean time, have fun at Wesleyan and we at Bryn Mawr and Wellesley will continue to throw our tampons on the floor. Because you know — that’s just WE DO at women’s colleges.
For a college that is so sheltered from men I feel like I see quite a few male Swarthmore and Haverford students walking around, not to mention the male post-bacs and graduate students who actually attend BMC. Weird…
RR, BMC ’13
As another transfer from Bryn Mawr, I clearly had my issues with the school. However, I understand that this was not the college’s fault, but a difference of personality fit. Like you, I used to scoff at people who corrected “all girl’s school” to “all women’s college” until I got out in the real world and had people question my abilities simply because I was a female. I am truly sorry and sympathetic that you had such a negative experience at Bryn Mawr, but I hope in the future you learn to approach this subject with enough maturity to not be hostile to the institution and all women’s education all together. Respect for others and their needs is one of the lessons you missed in your time there and I wish you the best of luck as you learn it now.
I have clicked ‘like’ on very many of the comments below, but I really must reiterate: what foolish editor allowed such an ill-advised opinion piece to be posted? Could anyone really have thought it would garner praise for the writer OR the school? (M Lavrakas BMC ’88)
Have you considered that the purpose of an opinion piece doesn’t have to be for the purpose of “garnering praise”? But rather to express an opinion that sometimes the author knows will not be popular?
This is what is known as a Public Relations FAIL. At my workplace, no blog post/opinion piece that goes out under the University’s imprint would ever go live without passing by the eyes of the communications department. You know, to make sure that some person doesn’t accidentally cause a firestorm based on poorly presented feelings that do not reflect the school’s message or attitudes.
Although, to clarify, I’m not including solely student produced publications in that assessment. I have zero idea what sort of oversight they have on our campus, although I do recall officials and readers occasionally reacting vehemently to poorly conceived/executed pieces attacking our main sports rivals…
Holy Shades of Community, Batman!
Ms. Chu, I personally had a horrible social experience at Wellesley. I was not the norm. Most people had a great time. Since leaving I’ve realized college is not, ultimately, about socializing. You go to school to go to school. I got a great education. I do not regret it.
Women’s college alums, I share your outrage. Now leave it alone. Someone publishes one of these every other year. Don’t make it worse by writing something that will embarrass you (threats, etc.) or reflect poorly on your college.
SM, Wellesley ’08
As a Bryn Mawr student, I personally really enjoy having a holiday where I frolic around in white and scream “DEATH TO THE PATRIARCHY”. Just saying~
F.L. BMC ’14
You must be very insecure in your femininity. I wish you had had some valid arguments against Bryn Mawr so I could refute them, but you don’t.
Also, it took me to the very last sentence of your article to realize you actually weren’t kidding. Yikes.
I’m sorry, hold on. You read this an opinion piece? Are you sure we’re referring to the same article? Vicky used exaggerated personal anecdotes and applied them across the board as if they were facts of ALL women’s colleges in general. Aside from most of the claims she makes about Bryn Mawr in this article being founded in utter and complete falsehood, she did NOT present this article as an opinion piece. The claims she uses to substantiate her “opinion”, dare I call it that, are false, disgusting, and horribly offensive.
In response to your comment about Wellesley women riding “the fuck truck” to neighboring institutions: I assure you that term is not used by a single Wellesley student. Rather, I hypothesize that demeaning term was coined by students at other institutions that harbor misguided resentment towards Wellesley women that have decided to seek out social events at their schools*.
Is it likely that women from Wellesley occasionally engage in sexual or romantic activity with students from those schools? I’m inclined to say yes. Perhaps it’s because I’m unfamiliar with the nature of Wesleyan’s social life but I’m assuming those kinds of interactions occur just as frequently at your school as they do at any other college, all-women’s college or not. I will not defend the actions of any student at Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, or any other all women’s institution that shares an academic or social relationship with their neighboring schools because THESE ACTIONS DO NOT NEED DEFENDING. Attending an all women’s college does not commit me to celibacy nor does it restrict who I can or cannot be friends with, sleep with, party with, etc. I’m sorry that going to an all women’s college means I can’t just walk down the hall to watch a movie with or sex up my boyfriend/girlfriend. I think it’s really unfortunate that you seem to think that having to ride a bus in order to do that gives anyone the right to look at and refer to me in a derogatory manner.
The fact that you even used the “Fuck Truck” as an example of why women’s colleges could never “survive” without their hypothetical coed counterparts only improves upon arguments echoed by others in this thread in favor of attending an all-women’s institution. Fuck truck? Yea, Vicky… I’m gonna’ say it. Death to the patriarchy! DEATH to the fucking patriarchy. How dare anyone condemn a woman for how she chooses to use her mind OR her body. Your use of the term “fuck truck” only reinforces the ever-present dichotomy between how men and women’s actions are perceived in current social and political realms.
While I agree that some of the responses to Vicky’s article are unnecessarily aggressive and spiteful, the criticism of what she has presented in this piece is most definitely warranted. Your attempt to defend her is noble, however, your own misguided and offensive response further proves that.
*Disclaimer: I’m a student at Bryn Mawr so this statement was simply a projection of how I feel some Haverford and Swarthmore students view Bryn Mawr students “invading” their campus on the weekend. I am unfamiliar with the nature of the Wellesley/Harvard/MIT relationship.
I am fairly certain that it is Vicky who was attempting to defend herself, and not a friend. She first heard the phrase “fuck truck” while still at Bryn Mawr, as it was used to describe the tri co van.
Hahaha. Believe me, it’s probably not commonly known at Wellesley, but it’s commonly known at MIT and Harvard. We alternate between fuck truck and Slut Bus, and I guess Haverford/Bryn Mawr has caught on!
Bostonstudent … Wellesley knows. Thanks for proving that sexism is alive and well. Have fun perpetuating it!
Well, it’s your loss that you’d choose a place like Wesleyan over Bryn Mawr. Going to Bryn Mawr does not mean all of that stereotypical trash that you spewed in this “article”. It means being a part of the most welcoming community you’ll ever be lucky enough to find, being challenged every day in your classes, being surrounded by brilliant professors and classmates, embracing incredible traditions, finding closer friendships than you could find anywhere else… need I go on? Bryn Mawr is the greatest thing that has ever happened to me, and I think you’ll find many Mawrtyrs who will say the same. And we’ll defend our school until our dying day- notice how many comments this piece of trash has gotten?
Also, saying “women’s colleges could not seem to function independently of coeducation institutions” is just plain HILARIOUS. I know in my department, the corresponding departments in the other two schools in the tri-co lean QUITE heavily upon their Bryn Mawr counterpart, which is known for being one of the best in the nation. Bryn Mawr is quite proud to stand on its own in every way. Maybe YOU needed the other schools, but other Mawrtyrs certainly don’t.
Wesleyan should be ashamed for publishing such an article. I happen to find Wesleyan repulsive, but you don’t see me posting offensive, stereotype-ridden articles in the Bi-Co News, do you?
Here’s hoping you have lots of unhappy Fridays and beyond <3 D to the P!
As a recent graduate of Bryn Mawr College, I am embarrassed by the vitriol of the responses to this article. Yes, Ms. Chu makes a number of dubious claims about the school, claims that misrepresent the experiences of the vast majority of its students. But a little perspective could go a long way. So a college student wrote an opinion piece for a school newspaper that you thought was unfair. Get over it.
Responding to a poorly reasoned argument with hundreds of declarations of anonymous slander is probably not the best way to convince people that Bryn Mawr is actually a great place. If these petty, condescending rants are indeed an accurate representation of the Bryn Mawr student body, then I imagine the Ms. Chu must feel pretty good about her decision to leave.
In conclusion, lighten up Bryn Mawr. I thought we were better than this. Let’s have a little sense of humor about ourselves and keep in mind the immortal words of one Dr. Bob Kelso:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USh8lKeui2o#t=24s
I am a current Bryn Mawr student who definitely finds this article offensive. Ms. Chu chose to use her less than stellar experiences at one all women’s college to attack a whole slew of highly educated and highly motivated women, and attempts to belittle and slander every women’s college in the process. It is an arrogant assumption that all women’s colleges are a reflection of what she supposedly experienced.
So, yeah, it’s a foolish opinion piece that isn’t grounded in anything substantial. I have to agree with EmbarrassedMawrtyr: Why are we attacking Ms. Chu? If this is an attempt to show people how smart and determined Bryn Mawr women are, we are definitely failing. While I have a lot of less than stellar things to say about Bryn Mawr, one of the things I have admired about my institution is my fellow students’ passion and courage. As a student body we are not afraid to press the envelope and use our passions to start dialogues. We challenge authority, we stand up for what we believe in, and we let our voices be heard. In my opinion, that’s not what you’ve done here.
Attacking someone for their opinions? I really didn’t think that was what Bryn Mawr was all about. What could have been a constructive dialogue has turned into an all out war, and we (Bryn Mawr students) are left looking just as arrogant as we are painting Ms. Chu out to be.
I don’t think attacking Ms. Chu is appropriate. Pointing out the flaws in both her argument and her methodology, as well as defending a way of life which, on some level, defines each woman who chooses it, is not out of line in the least. If you go through the comments, most of them try to dissect her arguments and disprove them, point by point.
I do wish that Ms. Chu had afforded Bryn Mawr, its students, and women’s colleges at large the same respect for which you now campaign. I doubt she realized the vitriol with which the community would respond – or even that this article would leak out of the Wesleyan bubble. (Yes, Wesleyan… you’re in a bubble too.) In the shifting world of the Information Age, however, we must take care to remember that local action can have global consequences.
I look forward to seeing the Argus retract this article and Ms. Chu issue an apology for her thoughtlessness. While I doubt this will ever really happen, I think it would do a lot to mend fences between Ms. Chu and her former school.
I offer in response:
“I have known many graduates of Bryn Mawr. They are all of the same mold.
They have all accepted the same bright challenge: something is lost that has not been found, something’s at stake that has not been won, something is started that has not been finished, something is dimly felt that has not been fully realized. They carry the distinguishing mark – the mark that separates them from other educated and superior women; the incredible vigor, the subtlety of mind, the warmth of the spirit, the aspiration, the fidelity to past and to present. As they grow in years, they grow in light. As their minds and hearts expand, their deeds become more formidable, their connections more significant … I once held a live hummingbird in my hand. I once married a Bryn Mawr girl. To a large extent they are twin experiences.”
-E.B. White, Call Me Ishmael: Or How I Feel About Being Married to a Bryn Mawr Woman
Go read the full essay, you might learn something. I wonder if Wesleyan students have ever inspired such a remarkable piece of writing…
oh god, please don’t bring the rest of us Wesleyan students into this… I am ashamed that Vicky is my own classmate!
There are so many portions of your article that are offensive, it’s hard to know where to begin.
So I’ll just say this … going to Bryn Mawr (like any single sex institution) is a very big decision. It is not for everyone, and clearly it was not for you. I wish your parents had provided better counsel when you were considering college choices. You might have avoided what sounds like a miserable year at Bryn Mawr and would have avoided embarrassing yourself. Your article is an obvious caricature of Bryn Mawr and I would guess that anyone with average maturity will recognize the limitations and generalizations of your article.
I’d like to ask about your statement – “it really isn’t normal” – as compared to what exactly? The “real world” atmosphere at an academic institution? You are misguided if you believe the world which awaits you after graduation looks like anything Wesleyan.
Perhaps you meant say it isn’t “normal” as compared to other colleges/universities. It might have not occurred to you, so I’d like to point out that each quality academic institution has a culture that makes it unique … which is the entire point. By standing out and sharing common, unique experience the student body is bonded for life – across generations and professions. This creates a powerful network and a base from which students can go on to exceptional lives and careers. Perhaps that is not “normal” – hooray!
Vicki,
I presume that what inspired you to write this article is because it’s your senior year of college: a time when all students are thinking about where they’ve been, where they’re going, and how they’ve changed over the past four years. As a fellow transfer student — someone who transferred to Bryn Mawr from a co-ed liberal arts college — I’ve been in your shoes. There’s an impulse to interrogate where you started because it’s so different from where you are now.
I’d certainly encourage you to continue reflecting on this idea, which you’ve clearly begun to do in writing this article. That being said, publicly attacking a community is in poor taste, especially when I’m confident that you’d have better insights to offer.
In particular, your argument seems to be that a co-ed experience is definitively better than that offered by a women’s college. From my transfer experience, I learned that one is not better than another: they simply are different. And the beauty of having both options is that you have the opportunity to choose. As we experienced as transfer students, it’s about making the right choice the second time around.
Maybe you’re reflecting on this topic because you’re disappointed that you only had three years at Wesleyan, not four. For a time, I felt that way. However, I came to realize that I wouldn’t be the person I am today if I had not transferred. That one year of misery at a co-ed college changed me just as much as three years at Bryn Mawr. I am equally grateful for what both experiences offered and for the opportunity to choose the best one for me.
One day, I hope that you can look back on your college experience and be happy with your decisions and who you’ve become as a result of those choices. And that means dwelling on how grateful you are for Wesleyan, not your unresolved anger towards a place you chose you leave.
If I remember correctly…didn’t you first want to go to Wellesley? And get rejected?
Furthermore, you’re generalizing all of Bryn Mawr. Not all students here, quite frankly, give a fuck about gender inequality – like myself. Maybe if you had taken more time to get to know the students at Bryn Mawr rather than running off to parties at Swarthmore, you’d realize that there are a lot of us who think just like you here…who chose the school not because it was a women’s college, but because of other educational opportunities.
Dear Ms. Chu,
I, too, attended Bryn Mawr College for my freshman year before transferring to a co-ed school. Although I chalk up many of my past initial reactions to the school as a product of a conservative, Christian, Midwestern upbringing, they greatly resembled your own impressions. As in: knee-jerk, prejudicial, anecdotal, immature, and categorically unfair.
As I read your piece, all I could think of was myself – at 19. Fresh from small-town Ohio. The inner narrative in my mind during that time went something like this: “LESBIANS! Women wearing SWEATPANTS! Where are the MEN?” Lest you get the wrong idea, however, let it be said I adored Bryn Mawr, with the same appreciation for the intellectual rigor and architectural beauty you oh-so-briefly-cited. With an addition to your weak plaudits – the amazing women I met and bonded with, including my Customs group and some who have commented on this article already.
But I, like you, went off in search of the Great Wide Normal. A co-ed liberal arts school back home, to be precise. Wesleyan it ain’t. After glorying in the testosterone, sorority membership, and the “familiarity” of women in Ugg boots sporting fake tans (no sweatpants here, natch) I would like to testify from a post-grad perspective a few years ahead of your own that you have jumped from the frying pan into the fire.
Bryn Mawr isn’t “normal.” It’s better. A utopia somewhat replicated within the intellectual confines of your institution, but never matched. You write that “there is still a Real World, and it’s been easier to learn how to contend with it and with men at Wesleyan than at a women’s college.” That is one argument with which I am inclined to agree. It is certainly easier to contend to the “Real World,” which you, Ms. Chu, have never experienced, if one does not attend an institution that champions women. Because if there is one thing the Real World doesn’t do, Ms. Chu, it’s that.
