<p>Iglooo… do you know what confirmation bias is? You have admitted to having a “prejudice” against women’s colleges --and throughout this thread you seem to be twisting various comments of posters to mean something very different, often the opposite, of what was said. I’m thinking the only explanation is that you are distorting comments through the lens of your own bias.</p>
<p>Examples: </p>
<p>Monydad mentioned something about the bus that takes women from Wellesley to frat parties at MIT … you seemed surprised that there was a bus for the girls. (If you looked at a map you’d see that it is too far to walk – Wellesley is 16 miles from Cambridge; the reason there is a shuttle is that Wellesley students also have cross-registration privileges at MIT, so its important to provide transportation between the two campuses).</p>
<p>I pointed out that guys who want to meet Barnard girls are more likely interested in forming relationships than in casual sex (I don’t see why “feminism” needs to go hand in hand with male-bashing) – that whatever their fantasies about finding a gorgeous woman, they are mostly looking for girlfriends who would be attentive and affectionate. For reasons I still can’t fathom, you took issue with that. (I don’t understand why. Both my kids are heterosexual and both were equally interested in meeting and dating people of the opposite sex during their high school & college years). </p>
<p>Mythmom pointed out that Barnard was ahead of the curve in abolishing dorm curfews and other restrictions of women, back in the 1960’s, well ahead of most other colleges – and you said that “solidified” your prejudice. Again… I’m at a loss to see why. </p>
<p>I’d think you were here just ■■■■■■■■ for a fight, except that is not consistent with your other posts on CC, where you come across as a sensitive and caring person. So I can only conclude that your bias has taken hold so firmly that you are having a hard time getting the point of anyone’s comments. </p>
<p>The corollary to confirmation bias is cognitive dissonance – when information is so contrary to your preconceived notions that you can’t make sense of it. I’m thinking that must be what is going on. </p>
<p>The point those of us who have experience with Barnard are trying to make is that it is not a sex-segregated institution and there is not a sexist atmosphere on the Columbia campus, nor any sort of overwhelming attitude or bias expressed by Columbian’s towards Barnard students. It is very common for large universities to have multiple undergraduate colleges with somewhat different individual cultures and goals. In this case, it happens that Barnard has also maintained its historical status as a women’s college. In this respect the dynamic at Barnard may be similar to the dynamic of Scripps (of the Claremont Colleges). </p>
<p>I think from your posts that you have some mistaken assumptions of what a women’s college must be like. </p>
<p>I’d reiterate that my daughter chose Barnard for reasons other than its single-sex environment. She wanted to study in a co-ed environment, and in fact she did because that is what Barnard actually provides as a practical matter. I think she was like a lot of other Barnard applicants, very grateful to have the opportunity to attend a Manhattan-based LAC that is integrated with a large research university, so that she got the personalized, undergraduate-focused education that is typical of a LAC simultaneously with the resources of the large university. That the school happened to be women only was just something that worked to my daughter’s advantage in admissions.</p>