End-Runs
So, the Dean of Admissions at Bryn Mawr (whose name and email can probably be found publicly, but I won't post right here) wrote back to me. She is probably pretty busy, so I appreciate that it took less than a month for her to reply. (I still haven't heard back from Smith's group, which isn't surprising, as I now realize they are almost all in finals or on vacation).
Some good news: BMC, based on the Transgender Task Force recommendations, apparently already planned on making a public website that "[articulates] just these policies and practices [ie, those regarding transgendered students and admissions]. [...] You will be pleased to know that the new Dean of the Undergraduate College has reviewed the Task Force recommendations, and has made this website a priority for the coming summer."
Conclusion #1: Yay. This is necessary. It's both good practice and good news they will be articulating their stance in public. It's possible such a public articulation wasn't necessary in 2000 (I wouldn't bet on it), but it's probably only going to become more necessary as the century goes on, which can only be a good thing. If I'd waited another six months, there would probably have been a website actually talking about some of this stuff, in public. That's a good thing.
Another good thing: The Dean has said she will forward my info and my desire to help out to the people who are already involved in dealing with these issues.
Conclusion #2: It looks like it's too late to get in on the ground floor of Transgender Task Force stuff for me, but it looks like there's an elevator going up, and there is still Useful Stuff Being Decided and Done.
A third good thing: "How an individual self identifies in terms of gender, or any changes in self-identification while a student is enrolled here are personal matters and not something the College tracks. As I hope you experienced, our students tend to be exceptionally accepting of each others' differences and we in the administration try to create as healthy and supportive an environment as we can for all our students."
Conclusion #3: Possibly, it's silly to list this as a good thing, because honestly it's a pretty basic expectation of human dignity, but not all colleges do this, so I'm going to give them props (although, apparently, if you self-identify as kinky while at the college, individual classes of alumni may not feel bound by creating 'as healthy and supportive an environment' as they can... ;P)
...But here's what I consider to be a grammatical end-run around the actual question I asked: "Bryn Mawr's admissions policy as a women's college is to admit female students only. If it is not clear that an applicant to the College is female, we would approach the situation on an individual basis to gain a better understanding of the student's circumstances. However, our policy to admit female students only would not change."
Conclusion: I was an English major, so I'm already inclined to parse sentences for minutae; and everyone I know from college, including myself, learned how to be a better critical thinker there even if they were already decent when they came in. If they didn't think I could see that they elegantly sidestepped my question, or hoped I wouldn't ask about it...well, let's just say that I hope they expected this line of detailed questioning from one of their own alumna. They should have especially expected it from an alum who has multiple kinds of personal investment in the cause of the college and gender equity, and actively wants to donate her precious time to both causes, and so is going to make darn sure those causes are actually going to be advanced before committing a lot of time to advancing them.
If they didn't expect such a pointed reply (perhaps they were hoping I'd accept the studied phrasings and implications of the sentences in the letter, from which arise answers of an almost elegant incompleteness), that's a shame.
Frankly, I expected it to be a blanket "no way, we don't admit MTF students," so I am pretty psyched that there is the possibility that BMC and its admissions office might instead choose to deal with similar situations on a case-by-case basis. However, the answer given obviously and almost totally sidesteps the question at hand: if your "policy is to admit female students only," how do you define "female," and make that decision on a case-by-case basis? For that matter, how do you decide if "it is not clear" that some individual applicant to the college may or may not "be female?"
I would *love* to see a driven young transgender woman just get admitted and study and graduate without anyone ever noticing or caring; it would be fantastic (and also fantastically fraught, though for all I know somebody's already done it, and I just haven't heard about it). See also: “Well, if I have no way of telling, the person wouldn’t be in violation...I mean, if you can’t tell, what’s the difference?"
Words aren't always the same thing as answers.
This is the email that I wrote in reply.
Hello there, [name]! Thank you so much for writing back to clarify. I am happy to hear that the Transgender Task Force's recommendations will be reviewed and updated on the website this summer! If there is any way that I can help the Transgender Task Force or the admissions office or indeed anyone involved with making these kinds of recommendations or decisions, now or in the future, I would be thrilled to help out. Please definitely let me know if I can be of assistance; you can email me at the below address or, if you like, call: [number].
In trying to understand your answer regarding Bryn Mawr's admissions policy on admitting "female students only," I am still running up against the fact that it is not clear to me how Bryn Mawr's admissions office defines "female students" (as obviously, there are many understandings of femininity, possibly as many as there are individual human beings). I very much appreciate the fact that in cases where a potential student's gender identity is in question, admissions deals with that applicant's admission on a case-by-case basis.
However, in the case of MTF transgender applicants, would such a clarification process would revolve around the potential student's pre-existing social/personal identity as a woman, such that MTF transgender applicants might be accepted to Bryn Mawr on a case-by-case basis? Or does "our policy to admit female students only" mean that such potential students would be denied application?
In short, does the definition of "female student" that Bryn Mawr and the BMC admissions office use include MTF transgender applicants by virtue of those applicants' personal and cultural understanding of themselves as women? Or does Bryn Mawr's definition of "female student" in use during the admissions process automatically exclude MTF transgender applicants, by virtue of the fact that such applicants possessed (or may still possess) male sex organs, and perhaps were originally socialized as men?