Refusing to challenge the status quo (no “down with the patriarchy!” cries) avoiding casual dress (sweatpants) and steering away from anything concerned with women’s bodies, such as menstruation (bloody tampons) will certainly prepare you for this “Real World” you anticipate; you will have been sufficiently conditioned within societal norm to accept it. And when you confront the Real World in all of it’s bigoted, prejudicial, male-biased glory, you will think back to that “single-sex, isolated, bubble of women” you left…with longing. And maybe an understanding of what you lost when you made a trade in favor of Normal.
And those sweatpants-sporting individuals you left behind? If there is anything you should have learned at BMC, Ms. Chu, it is the ferocity and devotion of the Mawrtyr. I would compare throwing down the gauntlet as you have done to waving filet mignon in front of a pack of starving wolves. Enjoy.
* Perhaps you spent too much time at Haverford?
Wow! There is no fight like a cat fight! I think we can safely conclude: Wellesley and Bryn Mawr = BITCHES. Proof: 200 Comments. Thanks for making Vicky’s case for her. She couldn’t have done it without you.
I disagree that the volume of comments is somehow a response to some underlying truth in the author’s claims. True, there are quite a few comments that are mean-spirited, but there are also a number of rational comments pointing out her illogical extension of her (quite exaggerated) experience at Bryn Mawr to suddenly apply to every women’s college in the United States.
The number of comments doesn’t make us bitches. The number of comments, from parents of current students, from alumnae from the 1960s, and even tangentially from Wesleyan students noting that the author doesn’t speak on behalf of her school, is more representative of our intent to respond, as we have for decades, to countless arguments that we don’t deserve to exist, that our institutions don’t have importance or meaning.
As a student of a co-ed college (Haverford, I might assume from the HC? Or perhaps even Wesleyan?), I wouldn’t necessarily expect you to immediately think of the constant vitriol that results from attending a women’s college when reading these comments. Often when I mention my college choice to people from high school, I’m asked how lesbian sex is, or how desperate I’ve gotten for men as if I’m so horny I can’t get through the day. (I’m straight, and I don’t feel demeaned by being called gay, because I have met some of the most amazing people I know at college, and they are gay, trans, genderqueer, and more.) But co-ed students have the luxury of feeling secure in their institution without being questioned, as it has now been the societal norm for a very long time, and it’s something I envy. It took me a long time to come to a place where I was happy with where I was, and willing to accept the necessity of constantly being defensive.
I think to Bryn Mawr students in particular, for a transfer student to write as if she is the voice of the community while having abandoned it is particularly repugnant. It is a betrayal of sorts. The Seven Sisters in particular have a notion of ‘sisterhood’ and support, and a large network of alumnae. I suppose it’s somewhat similar to the Wesleyan Mafia in film. To us, this is like a Wesleyan student graduating and getting involved with Wesleyan film alums, then turning around a year later and writing a crude ‘expose’ filled with lurid and manifestly untrue details.
I hope this doesn’t come across as ‘bitchy’. When I first read the comments here, I was actually shocked at how polite and well thought out they are, considering this is an anonymous forum and anyone could post “LOL UR WRONG” if they so wished.
Only a man would refer to women speaking up above angelic tones as “bitches”. You proved her point. Men rule the world and women had better remember their place. And God bless poor Vivian, she drank that coolaid.
Make that Vicky. Maybe she’ll get lucky and other people will forget her name.
If expressing an opinion (most of them well structured, considered and polite) makes a woman a bitch then I have only this to say: then long live the Bryn Mawr and Wellesley “bitches.” Your comment reinforces why women still need single sex education: people who think that if a women speaks up, she is bitch.
The fact that disagreeing with someone’s assessment and making your own opinion known qualifies one as a “bitch” at Wesleyan is perhaps the best testament to the downside of both the real anti-feminist world and co-ed education I can think of
Not from Wes byoch, but thanks.
We’re all “bitches” but suddenly I am demoted to “byoch?” I am sad.
Kaley is one of the sweetest people you will ever meet. She also has the ability to break the “tyranny of nice and kind” (google it) that so many women lack. She knows that being an assertive woman is not the same as being a bitchy woman. She has the courage to sign her name to her opinions. So far, she has been far more of a credit to herself in this forum than many other participants, including those who call her “byoch” from the safety of an anonymous internet forum. She deserves better from you.
-Molly Pieri, BMC ’09
Thanks Molly! I loved being one of your froshlings at BMC.
It’s OK, Vicky. You don’t need to be afraid of women.
We can teach you how to learn to dance when the music’s ended.
-D2tP
My Mawrtyr sisters have said it all already. But just to add my voice to the chorus — shame on you and shame on the Argus editors for publishing this hateful and degrading article.
I’m proud to be a Bryn Mawr woman! I can relate to her exaggerated feelings and thoughts about Bryn mawr since I briefly considered transferring last year, but that was because I didn’t give Bryn Mawr a true chance. When I took the time to actually get out there and see what Bryn Mawr has to offer, I was hooked. Bryn Mawr is an extraordinary place and anyone would be lucky enough to attend.
I have a few responses.
1) Maybe you should have stayed at Bryn Mawr because Bryn Mawr would have taught you acceptance, the faults of generalizations, tolerance, and the faults of judgements.
2) Exaggerations. I’m pretty sure the majority of people can say that they’ve worn sweatpants to class. More importantly, why does that matter? Also, I have NEVER seen a tampon strewn across the floor here, but I did see one at other colleges. Finally, I have many friends here and NOT ONE of them have ever participated in the questionable behavior that you mention…
3) The benefits of an all women’s college. You even mentioned yourself that “Some statistics show that graduates of women’s colleges perform better in their careers compared to women who graduate from coed schools” so how can one of your last statements that Wesleyan is better than Bryn Mawr for preparedness hold up? Truth is, our college helps eliminate stereotype threat that is a valid psychological phenomenon that hinders women’s performance. Truth is, Bryn Mawr provides opportunities for coed interaction (every single class that I’m taking this semester has at least one male). Truth is, Bryn Mawr provides an education enviable by other colleges and thus is ranked as one of the best colleges in the nation. How can we obtain those rankings and hold the prestige of a top tiered college if it we were not one of the bests?
You should apologize for your gross generalizations, judgments, and overall ignorance.
Sincerely,
Ashley Hahn BMC ’14
I know there are grammatical errors. I did not check this because I have a midterm and a paper due tomorrow, yet at the same time I felt the need to post something.
So what are you doing now? Judging her? Hypocritical bitch, don’t talk if you can’t back it up please
thank you.
Why can’t you leave it at “hypocrite”? Why do women, which is even more deplorable than men, need to refer to women who speak up, (especially when you don’t like their tone), as “bitch”? Can you not see the anti-female judgment in that?
You’re rude.
thank you.
WOW. Cyber bullying anyone? She did back up what she said and other BMC students backed it up for her. So many more comments on here are 100% worse than hers, why don’t you comment on them?
How is she a hypocritical bitch? She didn’t judge Ms. Chu she just pointed out that her argument has gross generalizations (which is true), that the girl judged a lot of people (which is true), that she was ignorant (which is true because she didn’t understand that Bryn Mawr is very highly ranked and she was discrediting it which shows her lack of knowledge and thus ignorance) and that women colleges such as Bryn Mawr is a good institution.
If anything as a Bryn Mawr student you should be supporting her and liking the comment because she was sticking up for your college. You should be thanking her rather than inappropriately calling her a bitch.
How do you think Ashley would feel if she read that? What if she was having a really bad day and then read your comment calling her a hypocritical bitch.
Do you even know her? I do and she doesn’t deserve that. She is really involved at Bryn Mawr and loves her college which I’m sure is why she wrote this.
By the way, at least Ashley had the courage to write her name and year. How about you, clearly not impartial BMC student, I guess you’ll just hide.
I dare you to tell who you are so the world will know. Ashley’s comment is harmless and your comment is incredibly inappropriate and a terrible example of Bryn Mawr College.
You should apologize to Ashley in person for your despicable words toward her; it’s what any REAL Bryn Mawr woman would do.
My friend just alerted me of this. I can’t believe another Bryn Mawr woman would degrade another like that. What did I ever do to you? I’m sorry that I cared about my college and decided to stick up for it. I love Bryn Mawr and am not afraid to voice my opinion.
How dare you call me a bitch! Do you even know who I am, what I’ve been through, or anything about me at all? Because I guarantee if you got to know me you would think the exact opposite.
I don’t have to justify myself to you, but I’d love to know who you are. We all have haters and I guess you just might not like me for some reason because I have a feeling any person in their right mind would not post such a mean comment on a little post like I wrote.
I hope you have the guts to come up to me and tell me in person who you are; I’d just like to know so that I can change your opinion.
I’m incredibly offended by your comment and honestly it really upset me. I don’t understand how my comment deserved a reaction like that. Please think before you type because not to sound lame and I am not ashamed but that really hurt me. I gave Vicky a fair critique and didn’t slander her name, possible job future, her armpits, her sexual or sanitary habits or anything. I just said what SHE EVEN ACKNOWLEDGED in her apology.
Please come see me in person or non-anonymously and explain to me how I’m hypocritical or how I’m a bitch. I’d love to know because just as you said I couldn’t back it up when I did, you actually couldn’t back your opinion up.
Thanks. PS. Email or facebook me, once again gain some courage and confront me, isn’t that what we’re learning at Bryn Mawr. I bet you’ll hide like a coward and not reveal yourself.
Now *that’s* what I’m talking about. Way to have a good ol’ fashioned BMC Confrontation, Ashley. It’s about addressing the problem, finding a solution, and moving forward. I love my alma mater. Also, as I’ve said before, enough with the anonymous posts, folks. You wouldn’t do it in the campus center, and you shouldn’t do it here.
-Molly, BMC ’09
You just don’t give a HOOT about anyone or anything. Thanks for transferring, hope your ignorance gets you far in life!
The only fault I see in Bryn Mawr is ever accepting you.
Lay off this girl. Its her goddamn opinion- you are debasing YOURSELVES by posting these comments. She has a right to say her beliefs- freedom of press- and all of you are embarrasing Bryn Mawr.
Thank you for putting this article out to the world, and more importantly on the internet so that now all of us “oversized sweatpant” wearing girls can go throw around our soiled, bloody tampons around in protest! You gave us a new hobby…we can finally leave our “isolated bubble” to tell the world how happy we are that Ms. Chu left Bryn Mawr.
Sincerely,
The girl who apparently is not normal and loves doing unmentionable things according to my new BFF Ms. Vicky Chu
xoxoxoxo
Vicky,
As a graduate of Barnard College, I would warn you against making generalizations about women’s colleges that are based solely upon your experience at Bryn Mawr. Barnard is a phenomenal place where women do not go to class wearing sweatpants (and even if they did, what’s wrong with that?) and tend not to leave bloody tampons strewn on the floor. I’m here to inform you that Barnard is also a place that can, and does, function independently of the coeducational institution that sits right across the street.
You are completely right to say that women’s colleges are not normal; they aren’t, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Barnard is not a “normal” place, and its students are not “normal” either, thank goodness for that. We are highly motivated, we are poised and assertive, and we do quite well in the Real World. We do not burn bras on the weekend, we are not all raging lesbian feminists, and we only glare at the Columbia football player in our class when he says something stupid.
It takes a certain level of maturity to decide to attend a women’s college in the first place – and a certain level of independence to attend Barnard particularly –, but it also takes a certain type of young woman to be able to thrive there. I’m so sorry that you weren’t pleased with your experience at Bryn Mawr, and I don’t blame you: it’s not for everyone. I’ll be the first to say that I did not love being in a single-sex environment. In fact, I hated my first year at college and, yes, I sorely missed testosterone in my everyday life. But by the time I graduated, I had absolutely no regrets. I could not be more proud and appreciative of my education and of everything Barnard had to offer me, academic or otherwise, and I gained a sense of self there that is simply incomparable to what you’d find at “normal” college. I even did unmentionable things with men in New York City sometimes, and I didn’t have to take a bus to get there.
I am not embarrassed to say that I attended Barnard College not because of but despite its all-women’s environment. If I were applying to college all over again, though, I would apply because of, not despite this aspect. It’s too bad that you were unable to see the benefits of an “abnormal” college like Bryn Mawr, but I’m sure you will be more than happy at Wesleyan, which is a wonderful school itself.
Transferring out of a women’s college and writing this piece does not make you an ignorant, shallow, or unintelligent person. All it means is that you weren’t quite ready to embrace a college that is more known for its outstanding education and promotion of female empowerment than for its social life. I think it’s a little silly, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Sincerely,
Barnard ‘10
“raging lesbian feminists”? really?! Come on, Barnard Woman–surely you can do better than that trite stereotype?
Dear Ms. Chu,
In your first section of arguments, you do the following:
a) Look down upon women for wearing sweatpants to class (topic: clothes)
b) Mention hearsay about sexual relationships between students and professors (topic: gossip)
c) Make faulty statements about male students and their treatment thereof by both faculty and students (topic: boys)
If clothes, gossip, and boys were the first things to enter your mind when pondering a “classroom” or “academic” environment, then I am not even remotely sorry you did not find what you wanted at Bryn Mawr.
When I think of a classroom environment, I think about the intellectual level of my peers (whether they are male or female), the breadth and depth of discussion and the ways in which I can broaden my critical thinking skills, and the guidance and support offered by those who teach me. I do not give two shits (to put it bluntly) about who is wearing what, or who is sleeping with whom, or who is what gender/race/ethnicity/etc etc.
And that, right there, Ms. Chu, is exactly why I and many other are proud graduates of an institution that offered us dedicated support, lively, far-reaching, and deep conversations about Judy B., Foucault and many many others (…see, I can name-throw too!), as well as close bonds with professors whose dedication has had a deep and lasting impact on the way I view the world.
– Sharanya Sharma
PS: I will never, ever ever apologize for calling for the end of the system of oppression that is called the patriarchy (which hurts both women and men). Ever.
Vicky,
As a graduate of Barnard College, I would warn you against making generalizations about women’s colleges that are based solely upon your experience at Bryn Mawr. Barnard is a phenomenal place where women do not go to class wearing sweatpants (and even if they did, what’s wrong with that?) and tend not to leave bloody tampons strewn on the floor. I’m here to inform you that Barnard is also a place that can, and does, function independently of the coeducational institution that sits right across the street.
You are completely right to say that women’s colleges are not normal; they aren’t, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Barnard is not a “normal” place, and its students are not “normal” either, thank goodness for that. We are highly motivated, we are poised and assertive, and we do quite well in the Real World. We do not burn bras on the weekend, we are not all raging lesbian feminists, and we only glare at the Columbia football player in our class when he says something stupid.
