<p>I realize that this thread is a few weeks old, but as a current Wellesley student I feel the need to comment because the comments here are so incredibly negative and I believe, unfair, against Wellesley and Wellesley students, in many ways. </p>
<p>1) The notion that all Wellesley students are “upper class, white, wealthy and of course, legacies”. This statement is slightly ridiculous. According to Princeton Review, about 60% of Wellesley students are on financial aid and 60% of MHC students are on financial aid. According to Princeton Review, 47% of Wellesley students are white, 26% are Asian, 7% Hispanic, and 6% are African-American. Also according to Princeton Review, 52% of MHC students are white, 11% are Asian, 6% are Hispanic, and 4% are African-American. Even allowing for those students who did not report their race, Wellesley compares well to Mount Holyoke in terms of ethnic diversity. A quick search has not turned up the percentage of students at Wellesley who are legacies, but of the few I know, I can give you every assurance that they are every bit as intelligent and deserving of their spot as any other Wellesley student. I am sure that there are some who are not, but I am every bit as sure that you could find those students at MHC as well. Furthermore, the extrapolation that Diplomat makes from attending apparently one class that was not to her liking to claiming that “most” Wellesley women showed a high level of immaturity and intolerance is incredibly offensive. Of course I don’t know what happened in that class, and I won’t be so foolish to claim that those students might not have been immature and intolerant, but neither I nor any of my friends exhibits said immaturity and intolerance, and I don’t think that a majority of Wellesley students do, either. I also do not think it is fair to judge an entire student body from one class. </p>
<p>2) The rejection of frazzledmaybe and Scholarfeminists have been bandied about as proof of how awful, short-sighted, and bigoted Wellesley is, when it actuality, it seems from reading both this and the Wellesley board that both were rejected for simply not meeting Wellesley’s requirements for transfer admission, which is that only incoming Sophomore and Junior students can apply (students who have at least 2 years left to complete on their degree). frazzledmaybe argues that Wellesley is the lesser school because it is illogically will not “look past bureaucratic boxes”. She is certainly entitled to her opinion; many people would argue that it is illogical in this day and age to maintain an all-women’s student body but the Wellesley College administration disagrees with this and refuses to accept any number of truly spectacular male applicants with stories to rival any on this board because of their status as male. Again, a person may disagree with the policy not to accept students with more than 2 years of college credit just as a person may disagree with the policy not to accept male students, but the fact that Wellesley maintains both policies is not proof that Wellesley does not value diversity or only admits privileged applicants. I believe–as an actual student at Wellesley–that neither is true, and the statistics back up my assertion at least at the most basic level.</p>
<p>Additionally, I would note that this requirement is enumerated in the first paragraph on the first page pertaining to transfer admissions on the Wellesley College website, a page that is not particularly difficult to find. I agree that Wellesley erred if it did not make this requirement known to you, if that is indeed what happened, but the information is readily available and mistakes are possible anywhere. That doesn’t excuse Wellesley for making a mistake, but again, it is not indication of Wellesley’s total lack of character as an institution. You are upset that Wellesley and Smith disagreed with your assertion that you still had two years left on your degree, but they both did still disagree. Having only taken community college classes and/or having only taking 100 and 200 level classes does not prove that you were only a rising Junior, as one could be a rising Senior at Wellesley who has not taken any 300 level courses and can still be on track to graduate on time. I can understand that this was upsetting to you, but it does not prove that Wellesley or Smith’s are lesser schools than Mount Holyoke–only that they have stricter transfer rules. </p>
<p>As to the notion of whether or not Wellesley wants “real” diversity: in my one year so far at Wellesley, there have been numerous forums for discussions of all kinds of diversity in which members of all communities are welcome. Wellesley isn’t perfect; no one worth listening to would claim otherwise. I know very little of Mount Holyoke, besides the bare facts, but I would guess that it, like any other school, has its fair share of people who are neither as open nor as tolerant as others would like. This is not me trying to bash Mount Holyoke, or claim that Wellesley is “better” than it in some subjective way, but to simply point out that anecdotal evidence and a few bad experiences are not enough reason to throw <em>any</em> school away or claim that <em>any</em> student body is as a whole intolerant or unaccepting of diversity. Unfortunately there are intolerant people everywhere and although it is true that there are some at Wellesley, I can assure anyone reading this board that these students are not coddled or wordlessly accepted without challenge, and that most Wellesley students do value real diversity.</p>