Or are such things decided strictly on a case-by-case basis?
Thanks so much! I hope to hear back from you soon.
Sincerely,
[Eredien] (BMC '04)
[email]
Some good news: BMC, based on the Transgender Task Force recommendations, apparently already planned on making a public website that "[articulates] just these policies and practices [ie, those regarding transgendered students and admissions]. [...] You will be pleased to know that the new Dean of the Undergraduate College has reviewed the Task Force recommendations, and has made this website a priority for the coming summer."
Conclusion #1: Yay. This is necessary. It's both good practice and good news they will be articulating their stance in public. It's possible such a public articulation wasn't necessary in 2000 (I wouldn't bet on it), but it's probably only going to become more necessary as the century goes on, which can only be a good thing. If I'd waited another six months, there would probably have been a website actually talking about some of this stuff, in public. That's a good thing.
Another good thing: The Dean has said she will forward my info and my desire to help out to the people who are already involved in dealing with these issues.
Conclusion #2: It looks like it's too late to get in on the ground floor of Transgender Task Force stuff for me, but it looks like there's an elevator going up, and there is still Useful Stuff Being Decided and Done.
A third good thing: "How an individual self identifies in terms of gender, or any changes in self-identification while a student is enrolled here are personal matters and not something the College tracks. As I hope you experienced, our students tend to be exceptionally accepting of each others' differences and we in the administration try to create as healthy and supportive an environment as we can for all our students."
Conclusion #3: Possibly, it's silly to list this as a good thing, because honestly it's a pretty basic expectation of human dignity, but not all colleges do this, so I'm going to give them props (although, apparently, if you self-identify as kinky while at the college, individual classes of alumni may not feel bound by creating 'as healthy and supportive an environment' as they can... ;P)
...But here's what I consider to be a grammatical end-run around the actual question I asked: "Bryn Mawr's admissions policy as a women's college is to admit female students only. If it is not clear that an applicant to the College is female, we would approach the situation on an individual basis to gain a better understanding of the student's circumstances. However, our policy to admit female students only would not change."
Conclusion: I was an English major, so I'm already inclined to parse sentences for minutae; and everyone I know from college, including myself, learned how to be a better critical thinker there even if they were already decent when they came in. If they didn't think I could see that they elegantly sidestepped my question, or hoped I wouldn't ask about it...well, let's just say that I hope they expected this line of detailed questioning from one of their own alumna. They should have especially expected it from an alum who has multiple kinds of personal investment in the cause of the college and gender equity, and actively wants to donate her precious time to both causes, and so is going to make darn sure those causes are actually going to be advanced before committing a lot of time to advancing them.
If they didn't expect such a pointed reply (perhaps they were hoping I'd accept the studied phrasings and implications of the sentences in the letter, from which arise answers of an almost elegant incompleteness), that's a shame.
Frankly, I expected it to be a blanket "no way, we don't admit MTF students," so I am pretty psyched that there is the possibility that BMC and its admissions office might instead choose to deal with similar situations on a case-by-case basis. However, the answer given obviously and almost totally sidesteps the question at hand: if your "policy is to admit female students only," how do you define "female," and make that decision on a case-by-case basis? For that matter, how do you decide if "it is not clear" that some individual applicant to the college may or may not "be female?"
I would *love* to see a driven young transgender woman just get admitted and study and graduate without anyone ever noticing or caring; it would be fantastic (and also fantastically fraught, though for all I know somebody's already done it, and I just haven't heard about it). See also: “Well, if I have no way of telling, the person wouldn’t be in violation...I mean, if you can’t tell, what’s the difference?"
Words aren't always the same thing as answers.
This is the email that I wrote in reply.
Hello there, [name]! Thank you so much for writing back to clarify. I am happy to hear that the Transgender Task Force's recommendations will be reviewed and updated on the website this summer! If there is any way that I can help the Transgender Task Force or the admissions office or indeed anyone involved with making these kinds of recommendations or decisions, now or in the future, I would be thrilled to help out. Please definitely let me know if I can be of assistance; you can email me at the below address or, if you like, call: [number].
In trying to understand your answer regarding Bryn Mawr's admissions policy on admitting "female students only," I am still running up against the fact that it is not clear to me how Bryn Mawr's admissions office defines "female students" (as obviously, there are many understandings of femininity, possibly as many as there are individual human beings). I very much appreciate the fact that in cases where a potential student's gender identity is in question, admissions deals with that applicant's admission on a case-by-case basis.
However, in the case of MTF transgender applicants, would such a clarification process would revolve around the potential student's pre-existing social/personal identity as a woman, such that MTF transgender applicants might be accepted to Bryn Mawr on a case-by-case basis? Or does "our policy to admit female students only" mean that such potential students would be denied application?
In short, does the definition of "female student" that Bryn Mawr and the BMC admissions office use include MTF transgender applicants by virtue of those applicants' personal and cultural understanding of themselves as women? Or does Bryn Mawr's definition of "female student" in use during the admissions process automatically exclude MTF transgender applicants, by virtue of the fact that such applicants possessed (or may still possess) male sex organs, and perhaps were originally socialized as men?
Or are such things decided strictly on a case-by-case basis?
Thanks so much! I hope to hear back from you soon.
Sincerely,
[Eredien] (BMC '04)
[email]