It takes a certain level of maturity to decide to attend a women’s college in the first place – and a certain level of independence to attend Barnard particularly –, but it also takes a certain type of young woman to be able to thrive there. I’m so sorry that you weren’t pleased with your experience at Bryn Mawr, and I don’t blame you: it’s not for everyone. I’ll be the first to say that I did not love being in a single-sex environment. In fact, I hated my first year at college and, yes, I sorely missed testosterone in my everyday life. But by the time I graduated, I had absolutely no regrets. I could not be more proud and appreciative of my education and of everything Barnard had to offer me, academic or otherwise, and I gained a sense of self there that is simply incomparable to what you’d find at “normal” college. I even did unmentionable things with men in New York City sometimes, and I didn’t have to take a bus to get there.
I am not embarrassed to say that I attended Barnard College not because of but despite its all-women’s environment. If I were applying to college all over again, though, I would apply because of, not despite this aspect. It’s too bad that you were unable to see the benefits of an “abnormal” college like Bryn Mawr, but I’m sure you will be more than happy at Wesleyan, which is a wonderful school itself.
Transferring out of a women’s college and writing this piece does not make you an ignorant, shallow, or unintelligent person. All it means is that you weren’t quite ready to embrace a college that is more known for its outstanding education and promotion of female empowerment than for its social life. It seems a little “silly” to me, but to each her own.
Sincerely,
Barnard ‘10
HOW.DARE.YOU.
You just made all of Wesleyan want to disown you. forrr shameeee.
Here’s a little about me Vicky.
Fucked around at Swat and Haverford? Guilty.
Engaged in activities that reinforce negative stereotypes? Guilty.
Demeaned myself to gain validation from coed students? Guilty.
Hell, I even abandoned Bryn Mawr my sophomore year to live at Haverford.
I am proud and thankful that I was in these guilty situations at Bryn Mawr College, a place where I learned from these experiences without feeling shame. Bryn Mawr and the wonderful women I met are truly the sisters I never had. It is a supportive community where women grow in various ways, at their own unique pace. We embrace each women’s individuality, no matter how or when it is expressed. Through our differences we find a commonality; the strength and invaluable nature of empowered women. The support network continues throughout life and so does the learning experience.
So Bryn Mawr College is not just a women’s college, its me.
It’s who I am.
Guilty and Proud,
Rei Shimizu ’10
Dear Vicky,
Yes “women’s college” is the preferred term. Personally I take great joy in correcting people. I like to imagine their perception of me changing from one of a “little girl” skipping off to her classes to one of a mature woman who kills the patriarchy in her spare time. I might be one of the few people who thinks this way though, some may also prefer the term women’s college because the first women’s colleges were set up in order to offer women an education aligning with the MEN’S institutions. It would be detrimental to identify the members of the sister colleges as “girls” while referring to the members of their brother schools as “men.” I’m currently taking classes with men and women, but if you would like to refer to college age people as girls and boys feel free to do so.
I can’t argue with your claim that women’s colleges aren’t normal. No, they’re not. Then again it isn’t normal to be a part of the fortunate few able to attend a private liberal arts college for four years, single sex or coed. It probably isn’t normal to read Foucault and Judith Butler and discuss social constructions. I did not choose Bryn Mawr to have the “normal” college experience, but what is it that makes us abnormal?
Well, I guess my day is pretty normal. I roll out of bed around 10:00 am for my 10:00 am class. It’s okay; I can get up that late because I don’t change out of the sweat pants that I wear to bed. Once I wander into class I see him, the one male in my class. I saunter over because I know I’m looking good in these sweats today and take the seat next to him. Suddenly I’m stuck in this horrible dilemma do I demean myself for validation or glare angrily? Oh what my women’s college education has brought me to!
Oh wait. I forgot to mention that I wake up every day with what I call the “D to the P” alarm system. I keep my windows open so that the voices of my fellow students doing their all day everyday shouting of “Death to the Patriarchy” can wake me up.
In all seriousness however, I am sorry that you did not have a good experience at Bryn Mawr. Women’s colleges are not a fit for everyone and I am glad that you found a college that works for you. Women should challenge gender inequalities, and women’s colleges are not the only environments where that is possible. However, these do foster an environment that confronts gender discrimination and stereotypes.
Dealing with inequalities is not simply about “dealing directly with men who impose them upon us” (and may I add that often women impose these inequalities as well). Dealing with inequalities is about realizing the problematic structural underpinnings of our society, which can be realized in a coed or women’s college. Empowerment is not about me correcting someone for referring to my school as “girls-school”, empowerment is about recognizing the inequalities within our society and knowing that we are above the inequality. Bryn Mawr has empowered me. Throughout my past two years here I have met powerful and inspirational women, who have helped me gain more than an academic education but an education in how to enter the “real world” as a strong woman who continues to challenge the injustices that women within our society face.
In two years I will be a proud graduate of Bryn Mawr College, and when people say to me “Bryn Mawr? Pennsylvania? The all-girls school?”
I will answer, “Yes, that’s the one.”
All the best,
Brigitta
I am a 2009 grad of Bryn Mawr College.
For full disclosure let me be clear: I did not always like Bryn Mawr. The girls were weird! We had to take a bus to see boys! Why don’t we look like the Villanova girls down the street?! Bryn Mawr was a daily struggle for me. However, I am now in law school with some of the most “normal” people in the country, and let me tell you- I miss Bryn Mawr. Mawrtyrs are a unique breed. Their creatively, intelligence, drive, morals, etc.. are unmatched. It is only now that I see those who did not go to Bryn Mawr, that I appreciate what a unique, special, and rewarding college experience I had. Wesleyan is a fantastic school and I am happy to have many alums as my friends, but you (Ms. Chu) are missing out on something very special.
To the Wesleyan student body: It’s a shame that Ms. Chu’s article found its way into a publication baring Wesleyan’s name.
To Vicky Chu: Consider what the “normal” college experience entails. As a former member of the Tri-Co community, I’ll be the first to admit that there are certain features (social and … oh right – academic?), which make the Tri-Co a unique environment. Taken individually, each institution in the Tri-Co has its’ own set of idiosyncrasies. These quirks, albeit some quirkier than others, are what make ANY college experience special. Granted, I’m not sure where you’re coming from with the whole ‘tampons-on-the-ground’ bit. That’s blatantly untrue.
Let’s be honest here, this is a publication in the “Wesleyan Argus.” Will it ruin your life? Probably not. I’m sure you’ll skim over some of these blog posts as I have, but my advice to you is this… Consider what readers are saying, but also recognize what readers aren’t. Very few have come to your defense and less still champion your cause – for good reason. I hope you will realize, of equal importance to the educational aspect of college life are those friendships that you develop and maintain beyond your years as an undergrad. I strongly recommend you think more carefully before you write such crass, ignorant articles – with the sincerest hope that you don’t burn more bridges before you even have a chance to build them.
Cheers,
Tri-Co ’11
I would be lying if I said that I do not on occasion doubt the purpose and effectiveness of women’s-only education. If what we seek is a society blind to gender differences, then shouldn’t separating ourselves by gender be counterproductive? Statements like those made in this article and in many of the comments, however, suggest to me that society still has far too many unexamined and problematic notions of gender that will never be resolved if we simply ignore them. I understand that this is not what the article is advocating, but I am not convinced that ignoring isn’t exactly what I personally would do at a co-ed college or university, as I did at a co-ed high school. Perhaps this is merely evidence of my own faults, but I do not believe that I am the only one who has been more encouraged in this environment to address these issues than she (or he) has been elsewhere, or felt more comfortable doing so. To me, this is one advantage of women’s-only education among many.
By now many have already read and responded to the above article. I, too, like many of the mawrters and non- mawrters alike felt disturbed at the very skewed portrayal of Bryn Mawr College . So, I write not only to defend my experience at Bryn Mawr, but to defend those who are current students, and alumni of the seven sisters, and to all the other women’s colleges around the country.
The most I can say is that I am sorry Miss Vicky Chu transferred out of Bryn Mawr with such a perception. If indeed that was her account let’s not negate it. However, I do write to say that while she consider it as so, this is not the Bryn Mawr I know. This is not the Bryn Mawr I would want the Wesleyan community to consider, and the rest of the public that has access to this article. Was Bryn Mawr the perfect place? Of course not. As with most institutions of higher education in this country, I encountered issues of unaddressed racism, discrimination and ignorance about class issues. I heard absurd comments about Latinos and Black communities in the hallways of the dorms. I came from a class generation where the number of Latina-identified students at Bryn Mawr I could count on my hands and feet alone. But did this deter me from ensuring that I had the best possible undergraduate experience I could? No.
What I have always stressed, is that the experience one has at Bryn Mawr is simply what you choose to make of it. Did I have my moments where I wanted to scream and rip my hair out because I was bored with the strange awkward parties and social life? Yes of course. So what did I do? I invited my good friends over and had a dance party in my dorm room. Or I took the Septa train and headed straight into Philadelphia for the “real world”. Or a weekend trip to New York City would suffice. Instead I chose to focus on the positive things that I thought the institution could give me.
What Bryn Mawr gave me, that I don’t think I could have experienced elsewhere was a sense of connection and purpose in my pursuit of..well whatever it was that I was pursuing. Whether it was conquering that one 15 page paper that was getting to me, or engaging in heavy intellectual discourse where I felt like the odd person out, or obtaining that internship I wanted so badly. Most of what I did at Bryn Mawr, as simple or as grand of a task, I did with a sense of self conviction I haven’t been able to match out here in the “real world”. Bryn Mawr has a way of fostering that type of conviction and connection.
Because of Bryn Mawr I developed real growth inducing relationships from students from the concrete jungles of the South Bronx to the lands of Palestine. This was my community. Because of Bryn Mawr I developed growth inducing relationships from students of the African nations to the ancient Asian countries. My closest friends were from the Pacific North West of the United States to Japan. From Gambia to the Caribbean to South America. West Coast, East Coast, Chicanos, Boston, New York, The South. They were of the Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist and of the Baha’i faith. They were Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Questioning, Heterosexual, Straight. You know that bumper sticker that says Co-Exist? Bryn Mawr allowed that space of Co-existing to happen.
Bryn Mawr made it possible that a community of true diversity could work, with the given time and patience practiced by its community members.
The most important gift I got from Bryn Mawr was the affirmation that I could exist. As a food stamp baby-poet -gender-bending, Spanglish speaking- womyn loving-Boricua queer-arroz- con abichuelas- hija de los orishas- feminist-dj-hip hop head—I can attest and say there are very few communities that accepted or have accepted me in all my identities. Bryn Mawr was a community that did. And still does.
Is Bryn Mawr for everyone? Of course not nor would I ignorantly stand on a soap box and say that it is. So I would encourage those to find the path that is right for them. But I will not accept a skewed portrayal of a particular beginning of a journey to be published-especially when that person did not fulfill that place in it’s entirety. For those that do choose a place like Bryn Mawr College as their path, may it be one that is blessed, with ever changing evolution. In the spirit of Bryn Mawr, I say, ANASSA KATA to all my fellow Mawrters young and old.
It is so wonderful to see a group of ardent feminists debunk and invalidate the use of the “personal narrative”, a misleading rhetorical strategy feminists have relied upon for decades. I hope you’ll apply this level of rigor to the narratives of those you view in a sympathetic light or with whom you tend to agree, rather than uncritically accepting it as “true” simply because it was written or told by a woman.
I am interested in the stressed distinction between correlation and causation towards the beginning of the article. The author concedes, however indirectly, that Bryn Mawr has or has graduated a disproportionate number of strong women. She writes that these women are not strong because they attend or attended Bryn Mawr, but because they already were. In other words, Bryn Mawr attracts a disproportionate number of strong women. This attraction must be a result of some characteristic unique to Bryn Mawr. If that is it’s single-sex environment, then that suggests an obvious validation for single-sex education: it allows women to be a part of and benefit from a community of strong women, regardless of how they came to be so.
As a Wesleyan alum who went on to work in journalism, I am appalled that the Argus published this piece!
To those commenters who have been waving the “freedom of speech” flag: REALLY NOW?! If this had appeared on the author’s personal blog, then I would absolutely say “sure, it’s your opinion so feel free to sing it from the rooftops, with all of your sweeping generalizations and grammatical errors,” but let’s look at the situation…
This was printed in a college affiliated paper that can directly impact the way the school is perceived. Does this mean the author now does not have a RIGHT to express her opinions? Nope. The Argus, of course, CAN publish whatever it pleases even if it turns the school into a laughing stock…but here is where the common sense should kick in. How could no one on the editorial board realize that this article could, maybe…possibly, make Wesleyan look absolutely stupid?!
What is worse is the fact that the editors put an article out that breaks the cardinal rule of journalism: Did the author do her diligence? The fact that this piece is filed under the opinions section seems to be brought up time and time again, but that does not give it free reign to turn into a personal rant with no basis! This is still a college publication that should adhere to the most basic publishing standards!
While I do agree that most of the blame for this article falls on the author herself, I would also like to see a letter of apology from the current Argus EIC for making my old paper into the butt of many jokes in the office. My directly superior actually said “well, looks like we’re not hiring anyone from Wesleyan this year…or ever again.” Even though he said it in jest and even though he knows he is making a gross generalization – the fact of the matter is that in the back of his mind he now associates Wesleyan with this disgusting article and that will likely influence his hiring decisions in the future (even if it is just slightly). In case you haven’t noticed, the job market is brutal, so coming into the process with a mark against you (not matter how small) could make a huge difference. Speaking with other alums, they say a similar thing is happening in their offices. Yes, it’s completely unfair but that, Vicky Chu, is how the real world works.
Completely agree! I am actually surprised that more people have not brought up the effect this article could likely have on the rest of the Wesleyan community. As a current Wellesley senior, I know I cringe every time someone brings up that dreaded Rolling Stone article. I actually had an interviewer mention it once, even though it was published way back in 2001!
The truth of the matter is, some friends, superiors, co-workers, etc. are going to be judgmental either intentionally or unintentionally – we’re all human after all! For small liberal arts schools especially, these seemingly little things that are done by a small group of people (or just the author in this case) can result in unexpected fallout for the rest of us
Jobs in journalism? What jobs in journalism? They are going the way of the all-women’s college.
As the daughter of a Wellesley alum and as a current Bryn Mawr student myself, I think it’s safe to say that I am very much offended by this opinion piece and its attacks on single-sex education. More than anything however, I am saddened and confused by what you have to say. Mostly, why is it that you even felt the need to write this in the first place?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but your biggest problem with Bryn Mawr was how it didn’t fit in with your idea of a “normal” college experience. Like some commenters have already noted, what is defined as “normal” in this context? I’ll have to leave that one up to you to answer for yourself, but for now I can provide my own (shortened) answer.
While looking for colleges, I didn’t have an idea of normalcy in mind so much as finding a school with phenomenal academics, a great range of opportunities, and an environment where I could fully take advantage of whatever I wanted to achieve during my years here. I chose Bryn Mawr for a myriad of reasons, but one important one was that I found it to be a safe space. I can breathe here, I can relax and be myself in a way that I cannot in where I’ve lived in before, and most importantly: as a result I can study and focus on academics more effectively without having social issues such as keeping closeted or perpetually silent regarding my thoughts, opinions, and ideas hanging over me constantly. It’s provided a wonderful space in which I can expand my mind (and yes, my social life too) without the pressures of inhibiting myself as my previous educational experiences had proven.
My point here is that maybe Bryn Mawr just didn’t fit you well because you couldn’t understand the sort of experience that it creates. Hey, I find that I just don’t understand the stereotypical, heteronormative, “normal” culture that you find in most places, not just college; so that’s a point of view that I can understand. What I don’t understand, is why you felt the need to vent this in such a way that offended and slandered an entire group and culture of people whom you don’t even know, even long after you’ve left for an environment that better suits your ideals. You’re now happier at a coed school (and a good one at that); that’s great! So why take something that didn’t work out for you, and that by all accounts should be behind you by now, and ruin it for so many others for whom it’s in fact a blessing?
I just don’t know.
As a former Bryn Mawr student (I transferred to co-ed liberal arts institution) and the sister of a Seven Sisters alumna, I was incredibly disheartened to read this article, to say the least.
The majority of my formative years were shaped by the courageous and compassionate women who attended both the Seven Sisters and other respective women’s colleges. I am the product of a single-sex high school where a Wellesley woman was the Headmistress- ironically, a Mawrtyr was recently named her replacement. These women are my role models, sisters, and friends- women who have both nurtured and encouraged me, through my moments of triumph and defeat.
I am truly grateful for the year I spent at Bryn Mawr- I was unsure of my academic potential and without the gentle prodding of the faculty (Phenomenal is an insufficient adjective and frankly, I’m not sure if there is one to properly describe the likes of those who hold posts within the Art History and English departments), I never would have found my confidence as a student and even as a young woman. College is such a transitional time for each girl (and boy) and if there’s one thing I have come to learn, no one experience is ever alike.
I realized that for my own personal growth, it was necessary for me to learn to interact with men in both an academic setting and the greater community. I was far too shy and far too lazy to make the effort to commute to Haverford and Swarthmore on a daily basis. The problem was not with Bryn Mawr- it was with me.
You should not blame Bryn Mawr for an experience it could never fully provide and believe me, the College does it’s damnedest to serve every girl’s needs, as I’m sure you are well aware of given the support and kindness the Deans provide to those transferring out of Bryn Mawr. I was even told that if I was unsatisfied with my current institution, I’d be welcomed back wholeheartedly.
I’m surprised you even wrote this article to begin with- if you are so content to be a student at Wesleyan, why would you write an article like this? This type of behavior only breeds animosity and ill will and if that was your intent, you succeeded. But I highly doubt that- it seems like it was a slow news day over at the Argus and you felt compelled to whine about how Bryn Mawr failed to please you. Bryn Mawr no longer has any effect on you given that you are no longer a tuition-paying member of the community/do not attend Plenary (Did you even go when you were there?); therefore, you do not reserve the right to complain.
Out of respect for your former peers and to those I met at Bryn Mawr and lovingly call my sisters, please issue an apology. Same goes to the Wellesley women- because quite frankly, many of those ladies are running this world and it would be to your advantage to do so. My experience in a single-sex environment, during both high school and college, taught me to always help a fellow sister. We should be building each other up- not ripping each other down and you sadly, did the exact opposite.
I’m just gonna say, no matter how much you disagree with her arguement or whatever it was HER experience at Bryn Mawr. Haverford and BMC are both very selective communities. like actually either you fit or you don’t there really isn’t a middle ground. I completely understand how she feels about the bi-co. and while she spoke generally about single sex schools were feelings i’m guessing she felt against the bi-co community in general. so everyone calm your tatas and accept that not everyone finds the little sphere of BMC as awesome and righteous blah blah blah as you.
When I was at Wesleyan 25 years ago, it was all “Death to the Patriarchy,” and enormous sweatpants. I guess times have changed. We managed to throw away our tampons, but I feel the women of Bryn Mawr do that too.
I’m more amused at this article than anything. Why get worked up? Let’s have a laugh and get on with our lives. Look at how much time has been spent today reading and commenting on this article, myself included. Have none of us had anything better to do? Who are we to judge her? We’re no more qualified to judge her than she is to judge us—-after all, a great deal of us here were accepted at Bryn Mawr (or at other women’s colleges), just as Vicky was. It was her choice to leave, just as it’s our choice to stay. It’s her choice to write foolish articles, and it’s our choice to read it and write comments. I don’t think she wrote the article thinking, “Wow, I’m an absolute idiot,” and we don’t write our comments thinking that we’re idiots. We’re all just trying our best in life. We try to get a sense of value the way we can—-sometimes we try to get it by joining groups or by putting others down. I do not necessarily agree with the content of the article above, but I don’t scoff at it or feel enraged by it. I don’t care. Why would any of us let what others do or say bother us? Maybe because it challenges our sense of value? It’s up to us to find that value within ourselves, just as Vicky could have done instead of writing this article. But she didn’t find it within herself, and neither are we, clearly. To some maybe, a Bryn Mawr woman is supposed to defend herself until she’s blue in the face. To me, a Bryn Mawr woman should be able to deflect the insults and find it within herself to not let petty things bother her. Why stop and smell the dogshit when we can stop and smell the roses? Live and let live. Don’t we want peace?
I would just like to preface this by saying that this article does not reflect on Wellesley, Wesleyan or Bryn Mawr, but rather the author. All three schools are wonderful institutions that any student would be lucky to study at.
I am a Bryn Mawr freshman who did not choose this school because I am a tampon-flinging feminist, but rather, someone who would like to receive the best education I can. I am sorry that Ms. Chu’s experience at Bryn Mawr was so horrible that even after a considerable amount of time, she is still complaining about the despicable nature of BMC. I am only two months in, but I have already met a wide variety of women who I am honored to know. The girls I have met have ranged from fashionistas to athletes to total bookworms and they have all been equally intelligent and kind.
Although, as with almost any schools that are so closely related, there are rivalries, I have had mostly pleasant experiences with the Haverford students, both male and female. When there are students from the other schools in my classes, they are not lauded nor alienated, but they blend in with the other students, and I am thankful that my college allows me to expand my experience to other colleges with such insightful students.
I would also like to address some of the comments about how students should not leave the campus so much. I am a freshman who goes to the other campuses once or twice a week and so far, this has benefited me greatly. I make that choice because I know that going off campus allows me to have a “normal” college experience when I want, as well as the privilege of being in such a special place as Bryn Mawr.
Yes, there are feminists, and yes people wear sweatpants, but I refuse to believe that this is an experience that is solely limited to the Seven Sister Schools. I think that I am lucky to be able to be in a school that celebrates so many different cultures and schools of thought. I am truly sorry that in the time you spent here, the concepts of acceptance and open-mindedness were blocked by the chants of feminism and female hygiene products.
Even more than I am sorry for you, I am sorry that the Argus chose to publish this article; as I know people who go to Wesleyan, this does not reflect the opinion of your school, but rather a bitter student who can’t seem to appreciate how lucky she was to attend Bryn Mawr or Wesleyan at all.
Well thank you, Vicky Chu, for not coming to Hollins. We really like sweatpants. Much as strong and independent women seek a college atmosphere that will enrich their experience, so do those women who love sweat pants seek Hollins. Also women who don’t love sweat pants. And women who are wondering if you think patriarchy is….good? What’re you getting at here, exactly?
Well Vicky, I’m first going to say that I hope you’re happy at Wesleyan. Hopefully there are no tampons on the floor and no girls wearing oversized sweatpants to class there. You’re free to think however you want, but remember that you really need to be careful when you’re publishing your thoughts. Look what you’ve done here; you have offended your former classmates, friends, professors, and other faculty of Bryn Mawr. You somehow managed to bring in Wellesley into this article (which was completely unncessary), and guess what, you’ve offended the entire Wellesley community as well. I am sure that some students at Wesleyan are ashamed upon reading this, as I can tell from some of the responses. It’s true that you left us, but that does not mean that you are justified to publish your exaggerated (not to mention FALSE) “opinions” on Bryn Mawr. You clearly don’t belong here, and we don’t want you here either. If you’re happy at Wesleyan, that’s great. Glorify Wesleyan all you want, as you proudly say “I’d choose Wesleyan over Wellesley.” Bryn Mawr, however, is out of your reach. You don’t have the right to make such statements about us, and you should be ashamed and realize what kind of a mess you have just created here. Even if you don’t (which is certainly a possibility seeing how your mind works), you probably realize at this point that MANY people have been offended by this piece of writing, as you can tell by the comments. Words are more powerful than you think, and you need to be careful with them.
Good luck.
Dear Ms. Chu,
I am sorry to hear that you decided to attend Bryn Mawr and did not find what you were looking for. I sincerely hope that you have found happiness at your new school home.
That said, I have some serious issues with your article. The first, and perhaps most important, is that you brought Wellesley into it, in spite of having no direct experience with that institution. The fact that Wesleyan and Wellesley have similar names does not excuse using it as a substitute for the college you had the real issue with, especially when writing in such a completely denigrating manner. Your problems and experiences were at Bryn Mawr. Leave Wellesley out of it.
The second issue is that your accusations are simply untrue. I have never worn sweatpants to class. I don’t think I’ve owned a pair since I was about 8. Most of my friends and classmates were routinely well dressed, or at least well enough dressed to be seen in public. I will admit to slipping into the library in my PJs to grab another book for my thesis in the middle of the night, but I certainly never journeyed out in daylight without at least jeans.
I have never seen feminine hygiene supplies strewn about the floor, used or otherwise. In fact, in my experience, the grungiest bathrooms were the co-ed ones. Bryn Mawr women are meticulous about keeping the bathrooms clean, and those who aren’t are confronted by hallmates almost immediately. In addition, our wonderful housekeepers cleaned the bathrooms daily.
As for affairs with professors, I never heard one such whisper. I knew that they happened from time to time, but certainly it was not a prevalent topic of discussion or speculation as you suggest in your article.
I have known women whose entire lives involved going to Haverford and Swarthmore to have sex with any random man they could find. In my experience, those women spend more time off campus, and therefore don’t bond as well with other students. In many cases, the women who were more interested in chasing boys than focusing on studies and friendships found themselves outcast, and it sometimes resulted in transfers. And certainly, more freshmen spend their time off campus in search of boyfriends than upperclasswomen, but I believe that’s a combination of culture shock and having less work freshman year. Bottom line, about 98% of Mawrtyrs live on campus, and very few leave for the whole weekend. That means a whole lot more time to study, and build connections and friendships.
I won’t say I didn’t consider transferring. It’s an intense environment, and I found myself in some sticky social situations. Fortunately, I had supportive friends and I pushed through the tough stuff. In the end, I was glad that I stayed. I’ve met some of my best friends at BMC. I’ve learned to speak a language that has lead me to travel, live abroad, and find true love. I’ve learned that feminism is about equality. I did not find a bunch of man-hating lesbians. I found a group of women (and transmen and men and others who do not fit any of those categories) of all orientations and creeds who were looking for equality, friendship, education, and the chance to change the world.
Normal, I have found, is simply a state of mind. No, a single sex environment is not normal. It is special. If it were ordinary and common, it would lose that which makes it special. But just like anything different or special, it is not for everyone.
It seems like you have a lot of resentment towards your time at Bryn Mawr, and I truly hope that you can work through that. I wish you the best, and hope that this mess does not reflect too poorly on you in the future. In the meantime, I encourage you to write truth, and to use your skills to build up and support others, rather than tearing them down.
Kate Callahan, BMC ’07
Hi Kate- I completely agree with most of your comment, but I feel like I need to chip in real quick to defend the folks (like me) who took advantage of the Tri-Co for social diversion… Or, as every one seems to assume it all boils down to this one thing: sex.
First, let me say that yes: I went to Swarthmore at least once a week for almost my entire time at Bryn Mawr. I often stayed the night. While I would not qualify the acitivities in which I participated as “unmentionable” as Ms. Chu does, I do consider them private, between me and the man to whom I was then dating and to whom am currently engaged. (And no, Ms. Chu, he was not a member of any sports team.)
I do not feel as if I missed out on my Bryn Mawr experience because I such a significant part of my social life (both with my significant other, and Swattie friends that I met through him) at Swarthmore. I do not feel as if I am less of a student, or I received a poorer quality education because I pursued a romantic relationship during my time at school. I do not feel like less of a feminist because I met my future husband while attending college (and an all women’s college at that).
I do feel like I received an excellent education at Bryn Mawr. I do feel like I participated as an active member of the Bryn Mawr community. I do feel that my relationship with my then boyfriend was a stabilizing force in my life that positively contributed to my ability to cope with the near-unmanageable workload that is double-majoring at BMC.
Finally, I do feel that students should be encouraged to try to take advantage of both the social and academic opportunities presented by the Tri-Co consortium. Not because Bryn Mawr is somehow “incomplete” without its coed partner schools. And not only to do “unmentionable things” with students at co-ed institutions (which, by the way, why do we consider “sex” to be “unmentionable”, particularly when it comes to women seeking it out… A topic for another discussion, I suppose.) But because there are many more opportunities at our Tri-Co campuses for fun extracurriculars that no one small liberal arts school can offer.
And if a student happens to find romance (or if she’s out there looking for it) I don’t think that that’s a bad thing. I know that I benefited immeasurably from my off-campus relationship during my time at Bryn Mawr: both emotionally and academically. I was also able to provide the same sort of support to my partner. We helped each other through the hard assignments, and through difficult parts of our lives. I am not ashamed of my relationship- it did not (and does not) make me less of a Mawrtyr. I want other young women to be able to seek that sort of relationship off-campus, and not feel guilty for doing so.
I know that you, Kate, didn’t necessarily imply that any of the things I am arguing against here: you only suggested that a rabid preoccupation with things non-academic and off-campus can detract from the degree to which a young woman can find her place within Bryn Mawr’s close-knit community. And I agree with you. But your sentiment does resemble a disturbing notion- first proposed in Ms. Chu’s article, and echoed throughout the many, many comments here: that seeking off campus heterosexual relationships makes you less of a Mawrtyr, less of an academic, and less of a feminist. I want to take this opportunity to voice my opinion for the record: No, it does not.
-Molly Pieri, BMC ’09.
Also, didn’t proof read this, and I’m already noticing some mistakes which should have been fixed (ie: “between me and the man to whom I was then dating and to whom am currently engaged.” should read “between me and the man I was then dating and to whom I am currently engaged”.) Please forgive these. I’ll try to remember to proofread my comments in the future.
-Molly, BMC ’09
Someone in my office knew that my high school age daughter is considering applying to an all women’s college (among other choices) for next year and suggested that I take a look at this article. I attended a coed LAC and have had no direct experience with women’s schools. When I finished reading Ms. Chu’s piece, I was skeptical. The experiences of one disgruntled student who transferred out of Bryn Mawr didn’t seem like an adequate basis by which to judge all women’s colleges. Then, I read these comments by current students and alumni of some of the most prestigious ones. Although there are some thoughtful posts here (particularly by BMC writers) and a few dissenting voices, I have to say that the overwhelming impression left by literally hundreds of commenters tends to confirm Ms. Chu’s observations. So many defensive and even vindictive comments! Hundreds of comments really can’t be easily dismissed as unrepresentative, particularly when there are so few voices disassociating themselves with the dominant view in this thread. I’m afraid that perhaps without intending to, you’ve made Ms. Chu’s point for her. Perhaps all this can be chalked up to school pride, but maybe there is more going on here. Ultimately, the decision of where to apply to college is up to my daughter. But, based on what I’ve read here, I can’t say I can endorse the all-women’s option for her.
An impression that we’re smart, strong, and stand up for ourselves unitedly in the face of ridiculous accusations? Why wouldn’t we be defensive?
Yes, it is true that we take great pride in our institution. You’re also right that there’s more going on here. I’m not sure if you understand the degree of offense she has inflicted on the entire Bryn Mawr community with this article. Being a Bryn Mawr student, of course I know the downsides of going to Bryn Mawr, and I myself has considered transferring from Bryn Mawr as well. This article, however, is largely untrue, and simply over-exaggerated. I was very offended upon reading this article, and let me tell you that most of my friends here love Bryn Mawr even more than I do. She is free to talk or write about her Bryn Mawr experiences, but it is certainly possible to do so without offending her old classmates.
“Ultimately, the decision of where to apply to college is up to my daughter. But, based on what I’ve read here, I can’t say I can endorse the all-women’s option for her.”
It is fine if you don’t find women’s colleges appealing; I know that many people don’t. I don’t think it is appropriate, however, to make such a statement in response to this particular article, because, as you can tell, most people that are reading your response at this point are probably students of Bryn Mawr and Wellesley. Women’s colleges have much more than the superficial qualities that are exaggerated here. Being a student at a women’s college, I don’t find your statement very pleasing.
BMC student ’14
Hey Troll Momma, please direct me to where in the comments, where we have “made Chu’s point for her.” Where doesn’t someone confirm any of the dumb-ass generalizations that she makes. Thank GOD you aren’t my mother.
Honestly, they are too numerous to count. Your post would be one. Perhaps the worst are the threats to Ms. Chu’s future employment, which I find disturbing. But, the ad hominem nature of many of the posts and the vitriol they contain don’t speak well for your institutions and tend to support Ms. Chu’s thesis that other education options may be more attractive. P.S. What is a “troll”?
Tiger Momma,
Until you have truly walked in the shoes of a minority and felt the sting of baseless, mean-spirited, endless comments, you will not understand where these young women are coming from. There is a tipping point which has been reached here and perhaps the students of all female colleges should actually thank Miss Chu because it has brought to light what so many misinformed people feel about these schools.
Yes, perhaps words could have been chosen more wisely but I am thrilled to see young women defend themselves. Better word choice will come with age and wisdom but I would never seek to dampen such a fire in the soul.
Has it ever occurred to you that women who go to women’s colleges are CONSTANTLY dumped on, made fun of, and completely disregarded as having attended “lesser” institutions by most people? You know, people who go to Harvard and Yale do not need to defend their institutions. Society and mass media already do that for them. They never need to be bothered about the reputations of their schools. That goes for pretty much any co-ed college. What I find disturbing is that even after having had a liberal arts education, you are unable to see that people (and women in particular) who take the road less traveled and who make the unpopular decision, are the ones who are constantly put in the position of having to defend that choice.
We as women’s college graduates react strongly to people who criticize our schools. Why? Because people are ALWAYS criticizing our schools. The typical image of an American college student is a keg-sucking, blonde-hair-flipping coed. Watch any Hollywood movie to confirm that. And we at women’s colleges work every single day to break down that stereotype. And for it, we are called “dykes,” we are judged for not being sexual enough (wearing sweatpants to class apparently qualifies), and one top of it we are made fun of if we take classes at coed institutions!
But what you SHOULD read from all these hundreds of comments, ma’am, is the passion and complete adoration of women’s colleges that their graduates have for them. And the fact that they are willing to fight the good fight EVERY day… EVEN on this ridiculous, no-name column. Why? Because we’re a small group and people easily misjudge us, so even tiny articles like this make a difference to us. And because we KNOW that if you give women’s colleges a chance, they can do for you what no other place can do for you. They can give you what no other place on earth gives you.
If you don’t give it a chance, then none of that will make sense to you. But I hope you (and your daughter), at least throw in the applications and do your research before deciding against a community of such amazing women, who stand tall for each other even in the most minute ways.
If you can’t see that, I’m sorry.
Dear Tiger Momma,
I can understand your concern given some of the comments you see here. Please allow me to explain why (I think) these comments were posted:
During my time at Bryn Mawr, I had to confront many, many negative stereotypes from people who were unfamiliar with Bryn Mawr, and who had many preexisting misconceptions about all women’s colleges in general.
When I announced to my family my decision to attend an all women’s liberal arts college my little cousin blurted out in a horrified voice “You mean your not going to get married?!?” As if: a) women who wend to all-women’s colleges don’t get married and b) not getting married was a fate worse than death for a young woman.
Before I left to attend Bryn Mawr, a friend of a friend advised me, if I were unlucky enough to “get a lesbian” as a roommate, to tie her up with duct tape at night to make sure she didn’t attack me (presumably in a sexual fashion).
When my boyfriend told his friends that he was dating a woman from Bryn Mawr, one of his friends replied: “Oh, I didn’t know you were a lesbian”. As if all Bryn Mawr women are homosexual, and if he were dating one, he must some how be a female lesbian as well. (This notion existing side-by-side in a sort of doublethink fashion to the idea that Bryn Mawr women are all sexually-starved straight girls who routinely troll coed campuses looking for willing men to share their beds at night– another preconceived notion of a Bryn Mawr woman I had to face as my boyfriend and I were involved in a cross-campus long term relationship)
And about half-way through my education I had to explain to a family friend that, no, I was not going to a finishing school where they taught me the proper rules of etiquette, but rather to an incredibly rigorous academic institution where I was being intellectually challenged on a daily basis, broadening my horizons, and being empowered to change the world by both the faculty and my peers.
You see, Tiger Momma, Here in the Bryn Mawr community we are used to having to defend our choice to attend an all women’s institution to people who are ignorant of its true purpose and identity. And most of the time we are able to keep our cool and explain calmly and rationally that: No, we are not all lesbians, yes, some of us are and we’re proud of providing those students with a safe space in which to express themselves. And yes, each and every one of us is dedicated to pushing her own academic limits, challenging the unsatisfactory status quo, and changing the world for the better.
But when a member of our community- albiet a member who has moved on to a new community- but still someone we expect to understand this problem, and to know what Bryn Mawr is really about, makes insulting, degrading, and false statements about our school in a public forum, we feel angry, we feel insulted, and many of us (particularly those who, unlike me, knew Ms. Chu personally) feel betrayed by a fellow community member. That is why so many of us have reacted in anger- not always tempered by rational thought.
You are right, some of the responses are concerning. But I do not believe that they are specific to all women’s colleges: I think that any close community faced with this sort of affront would respond with some insulting and abusive remarks. I think that the number of thoughtful and insightful comments ought to instead indicate the quality of the members of our community, not the lack thereof.
I hope this helps you take some of the less-than-admirable posts in response to this article in a new perspective, with more understanding to the feelings that motivated such posts. And while this does not excuse inconsiderate and personal attacks, it does help to explain them.
As far as your daughter’s college search (and not that I’m any sort of expert in this matter, but here’s my advice anyway): I would not judge any one type of institution (coed, all-women’s, liberal arts, technical institute, small, large, rural, urban) without visiting the specific institution in question: there is no better way to get a feel for a school than by walking around on its campus: observe the students, ask them about their college experience. Based on the way a school feels during these sorts of informal tours, your daughter will know which school is right for her.
-Molly Pieri, BMC ’09
Well said, Molly! It is exactly this kind of constant demeaning and constant defending of our choices that I was referring to in my post.
And as Molly says, yes, some of the comments here are ridiculous. But they come from a place of betrayal… and when you betray a small community that people are already quick to misjudge, that hurts more than when you betray the mainstream.
I hope these comments, at least, have helped.
Thank you for your candor and courage in saying this. As I wrote, some of the most thoughtful comments in this thread, including a few other responses to my post, have come from Bryn Mawr women. Posts like yours are making me a believer. [Posts that threaten career retaliation against Ms. Chu, not so much.] One person even suggested that I cannot relate to the feelings of an oppressed minority, but I am a racial minority (at least in the U.S.) and have felt the sting of prejudice. Even if you feel that your choices are under assault, in response may I encourage you and your peers to confidently and positively assert the value you see in your experiences at all-women’s schools without a trace of defensiveness. I would not intentionally “dampen the fire” in anyone’s soul, but I’m saddened that the overwhelming number of these comments to Ms. Chu’s piece offer more heat than light.
Tiger Momma, I hope this article and the comments that follow do not sway your daughter’s choices. Sadly nearly any inflammatory article posted with an open comment forum will devolve into threats and petty insults. I would have expected more from my fellow alumnae, but these unsigned poorly written internet posts certainly do not reflect the women I have known, and may way be from random internet “trolls”.
Never in my time at Bryn Mawr did I feel less smart or less capable than my co-ed peers. Penn professors were eager to have me in their classes; I was happy to be attending a tiny LAC and still have the option of taking graduate coursework as an undergrad.
I did not arrive on campus a confident young scientist– but I certainly graduated as one. The academic and social environment at Bryn Mawr left me well prepared for my graduate studies, and I wouldn’t trade my experiences [wholly hygienic, I assure you] for the world.
“More heat than light” is a perfect way to describe many of the less well thought out posts seen here. Unfortunately, I think that such is the nature of the anonymous internet forum: more so because we cannot see hurt we cause people with our words… Hopefully I have shed some light by my own posts, and I feel terribly that you might be receiving some of the aforementioned heat for expressing your take on the situation in your post.Good luck to your daughter in her college search.
-Molly, BMC ’09
I wonder if this concerned mother has considered the reaction of Ivy League students if a similar attack was launched on some aspect of their school, or really, of any student attending an institution of which they were proud. Whether it is a good trait or not, I have rarely encountered an academic who is not proud of her or his current or past educational institution enough to argue against those who wish to sling mud. I highly doubt the mass of these responses nor the anger voiced in them is unique to Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, or women’s colleges as a whole. Someone who feels that they have benefited greatly from her or his college experience and who hopes that others will be able to benefit from similar experiences will naturally jump to rectify publications that suggest untrue and frankly impressions of the college she or he holds so dear.
While I have difficulty understanding how arguments against an insulting article “confirm Ms. Chu’s observations,” since Ms. Chu seems to mostly comment on Bryn Mawr women’s hygiene and need to scream loudly in public, not the ferocity with which they respond to negativity online, I honestly feel as if this would be the response of any highly accredited college or university’s students and alumni/ae. I truly do hope this mother leaves her daughter’s college decision up to her daughter, be it coed or women’s college, and I have the feeling that no matter which she eventually attends, there will be students who love the school and are willing to defend it.
Dear Tiger Momma,
Please imagine if every stereotype that could be said about whatever groups of people you belong to had just been put online, by someone claiming to have experienced being part of that group. That is what we, at Bryn Mawr, are now dealing with. And the students at Wellesly are dealing with being judged in the same way.
What is hurting the students of Bryn Mawr – and yes, it does hurt – is not that Ms. Chu had a bad experience with Bryn Mawr, nor that she doesn’t believe in the value women’s colleges. Obviously we would disagree her assessments, but we would not begrudge her them. The fact is that being at a women’s college does create some difficulties and is not for everyone. That’s fine. But it is also not what Ms. Chu claims it is.
The stereotypes she puts out are simply untrue. We do not always wear oversize sweatpants to class, in fact, I find that Bryn Mawr women dress very well. I have never seen a bloody tampon in our bathrooms – they are immaculate. There aren’t such whispers about professor-student relationships, at least not that I have ever heard. The males in our classes are just like the females in our classes – it’s really not that big of a deal when there are men from Haverford or Swarthmore there.
So, before judging us as Ms. Chu so clearly did, I ask you to consider how you would feel if every stereotype that you have ever faced had just been presented to the world at large as fact. I am sure you are an intelligent woman with a lot to offer the world, one who takes pride in what she is doing and where she is doing it. How would you feel if someone did the same thing Ms. Chu has done to us, to you?
I cannot defend some of the viciousness here, but in terms of “threats to her future employment” no one is threatening to make sure she doesn’t get a job. But it’s a simple fact that there are a lot of women in high powered positions who are Seven Sisters alumnae. It seems logical to me that Ms. Chu will probably feel the backlash of this article at some point in that manner.
I urge you to consider the viciousness with which this article was written, as well, when you are judging the responses of those attacked.
There is certainly a place in academic discussion for debate over the merits and disadvantages of single-sex education, or even the relevance of such institutions. That’s not what this article does. It simply lists stereotypes of Bryn Mawr women, and uses them to draw the conclusion that coed institutions are better.
Excuse me, but you seem to be implying that you are willing to form your entire opinion on a large and diverse group of colleges based on one comments section on the internet (which appears to be largely unmoderated). Does that really constitute due diligence?
Most graduates of liberal arts colleges are fiercely loyal to their schools. I assume that as an alumna of a liberal arts college, you know this. Women’s college graduates are no different. What’s more, we tend to be particularly loyal to our schools for two reasons: because we have, over the years, heard so many inaccurate and demeaning remarks directed at our alma maters (“Isn’t that a girls school?” and “Aren’t there a lot of lesbians there?”–as if that’s a drawback/something to be ashamed of, being the most common, but also assumptions that we must be oversensitive to jokes and/or unable to relate to men), and because we believe that we have gained something invaluable from our experience–that we have become better people and better women, that we have become more sensitive to injustices of all kinds, that we are not afraid to do what it takes to make our voices heard when necessary.
It appears to me that your objection to women’s colleges is that their graduates are capable of getting angry on the internet. I assure you that 20-something graduates of every college in the US are capable of that. (I also assume that you are not researching other colleges in the same way.)
Yes, there’s a lot of snark in the responses from the students and alumnae of women’s colleges. It’s also true that most of the responses come from young people, and that this is an internet forum. Frankly, I’d say that the comments here have more substance to them than most internet comment sections (have you ever read the comments at, say, the Washington Post?), even if they are no less snarky. On the internet, people are more free to vent the full extent of their frustration, whereas in person most of us work hard to respond politely (though firmly) to ill-informed remarks about our schools. I would hope that a parent about to guide her daughter through the infinitely complex process of choosing a college would filter information and sources enough to keep that in mind.
For your daughter’s sake, I would suggest that you go to a “preview party” in your area hosted by one of the major women’s colleges. They happen in November and December in most major cities, precisely so that perspective students and their families can get a sense of what women’s colleges are really like. At a preview party, you would meet real people face to face, both current students and alumnae. That would give you–and your daughter–some far more comparable information to go by. There’s a broad range of women’s colleges out there–the experiences of my friends who went to Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, and Spellman are in some respects quite different from my experiences at Smith. Not to mention Smith can be a almost a different school depending where on campus you live and who you socialize with (just like almost every college I’ve ever heard of).
Smith College 2008
I myself have*. Sorry about the typo
I also transferred from Bryn Mawr to a coed school, but not because of any particularly negative associations I held with women’s colleges. To the contrary, I grew immensely as a student and a young person at Bryn Mawr, and I continue to value the lessons and relationships I gained there.
To my fellow Mawrtyrs (and yes, I still consider myself part of that esteemed group), kindly don’t lend more credence to this article than it is due. Let it rest as simply the reflection of one disaffected former Bryn Mawr student. Ms. Chu should be allowed the right to her own opinions, however disagreeable or uninformed you may find them.
Yes, and we are also granted the right to disagree with her.
I’m sorry you had a bad time at Bryn Mawr, and you must know that you wrote and decided to publish is complete crap.
Wow. I went to Smith, and I can’t say that it was always the most enjoyable environment- women can certainly be bitchy- but I am absolutely proud of attending a Seven Sisters school. I never saw tampons on the floor. I am pretty sure the only time I wore anything resembling sweats to class was the semester I had class immediately following a dance class (and I wore yoga pants, thank you very much). We NEVER said we’d “rather be dead than coed.”
It seems like you are the type of woman who is not confident with herself unless she has a man (or men) in her life. One of my favorite things about attending college at a women’s college was that I learned how to be dependent on MYSELF. I didnt need a man around to feel validated or be successful. That’s what going to a women’s college meant to me- a chance to focus on my studies and myself.
At the end of the day, Vicky, I feel bad for you. You are going to go out into life as someone who probably bounces from boyfriend to boyfriend just so you can have someone to take care of you. You will spend your life trying to find someone who can be successful for you. Good luck. And just remember- Google is a powerful tool, and this article is going to come back to bite you. Hard.
I thought there was something odd about a ten day old Argus opinion piece (not even an editorial) suddenly drawing so much fire from off-campus until I came across this blog maintained by a Wellesley alumna: http://jezebel.com/5851165/womens-colleges-only-promote-sweatpants-wearing–poor-tampon-hygiene-says-wesleyan-student
It’s difficult to imagine that it is a complete coincidence that the bulk, if not all, the comments above were rendered within 24 hours of the Wellesley blog.
I’m not defending Ms. Chu’s perspective nor her experience; they are what they are. I’ve read enough equally snarky articles about Wesleyan itself — articles on the front page of the New York Times, in _Newsweek_, and countless internet sites — to know that this type of humor seems to be endemic, a part of the American obsession with trope and stereotype. On that level, it’s on a par with some of the more rancid comments on view in the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s “Choosing the Right College” on purchase from your local Barnes and Noble.
I don’t know which is more moronic the original article or the Wellesley blog directing traffic this way, insuring it reaches a wider audience. Perhaps, this is a demonstration of that old chestnut, “There’s no such thing as bad publicity — so long as they spell your name right”, in which case, it’s Wesleyan, not Wellesleyan.
Wait… are you really implying that the website jezebel.com is some sort of Wellesley-run conspiracy to discredit Wesleyan? Really? REALLY?
No, more likely a strained attempt to play the victim card by Wellesley.
agreed; definitely shows Wellesley needs to further validate itself…..
Jezebel isn’t a “Wellesley blog.” It’s part of the Gawker network. Did you even read that article? It’s not playing the “victim card” at all – more like “check out this fool’s poorly executed attempt at an opinion piece.”
This is going to be great for you when you decide to interview for a job and find out your potential employer graduated from a women’s college. Look around, Vicky. There’s a hell of a lot of us and our “abnormal” women’s colleges put us in pretty good places when we graduated.
More proof that Vicky is right.
Really? you don’t think that if someone went online and publicly bashed your gender, school, race, creed, ethnicity, religion, etc. you wouldn’t be slightly less likely to hire them? Or bashed ANY of the above regardless of how it related to you? It shows Vicky has a serious character flaw. Frankly, I wouldn’t want someone who so easily makes vast generalizations and then posts them online, not only online, but online representing an institution far greater than herself (e.g. Wesleyan). She did not think about the consequences of her actions, who it would offend, how it would reflect on herself, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Bryn Mawr, etc. She lacks good judgement. This isn’t her diary. This is the internet. It’s not even on a personal blog.
Shut it.
Go on, keep digging the hole deeper! Do you honestly believe that this would be grounds for refusal to hire her if she otherwise was a qualified candidate for a job? While its true that college isn’t “anything goes” with no consequences for later life, do you want to be held to a standard that says an error in judgment during college (e.g., tasteless prank, drunkenness, minor code of behavior violation, poorly written student news article, etc.?) should disqualify one for future employment?! If you really do, then that reflects very negatively on you and those that share your view.
This is nowhere near a tasteless prank. This is a school wide publication. Something she will likely put on her resume under activities. So yeah. If someone came into my office and put this under their activities and I read it and thought “Wow, this person doesn’t seem to back up any of her points with evidence”, and I found that to be a job related flaw, it might make me think twice about hiring her. Hence why her school made her take it down. It offended people. It offended me.
But this is really ridiculous to argue. The argument is whether or not she offended a shit ton of people. People are constantly fired for offending shit tons of people. Every day! Of course I don’t know Vicky personally. I dont know her GPA or her stellar record as a tenor saxophonist. She might have tons of other redeeming qualities, and may be a great friend. I don’t know her. If I knew her I might change my mind. But right now this is what I know about her. She is a girl at a competitive college with at least one extra curricular activity…within that activity she managed to anger me and a bunch of other people to the point of public apology.
Hmm…maybe we should at least consider some other candidates.
Maybe I am over reacting? Maybe not. A friend of mine was nearly fired at my job for a silly prank that only offended one person. Anyway if you would like to continue this conversation you can find me on facebook or google+ or something, I have not hid my identity from anyone.
Don’t tarnish MHC’s name by jumping on the “threats about V. Chu’s future job perspectives” bandwagon. It’s out of line and immature. It is also a poor representation of all of the women’s colleges. Sure, Chu wrote something terrible and should feel remorse, but you’re DOING something more terrible and should stop.
I thought that ANY of the schools that have been discussed would’ve spoken to the fundamental “two wrongs don’t make a right” moral.
I find the defensiveness in these responses strange and alarming. Excessive pride often indicates lack of true confidence. Also, as a student at a co-ed university that often wears pajamas or ugly clothes and no makeup to class, I have to say that the idea that women need to be separated from men in order to feel comfortable in their own skin is, by definition, demeaning. I don’t need to rail about woman-power to feel powerful. I don’t need to tear down someone else’s opinion to validate my own.
I have met a lot of women’s college students, and a lot of Bryn Mawr College students, and like any other institution some are wonderful and some are difficult to bear, but the idea that women’s college students are in some way superior socially or academically to those of us who decided to go elsewhere, which is never directly stated but heavily implied here, is insulting.
It is insulting. Equally as insulting as the insinuation the author makes that we only feel comfortable wearing sweatpants to class because we are in an all-female environment, or that we hate men, or that we are inferior to women who go to coed institutions, as implied by the article.
I don’t think it is strange to defend yourself when stereotypes about you are expressed as fact. These stereotypes are something Bryn Mawr women have to face all the time. They are difficult and at times quite hurtful.
As far as tearing down someone else’s opinion to validate our own, it is not the opinion of Ms. Chu – ostensibly that women’s colleges are inferior to coed institutions – that is generating the emotional response, but the disrespectful and offensive way in which she has argued her point.
Sweatpants are all that fits me right now.
perfection
This is a ridiculous article. And for the record, Mount Holyoke College is in the process of researching the implications of becoming a co-educational institution, something that many single-sex institutions do as part of a process of understanding markets, trends, educational outcomes and demands, etc – and a process that may also lead to strengthening the argument for remaining a single-sex institution. They are many, many steps away from what one might consider to be “deliberating” whether or not they will go co-ed.
I’m a Mount Holyoke alum, and to clarify, this is something that the College does every few years. The discussion of going co-ed is a regular part of the discussion and is not likely to happen. I imagine that many single-sex institutions consider this as part of a discussion about the endowment. From what I’ve gathered from discussing this with the administration and the development office, there is no “deliberation.”
There is no need to even discuss the absurdity of Ms. Chu’s article. I believe women’s colleges are still relevant today and are instrumental in shaping not only the students who choose to attend but women’s education on an international level.
7 Sisters Solidarity.
–MHC alumna ’08
OMG no one at Wesleyan cares about any of these arguments. give it a rest wellesley/bryn mawr women. stop getting personally offended from what one girl thought about a year of her life at another college. everyone has their own experiences in college that shape their opinions and it doesn’t mean that it is a personal attack on your own experience. this is an OPINION piece. not what all of wesleyan thinks and also clearly not what all of you think.
i understand it is midterms so ya’ll are procrastinating from writing papers, but seriously move on.
I hardly think you’d “give it a rest” if someone wrote a scathing editorial claiming all Wesleyan students left bloody tampons scattered across campus…
It wasn’t an editorial. Like most opinion pieces, it probably did not even make it into the “hard” copy of the paper.
it did make the hard copy of the paper, but unlike wellesley/bryn mawr, we glanced at it and moved on. Wesleyan gets shitted on all the time (being called the most annoying liberal arts school, etc). We recognize they are in no way attacking our personal experiences. All these women here seems to think the author specifically intends to insult them, when she’s not. Stop overreacting.
is there going to be a response from the author?
It sounds like the author found her brief time at Bryn Mawr challenging, socially and personally. That is completely legitimate and transferring may have been the best decision for her, but being challenged by an environment isn’t a good reason to lash out at the institution of women’s colleges generally, students specifically, and to indulge in blind generalizations and stereotypes. A good education, academically and socially, is one that challenges you. I think it’s a shame that the author wrote this article instead of examining what specifically about Bryn Mawr she found challenging in an honest, respectful, and productive way. I am a Bryn Mawr alum who thought seriously about transferring out my sophomore year, primarily due to the single-sex nature of the school. I chose to stay because I realized that for me there was more room to grow in an environment that challenged the assumptions I held about what a community was, and that gave me the chance to define myself as a woman, not in relation to men, but by forming my own sense of self as a woman. Bryn Mawr isn’t normal. “Normal” doesn’t challenge you, help you grow, learn about and change your perspectives, or ask you to think about yourself differently than you may ever have before. I certainly hope that Wesleyan isn’t, as the author purports it to be, “normal” and that the reaction to this article will give the author the chance to reflect more seriously on the opinion she states here. It might be illuminating.
Sarah Lindberg, Bryn Mawr, 2010
I consider myself towards the bottom of my Haverford class. The only two classes I’ve taken at Bryn Mawr, both in my major, have been disappointingly simple – both were 200 level. Textbooks with big highlighted vocabulary and tests asking questions straight from the book with no critical thinking. Attendance + paying attention led to a great grade. People in the class asked some absurdly stupid questions.
I was disappointed that these classes fell right into the stereotype I’ve heard of BMC classes.
I took several classes at Haverford while I was a student at Bryn Mawr, with the exact same experience you had. This really isn’t the time or place for this tired discussion, but can we please just acknowledge that both schools have good profs and poor profs, good classes and bad classes, and yes, both schools have stupid people and slackers. I think we’re done now.
About to post almost the exact same comment. Thank you.
Bet it was Gangadean
((Hahahahahahahahahaha))
Although, I should also add that I absolutely loved my Buddhist Philosophy in a Global Context class, and still keep The Way of the Bodhisattva on the “books I actually read” portion of my bookshelf.
Your willingness to disparage an entire school based on your personal experience at an entirely different institution doesn’t speak well of your writing and critical thinking abilities. It sounds like you’re not really cut out for Bryn Mawr, Wesleyan, Wellesley, or any other rigorous college.
Snark.
I’m trying to think of something constructive to say but all I can hear in this article is “wah I went from one well-ranked school to another well-ranked school that is in turn mistaken for another well-ranked school – alas, how difficult is the life of a first-world college student!”
It’s not worth my time to address Ms. Chu’s points. Suffice it to say, I went to Wellesley and this piece could not be a less accurate description of my experiences there.
Instead, my comments are directed at the Wesleyan Argus. A high-minded discussion of the benefits of single sex education is fine, regardless of whether I agree with the writer. But to print inaccurate snippy jabs at another college? One the writer never even attended? It seems to border on libel, and I wish your editorial board had been more thoughtful.
Sarah Rosen Frank
Wellesley ’99
It gets pretty exhausting yelling “death to the patriarchy” from your dorm room all day long, strewing bloody tampons all over the bathrooms on campus, sleeping with professors, doing unmentionable things with haverford sports teams, and hunting down clean, oversized sweatpants to wear to every class, meal, and other functions, all while trying to keep up with the Foucault and Butler readings. No wonder you only lasted a year!
If the editors of this newspaper, and, more broadly, the administration at Wesleyan truly care about this student’s future, I would suggest they take down this article and issue a more formal, less-bloggy apology on behalf of Ms. Chu. I am embarrassed for her and am baffled that this publication thought a “showcase of stereotypes” of life at a women’s college would make for an acceptable piece for publication — how could it be read as anything but offensive and misogynistic? I do not know if Ms. Chu has future career goals in journalism, but this letter has already been cross-listed on jezebel.com and I can only imagine it’s a matter of time before it gets further attention on the internet. I’m a graduate of a women’s college, so I am personally offended by this, but as a general piece of writing, it reflects very little coherent, critical thinking (writing about and reinforcing stereotypes rarely involves such skills) and this is probably a very inaccurate portrayal of this student’s strength because I’m certain that you need to be an inquisitive and critical thinker to survive at either Bryn Mawr or Wesleyan. If this stays up, Ms. Chu could be held accountable for a momentary mistake she made in college; while I do not think she anticipated these consequences, the editors of this publication certainly had a responsibility to do so.
I find it interesting that you talk about students from other schools surrounding Bryn Mar prejudicing against the institution and the women that go there when your Wesleyan article does the same exact thing.
Your apology is terrible. Because men mocked you for going to a women’s college, you decide to say some woman-hating things in return? You make no sense. You should have stayed at Bryn Mawr — you may have learned a few things about feminism.
Vicky,
It’s unfortunate that your Tri-Co peers made you feel uncomfortable about the quality and legitimacy of your education at Bryn Mawr. As someone who took many challenging classes on that campus and who has many very good friends who are Martyrs or alums, I am sorry that anyone at Haverford or Swarthmore made the kinds of gross generalizations they did.
That considered, you should have known better than to make the same kinds of gross generalizations in your article. If you truly felt as isolated and offended by them as you claim, you should not have turned them around and thrown them back on Bryn Mawr and then dragged Wellesley into the matter. Your attempt to explain your perspective in your apology letter is nice, though unconvincing.
CR HC 2010
histrionics!
“The bigger issue for me was how men viewed Bryn Mawr women as a result of our single-sex experience.” I see now why single sex education wasn’t for you.You seem to be convinced that what men think about you or your institution is more important than the truth. I agree that men from other schools have all sorts of stereotypes about women who attend all female schools. Males from near-by schools did, in fact, say that Smithies were either desperate or angry lesbians, but, you know, that’s because they (like most men in the nation) believe that any woman who is sex-positive, knows what she wants and gets it must either be a whore or gay (if she’s getting it from a lady). I made sure not to care because I knew that they were misogynistic pompous jerks whose intention was to demean another human being based on their gender alone while they got high-fives from their friends for banging someone new. Girls from Amherst definitely hated Smithies for the obvious reason that we were competition academically and sexually.
Here are some facts about graduates of women’s colleges: Women’s college graduates make up only two percent of the college-educated population, and yet one-third of the women board members of the Fortune 1000 companies are women’s college graduates. Women’s college graduates are twice as likely to earn Ph.D.s. A higher percentage go on to study in the sciences and attend medical school. Of Business Week’s 50 highest ranking women in corporate America, 30 percent are women’s college graduates. Of 61 women members of Congress, 20 percent attended women’s colleges. These same stats are written about widely, but I found them this time at https://www.collegetoolkit.com/guides/college-selection/rescollwomens.aspx
How men (and women) view women at liberal arts colleges is inconsequential to the outcome of the education, and I’d say is even one of the reasons women’s colleges still exist. Parity has not been reached. Not even close.
Danny DeVito I love your work!
“The only thing you can’t replace is your reputation.” When I sent this article to my stepmother, a lawyer for the US government…this was her response. And she has sent it to friends in her department who went to women’s colleges – such as Wellesley and Smith. Unfortunately for you, this will continue to haunt you – you never know who you will run into. People from both colleges have sent this article to everyone they know – who have in turn sent it. This has gone farther than students at Bryn Mawr and Wellesley.
Furthermore, it’s fine that you didn’t like the women’s college experience – sometimes I don’t either. Many times I don’t like a pro-feminist nature of Bryn Mawr. But I have enough courtesy and respect to never tell lies about Bryn Mawr College and then, for no reason other than the name, bring Wellesley into it. I understand you got caught up in the moment about being published (oh boy!) – sensationalism. I thought Wesleyan was more high class than tabloids.
You see, I lived on the same hall as you a year at Bryn Mawr – I know you. And I know you’re spreading lies. Furthermore…I know this little “article” of yours is nothing more than you validating your choice to attend Wesleyan by putting down Bryn Mawr College – unnecessarily. You talk about girls needing the “fuck truck” to survive…but I remember you being one of those girls very clearly, Ms. Chu. A bit hypocrtical, no? I remember you talking, yourself, about Bryn Mawr’s lower ranking. Thus (since we’re making conclusions on personal experience, here): this must be a self-justifying article.
I would suggest you think before you speak (or write).
Calling it an “all girls” school is itself degrading.
“However, many of my classmates at the time told me they also felt marginalized by the experience of attending an all-girls school, and I know many who transferred as well.”
It’s not an all-girls school, it’s a women’s college you stupid bitch
How about “all-bitches” school? Given these comments, that would come closer to the mark.
‘Bitches’ for defending their school? That’s quite laughable. You seem more offended than the Wellesley and Bryn Mawr students. Take a deep breath and stop reading if women standing up for their school’s reputation is stressing you out.
It’s time to stop posting.
http://www.bestmemes.com/pix/56248766.jpg
RK bmc’13
http://ampersanding.blogspot.com/2011/10/pov-occupy-usdan.html
I love how the entire “apology” basically meant nothing. It is a waste of words.. She clearly sounds like she was forced to do write it, especially with the areas where she is still arguing her false generalizations. At least there is still some Mawrytr like fight in her. I feel bad for the Wesleyan students/alum who are forced to suffer the negativity from this article. I hope the writer the best of luck in her achievements because she is going to need it.
Dear Ms. Chu,
I could talk at length about my experience as an alum, but I won’t. I pity you, actually, because the ludicrous arrogance of this apology evidences your sincere lack of class in almost every way.
Every consortium has its stereotypes. You seem incredibly naive if you think the occasional joke made about another institution constitutes fact or the sole viewpoint on that campus. It angers me that you are perpetuating these about Bryn Mawr, when you clearly sought out negative points of view to confirm your own dissatisfaction, and when you chose to spend an inordinate amount of time at other campuses because you didn’t feel at home there.
By the way, if you were on my campus all the time and weren’t a student there, I’d probably have made rude remarks also.
Let me make this clear– I had friends at Haverford. I live with both Bryn Mawr and Haverford students now as an alumna. I was not mocked, I was not looked down on, and you are pathetically laughable in your attempt at journalistic prowess.
Your apology is so pretentious.
Soooo, in the response you claim that your biggest issue at BMC was the way that Haverford and Swarthmore students ridiculed you…yet as soon as you make a lateral jump to a coed but otherwise very similar college, you turn around and spread the same belittling stereotypes everywhere.
As a Wellesley alum, I’ll admit that I’ve heard my share of stereotypes from men — and some women! — about the value of women’s colleges. But I recognize that these sorts of baseless attacks say more about the people making them than they do about Wellesley.
You know, like maybe if some dudes are belittling Bryn Mawr for being inferior, and if Bryn Mawr is a “similarly exceptional” education (which it is), maybe the problem is actually with…the dudes? Maybe you should care less about what those kind of dudes think?
“The bigger issue for me was how men viewed Bryn Mawr women as a result of our single-sex experience.”
Seriously? Why do you even care how men view Bryn Mawr?
“but I continue to stand by my opinion about same-sex education and invite readers to critique my arguments, not my personal character.”
No one is stopping you from having an opinion on same-sex education. I have an opinion on it too, and so does everyone else. What matters is HOW you’re presenting that opinion of yours. I don’t know if you realize this, but it’s quite possible to express your opinion (though I’m not sure what your “opinion” is) without offending anyone. Unfortunately, you’ve done a very poor job, and judging from this “apology” letter, it seems to me that you don’t quite realize what you’ve done. If you don’t like having people critiquing your personal character, you must first realize that you have just degraded every Bryn Mawr woman’s personal character with shallow generalizations. It seems that you first need to work on understanding what an opinion is. Otherwise, if I were you, I would just keep my “opinions” to myself.
Bryn Mawr ’13
Why did you even publish your article in the first place? Your attempt at justifying such a pathetic article just embarrasses you even more.
“Perhaps I was one of an unfortunate few at Bryn Mawr to witness events like this on a regular basis. However, many of my classmates at the time told me they also felt marginalized by the experience of attending an all-girls school, and I know many who transferred as well.”
… So you saw bloody tampons on the floor on a regular basis? Was it only you? Cause I’m sure other people would have noticed that as well… But anyway, it’s okay if you decide to transfer, we completely understand if the whole women’s college isn’t your thing. Because let’s face it, a women’s college isn’t for everyone.
However, you did nothing to “highlight a side of the women’s college experience that is less often portrayed”. More articles are published by people with similar mindsets like you who completely bash and stereotype women’s colleges to the point of almost no return. It is people who write these absolutely ridiculous articles that perpetuate stereotypes about women’s colleges. This side that you wrote about is what society has seen and will continue to see as people like you continue to write these completely biased and extreme pieces of sh**.
Also, please, get over the whole “Wellesley?” “… No, Wesleyan” thing. Many students at Wellesley have shared similar experiences. “Oh you’re going to Wesleyan?” “… No, Wellesley.” Do you see us freaking the fuck out over this and publishing how co-ed schools suck and perpetuate the solidification of gender roles and sexual norms in society? No. We see this problem exist, but instead of complaining about it, we take action and do something about it.
And you just really needed to suck it up with how men view you Bryn Mawr students. “It was through degrading experiences like these that were imposed on Bryn Mawr as a result of reinforced stereotypes that I came to believe the self-segregation of women’s colleges had backfired.” Stereotypes will exist anywhere you go, it’s not like you can escape it. The guys who see you Bryn Mawr students, in the real world, will just see you as women and continue to stereotype you. Those experiences may have been degrading, but you had the choice to rise above the situation and not let these comments faze you. Students at women’s colleges have to go through this every single day, you can push through it as well. Haters gon hate, just let them judge, and prove them wrong.
Please, for the love of God, grow up.
I’m not even going to bother writing a lengthy point-by-point response to your article and apology, because it seems like these 300+ comments have only made you more solid in your opinions. I feel bad for you because I feel like you have internalized the sexism that you have encountered, but I am also saddened by your attempt to spread and perpetuate sexist stereotypes.
For everyone else reading this, I sincerely hope that you don’t just take Ms. Chu’s words as representative of what it’s like to attend an all-women’s college. I went to Wellesley not because of it’s all-female environment, but for it’s excellent education and its gorgeous campus. But while I was there, I did meet a bunch of smart sassy ladies who were proactive and took charge. As I discovered in the real world, one or two males would often take over discussion in my female-dominated work place. Then in medical school, the men are again the most vocal. Even when I’m in an all-female small group, I find myself taking charge–as someone who used to be so shy that people used to tell me to speak louder, I attribute part of my confidence to Wellesley. And, while there are certainly people who scoff at the idea of an all-women’s institution, I met SO many people–both men and women–who view Wellesley as an amazing institution.
– Wellesley ’09
From those of you who keep telling Wellesley/Bryn Mawr posters to simply “stop overreacting” try this: replace “Wellesley and Bryn Mawr” with “Howard and Spelman” and “Women’s Colleges” with “HBCU’s.” So here we have a girl who spent a year at an HBCU, decided that it wasn’t for her and then writes a terrible article confirming every nasty stereotype and pretty much condemning their existence based on her, very narrow, experience. You better believe people would be furious!
I realize that those posters may not see sexism as an issue of importance, but this comparison is meant to show that different groups of people have their own set of values, which (as we see from the attention this article has gotten) they are willing to fight tooth and nail to defend. Just because you don’t see the importance of something, or how deeply it offends someone else, does not mean you should just tell them to just “get over it.” That’s really selfish and narrow-minded!
DISCLAIMER: This example is just for the sake of an analogy! I’m not to trying to make any overarching comparisons of the importance of racism v. sexism so please don’t misunderstand! I’m a course 6 major, so please cut me some slack if I am not as eloquent as some of the other posters :/
What an inane article. What an inane non-apology.
Congratulations, Vicky. You’re going to have a difficult time finding a job next year.
More unnecessary snark.
Get used to it, it’s the internet.
Get out Williams troll!
It looks like your apology is as shallow as you seem to be. Good to know that the curtains match the syntactical drapes.
Dear Ms. Chu,
While I have written comments in response to your article before, I have not personally addressed you until now. Having read your statement above, I would like to start by saying that I can absolutely relate to the discrimination you experienced from some members of the Haverford and Swarthmore communities. During my time at Bryn Mawr, I spent many (if not most) of my weekends socializing at Swarthmore, and I took at least half of my classes at Haverford. While the majority of individuals at both schools were welcoming to me, and never spoke ill of Bryn Mawr for being a women’s college, there were a large number of individuals (both male and female) who, as you so accurately put it, looked down upon me for attending what they felt was an inferior institution, made assumptions about my sexuality (and how that affected my intentions at their school), and generally assumed that my character was of a lower caliber because I went to an all women’s college. I agree that these assumptions are hurtful, they are misogynistic. I also assert that they are patently untrue. I was not judged on my own merit, rather the challenges I faced were all based the generalization that I went to an all-women’s college, and so the following things, X,Y,Z, must be true of me. It sounds as if you and your friends had similar stereotypes forced upon you during your time at Bryn Mawr. You have my empathy.
However, your article, it seems, did more to enforce those false assumptions rather than challenge them. Which hurt even more, because your article came from a source who, one would assume, knew better what kind of institution Bryn Mawr is. To quote from your original article:
_______________________________________________________________________
“So what makes a women’s college as an institution different?
In terms of classroom environment, going to a women’s college means sitting in a classroom with women in oversized sweatpants. Inevitably, there will be rumors about the relationship between the professor teaching your class and some student. There will also be one male from a nearby coed school who sits in the front row. He will wear a sweatshirt with the name of his school prominently displayed at every lecture and will therefore be even more conspicuous to his glaring female classmates. He will be applauded by the professor solely for his willingness to learn in a female-dominated environment.
Socially, going to a women’s college means almost literally screaming “Death to the Patriarchy!” all day, every day. It means bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor. It means glaring at the coed schools’ sports teams who come to your campus to eat your chicken wings. It means taking a bus to other schools on the weekends to do unmentionable things with aforementioned sports teams.”
_______________________________________________________________________
This does not challenge the negative stereotypes I faced on the other Tri-Co campuses throughout my time at Bryn Mawr: it validates them! It states them as truth, from a reliable source: a former Bryn Mawr student!
My comments before now have been more academic in nature: I have been looking to instigate conversations regarding the benefits, and the costs, of single-sex education; I hoped to examine the judgments placed on women of these colleges who choose to behave in a certain way. But this post is different. This is my personal response, and as such I hope you will forgive me if my arguments are not as rigorously articulated as they would be in an academic piece of writing.
It hurts to have someone- someone who I feel should know better, someone who should know that by and large women from Bryn Mawr are capable, smart, women of integrity- echo the accusations, the stereotypes, and the assumptions I felt I had to challenge my entire four years as an undergraduate. I feel betrayed, Ms. Chu.
You have apologized for your generalizations, and you have explained the feelings from which your article was inspired. But your article did not say “Here are the stereotypes I faced as a student at an all women’s college. Here are the presumed benefits of an all women’s college. I find all these benefits to also be present in my current co-ed college. At my coed college, I am not confronted with negative stereotypes. I experience all of the presumed benefits of an all women’s education, with none of the negative stereotypes while attending my coed college, therefore I believe that single-sex education is counter productive, and I prefer to attend a coed institution”. That would have been fine- heck, some days I might even have agreed with you on that point.
Instead your article stated that going to an all women’s college “means” conforming to all the negative stereotypes you complain about in your current statement. I sympathize with the way that it feels to have your school looked down upon by your peers- and to be looked down upon because of your school. But, seriously Ms. Chu, how does proclaiming these negative, untrue, stereotypes as fact help to ameliorate this situation? Please, next time you decide to write about this issue, think before you publish, because someone as bright as you must be to have been accepted at both Bryn Mawr and Wesleyan (a great school, by the way, one to which I applied and seriously considered going…) you must be able to see how your words have not only failed to make the point you claim to have been aiming for, but also have the power to hurt others in very personal ways.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Molly Pieri, BMC ’09
“I apologize to the University for causing unnecessary animosity between liberal arts institutions.”
There is no animosity between the institutions. Everyone is simply voicing how they feel about you and your article, not Wesleyan as an institution.
“While I should not have generalized beyond my own experiences, these assertions were based on incidents that I witnessed during my time at Bryn Mawr.”
The bathrooms are always flawless. Also, your “incidents” weren’t witnessed, they are your own unique experiences. Everyone knows what you were up to on the weekends. And there is NO shame in that, but don’t act like all BMC women were roaming the tri co on the weekends doing “unmentionable things”.
“We were looked down upon for our lower liberal arts college ranking and mocked for wanting to study at their institutions. ”
Sometimes people make rude comments. It is a fact of life, and is not isolated to the college bubble. Ignore it, and move on.
“However, many of my classmates at the time told me they also felt marginalized by the experience of attending an all-girls school, and I know many who transferred as well.”
Please don’t drag others into this sloppy mess of yours without proving what they said with a direct quote and permission from them. Also, none of your BMC classmates, ASA board mates, or hallmates even speak to you anymore because you managed to alienate / weird out all of them.
“These negative stereotypes do exist and continue to be perpetuated and I condemn them as much as any commenter.”
Ok…but you utilized stereotypes as “evidence” in your article, so you don’t really make any sense. Let’s face it, you just wanted to poke fun at Bryn Mawr because you felt outcast there, because you made enemies there, and because you felt insecure about going there when you really wanted to go to Wellesley. You also, if I remember correctly, used to make fun of the rest of the BMC population as if you were not part of it.
Shame on you Vicky. The article you wrote is terrible. You have no respect for the people you went to school with. In fact, you never really did. The way you acted towards many of your peers was passive aggressive, and at times downright cruel. It’s truly funny how things work out.
Good luck!!! You’re going to need it.
Can we stop it with the innuendos? I’m not defending her in any way, but she did have a boyfriend at the time. And if everyone keeps calling her a slut or whatever, then WE’RE only reinforcing the stereotypes she’s mentioned.
Get your facts right. She only had a boyfriend for the second half of her sophomore year.
Do you realize how catty you sound? You are absolutely reinforcing the stereotypes she talked about right now. You make it seem like everyone’s sexual exploits were everyone else’s business, and that Otherguest12 is stupid to not have memorized them. And that’s beside the point; who cares when she had a boyfriend. You are just implying that it is bad for women to sleep around if they want to, and the fact that women do that to one another is perhaps even worse than when men do it to women. It is bad enough that cruel words from men limit us, why are we limiting each other?
…but you all have got to stop calling each other sluts and whores. It just makes it okay for guys to call you sluts and whores. Who here has ever been called a slut?
Please, please don’t do this. Her article was awful, her assertions unsupported and her stereotyping offensive, but all of this would have been equally bad coming from anyone. Saying things like “everyone knows what you were up to on the weekends” doesn’t help. I don’t care what she got up to on the weekends; I care what she wrote in this article. And a discussion of her romantic life seems well beyond the scope of that.
If you know the writer personally and if that influences your opinion, fine. So be it. But the majority of us don’t, and probably never will – so for this to turn into a debate about her character is unproductive at best (and, in my opinion, pretty inappropriate as well).
I have to agree–slut shaming isn’t helping anyone. The author’s personal character is not of import here. Her opinions were poorly formed and the outcry was warranted. Vitriol is not. I believe that everything that needs to be said about the original article has been said, even on Jezebel. It’s not necessary to bring her personal character under attack, given that everything on the internet lives in perpetuity. And, if you, as a Mawrter, feel so inclined to defame her, you should have the decency to sign your name, according to our Honor Code.
My apologies! that was supposed to be to ‘Guest 2012’ and ‘Anassa Kata’…
I understand the desire to apologize due to the backlash, as once this article went viral it was clear that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. But I do not believe this to be a decent apology. If it was, you would have not continued to have taken jabs at Bryn Mawr throughout the apology.
As a proud Bryn Mawr alum, I know that Bryn Mawr made me who I am today, gave me the best friends I could ever imagine, and helped me learn more than I ever thought I could. I’m sorry it didn’t work out for you and I applaud you for making the effort to go somewhere else to be happy.
I just would still like to know when you saw used tampons on the bathroom floor, as I never experienced that during my four years. I also would like to state that I got the same grades in my Haverford classes as my Bryn Mawr classes, and they never felt harder by any means. Finally, while I did not enjoy when Haverford invaded Haffner for pizza on Sunday, it was by no means only Haverford sports teams that were there. And I never did “unmentionable things aforementioned sports teams”, staying at Bryn Mawr was fine for me.
Omg, word vomit!
Well, why didn’t you just say that in the first place? I’d have been much happier reading this apology instead of the original piece; there are actually some substantive things in there.
OUCH! I hope these comments are getting emailed right to your brand new @wesleyan.edu !
learn something from it.
stephanie young
bryn mawr college ’11
Hi Vicky,
Although I do not want to reiterate what others say in regards to your piece, I really will not accept this as an apology. You claim that your issue with Bryn Mawr was the judgment and stereotyping fellow tri-co members inflicted. Being made to feel inferior for any reason is awful. On a personal level I never experienced that in the tri-college community. I find all three communities welcoming and intellectually stimulating.
My point is that I am not sure you fully understand why we take issue with your piece. By claiming that Bryn Mawr and other women’s colleges are not able to stand alone, do you understand that you perpetuate those stereotypes you experienced as a student? Is that clear? In other words, you impart those same hurtful judgments upon us. We do not appreciate it!
Some write in these comments that because I need to respond, I am somehow insecure in my school’s reputation or that my defense proves your point about Bryn Mawr students. Well, if standing up for myself is such a crime then it proves my point. Bryn Mawr continually teaches me to be a person that takes a stand. I will never allow others’ ridicule to dictate my life, and I will never degrade an entire community to validate my choices.
Although NO college experience mimics the real world, I am about to enter it. I will do so with the confidence and drive Bryn Mawr instilled.
On a side note, I plan my power outfits a week in advance. It matters to me.
Good luck,
M. Murphy ’12
Vicky,
I am sincerely sorry that this was your experience at Bryn Mawr. I hope that you enjoyed your college experience at Wesleyan. Everyone deserves a place to fit in and thrive academically and socially.
Klaudia Gorska
Bryn Mawr 2008
PS I witnessed some of these same things, but the good outweighed the bad for me.
guess what Vicky Chu, being a transfer from a Co-Ed education, I can sit here and bash co-ed institutions just the same. I am proud to tell you that I go to an all women’s college and did NOT wear oversized sweatpants to class this morning. I sure hope you wear a pant suit to class everyday because heaven forbid you get caught “dressing like you came from a women’s college”
ALUMNAE!!! We are pissed off alumnae of womens colleges. We are NOT alumni. The pissed off Wesleyan students (and the many others who found your piece repulsive) would be alumni. Unless some of the alumnae of Wesleyan College (Macon, GA) have also voiced their disgust here along with those of us from Agnes Scott, Spelman, Smith, Wellesley, Mount Holyoke, Bryn Mawr…
I hope you’ll gain from this and other life experiences something even slightly close to what we proud ALUMNAE of womens colleges have over the years. I do, however, sincerely doubt that is possible.
Enjoy, ladies.
http://biconews.haverford.edu/archives/7857-20985-revision-8.html
Another article by Vicky Chu about Bryn Mawr, specficaly transferring out.
I am disgusted. No matter how much people tell her what she did wrong, she will just never get it. That article was published back in 2009, and her writing style has not changed one bit over the span of two years (how do you even do that?).
Wow, I remember reading this article freshman year! Can’t believe she’s still dwelling on transferring out of Bryn Mawr, TWO years after the fact.
Ugh. That apology is the real-world equivalent of this one:
“Alyssa, I’m sorry I called you a gap-toothed bitch. It’s not your fault you’re so gap-toothed.”
(To continue the Mean Girls trope that seems so prevalent here).
In all seriousness, I just hope that this whole debacle will end up being a meaningful “life lesson” for Vicky Chu. Sometime, somehow, everyone fucks up. What really matters is how you confront your mistakes, and what you take away from them.
Argus staff:
As much as Ms. Chu was wrong in her generalizations, you made the decision to run the piece. It is unethical for you to remove it from public access just because the response to the article was so critical. You chose to run it, you should keep it up so that people know what this conversation refers to.
Bryn Mawr ’08
i’m sorry we didn’t like your bloody tampons here.
The plural form of “alum” for a group of women is “alumnae.”
I am sorry stray remarks from naive college kids caused you so much distress during your stay at Bryn Mawr. Somehow I would not think to solve that problem by transferring schools – pick your poison, right? I hope you are able to become more secure and self assured before you enter the world; for surely much harsher epithets will be slung (as they are toward us all) when you hit the pavement. You will need far more than a Wesleyan diploma to protect you from the vagaries of Real Life. The shield I recommend is: a thicker skin.
I cannot believe this is your apology…all I can say is that you should know better. “It’s like, the rules of feminism!” Good luck with the rest of your life!
XOXO
bmc girl
P.S. I know you love this, so I’ll shout it just for you Vicky Chu- Death to the Patriarchy!!!
As a proud Wellesley grad, I can truly say that I am offended by this article. No where else will you find such an engaging community outside of Wellesley. The women here are encouraged every day to follow their dreams, whether to become a nurse, or schoolteacher or even stay at home parent. You should consider yourself lucky that no Wellesley grads hold administrative positions, or else you’d find yourself in trouble!
A lot of my friends among the 7 sisters community did not appreciate this article, and what stereotypes/judgements it placed on our institutions. To continue with the Mean Girls trend, do you Ms. Chu, remember the part where Cady tries to blink and make the fighting girls disappear? Sorry, but just like in that instance, you cannot blink and make this go away. This apology may suffice for you, but it appears to be superficial and shallow like the article itself. Unfortunately this will follow you around for the rest of your life, and all I ask is that you learn from this experience. Actually, could I request an apology for the apology letter you already gave?
Thanks, and also, you forgot that some girls use pads instead of tampons. Oops!
Dear Vicky,
I have an anecdote for you that seems pertinent to your “article”… if we can even call it that.
One night during my sophomore year my friends and I exited my dorm room to find a rolled up panty liner on the floor perfectly equidistant between my door and my friend’s door. Perfectly equidistant. You can imagine, our confusion, horror and then… hysteria. Instead of recoiling in disgust (because let’s face it, who does this on purpose?) my friend and I proceeded to collapse on the floor crying in laughter. How absurd! Our plan of action was to take two rain boots (my friend and I with one each) and wedged it between the toes and booked it down the hallway to throw it away. (The adhesive side of the liner stuck to one of the boots, so we just threw it away temporarily). The whole thing was so ridiculous the only thing to do was to laugh.
This was an isolated incident and most certainly a bizarre mistake and no, I didn’t let it faze me enough to plague my experience at Bryn Mawr.
I tell you this story to show a difference between you and I, Vicky.
Shit gets weird sometimes. You have to laugh.
Choosing a women’s college is the difficult, unpopular decision. We defend it every day. We are confronted with constant ignorance and judgment and frankly, the best thing to do is keep your head up and be confident in your decision.
I’m sorry that such shallow and ridiculous incidents had such an impact on you. I’m sorry that you felt it necessary to bash an entire institution, community and ideology. Your arguments are empty and only prove you to be insecure.
I also see that you wrote a letter for the Bi-Co News about your decision to transfer a few years ago and now again last week. It appears that you have been haunted by this decision for quite some time. I hope you find peace with all of the sad insecurities that are at the bottom of your ignorance and lack of eloquence.
But for now though, learn to laugh. It will make it easier.
“If we do not penalize false statements made in error, we open up the way for false statements by intention. And a false statement of fact, made deliberately, is the most serious crime…” –D.L. Sayers, Gaudy Night
So, when you transferred to Wesleyan, “Did you have an awesome time? Did you drink awesome shooters, listen to awesome music, and then just sit around and soak up each others awesomeness?”
Also, these one liners would have been perfect for an apology if you had just left it at that. Here’s some advice… “I didn’t mean for this to happen!” “And I’m sorry for telling everyone about it.” “And I’m sorry for repeating it now.” “I couldn’t help myself!”
“Hey, how was school?”
“Fine.”
“Were people nice?”
“No.”
“Did you make any friends?”
“Yes.”
INSTEAD you chose this route:
“To find out that everyone hates me? I don’t care!” “I didn’t say anything.”
(source cited- Mean Girls the best movie ever)
For the record, every bathroom at my women’s college was immaculate. Even in the dorms, the worst we ever dealt with was hair left in the showers or blobs of toothpaste in the sink. Which I assume are pretty normal for any bathroom shared by 20+ women. The bathrooms in our classroom buildings were even nicer–possibly the cleanest I’ve ever seen outside of Sweden.
And yet, if I want to see and smell used feminine products that haven’t made it into the trash can, I can point you to a women’s bathroom at my co-ed graduate institution that always stinks of menses, where I saw a rolled-up pad lying behind a toilet seat just last week.
So much for stereotypes…
“The bigger issue for me was how men viewed Bryn Mawr women as a result of our single-sex experience.”
Yup. Sounds like a women’s college is not for you.
But I disagree with the decision to take your article down.
To the Argus:
You are making a mistake by retracting Vicky Chu’s column. You now have 400 comments referring to an article that the public can no longer view. Ms. Chu’s piece, a column clearly designated as an “opinion” piece, served its function perfectly: it stimulated discussion. Some of it has been snarky and unworthy of the school affiliations of the commenters, but much of it has improved understanding across the coed/all-women’s divide. Furthermore, Ms. Chu’s experiences are her own. It is completely valid for her to cite these experiences and anecdotes in defense of her larger point — that she finds the coeducational experience at Wesleyan superior to her experience a all-woman’s Bryn Mawr. These are not improper generalizations — her observations are evidence in support of her views. People are free to disagree with her and offer alternative views of life at women’s schools — and they have. Others have affirmed her views. But, the Argus does a disservice to itself and the community it serves by retracting Ms. Chu’s column. Like a letter to the editor or opinion editorial, it purports only to represent the views of one person based on that person’s experience. Let it stand for itself in the public arena.
Perhaps they fear for Ms. Chu’s safety. Or maybe they’re just worried busloads of ladies from Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, Smith and Mt. H will come throw their bloody tampons all over campus.
Lesson: Never capitulate to feminists. You can see from the comments posted since you published the retraction that the rate and viciousness of the posts has not abated. Capitulating to feminists is like negotiating with Hitler — you can’t win. That is why Rush Limbaugh calls them “femi-nazis”. They smell blood in the water now and each new posts proves Vicky Chu’s point. Who would want to go to school with these people?
Bravo Vicky! Shame on the Argus.
I have to agree, somewhat reluctantly. My sister went to a Seven Sister and I usually stick up for them as a group. But, is it my imagination, or does it seem incredibly easy to become a social washout at Bryn Mawr?
Let’s see, Hillary Clinton is the US Secretary of State and Rush Limbaugh is some fat drug addict who spouts hate on the radio. H.m.m.m.
I know who I want in my corner in a crisis.
Dude, don’t compare anyone to a Nazi. It is not an argument and in doing so, you stomp on the deaths of millions. Not acceptable.
From your explanation here, it would seem that you were unhappy with the way people outside of Bryn Mawr treated you. Now more than a year later, you still seem to need to revisit the issue and attack not the perpetrators but Bryn Mawr.
Has Wesleyan given you nothing deeper to think about? I find that hard to believe.
You turned a page in your life but it appears you need to return and reconfirm, “yes, I did the right thing and for all of these reasons.”
Something is haunting you, Miss Chu, and it sound an awful lot like “buyers remorse.”