Orient – Page 5 – Forty Years: The History of Women at Bowdoin

Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

Shortly after the arrival of women at Bowdoin, the question of coed housing arose, and this collection of reports and an Orient (Bowdoin’s student newspaper) article documents the process of addressing the issue. In the book Going Coed, Susan L. Poulson notes that sexual segregation “on the eve of coeducation” was extremely prevalent on college campuses, including in housing (227), and Bowdoin was certainly addressing this issue of coeducational housing. The College was only a couple of years behind Harvard, whose housing became coed in 1970, and Rutgers and Georgetown, which had introduced coed housing even earlier, in the 1960s.

As demonstrated by the Student Life Committee’s Report from November 3, 1971 (Document EN, 24.1), Bowdoin was grappling with the concept of coeducational housing within just months of the arrival of matriculating women students at the college. The committee suggests three guidelines: all students can choose between coed and single sex housing, but the College does not guarantee that those students requesting coed housing will be assigned to it; dormitories will be coed by alternating floors, but due to the ratio of men to women at the college, there will likely be three floors of men to each floor of women; first-year students can request coeducational housing, but their parents will be notified.

The student newspaper was quick to pick up on this report and also quick to criticize the second guideline regarding coeducational housing by alternate floors in an article entitled “New Coed Housing Plan: Sexes Remain Separated” from November 15, 1971 (Document EN, 24.2). Despite these criticisms, nearly a year and a half later, in March of 1973, the “Student Housing” section of another Student Life Committee Report (Document EN, 24.3) notes that coed housing had been successfully implemented, that the “vast majority” of the class of 1976 had requested it, and that there was less damage in coed dormitories. The Pierce Report of 1969, which had recommended coeducation for Bowdoin, declares that “women would undoubtedly have a ‘civilizing’ effect” at Bowdoin (31-32), but this 1974 report speculates that the decreased damage is the result, not of women having a “taming influence” on men, but of students in coed housing seeing each other “as more of a family” and the building “as more of a home.”

EN24.1 Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

EN24.2a Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

EN24.2b Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

EN24.3a Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

EN24.3b Coeducational Housing Arrives at Bowdoin

Orient Poll on Coeducation

At the beginning of the second semester of the first academic year of official coeducation at Bowdoin, the college newspaper ran a poll to find out what students and professors were thinking about the new student body at Bowdoin. The poll results (Document EN 25.1), published in the Orient on February 4, 1972, paint a mixed picture of coeducation in its first semester. Although the poll results included a number of outright sexist responses to coeducation and to Bowdoin women, the actual poll numbers show that for the most part, students and professors supported coeducation and that the issues they took with it could be remedied.

In response to criticisms that the article providing the poll results focused too much on negative comments, an article was published in the following week’s Orient issue, on February 11, 1972, giving several examples of positive comments among the poll results (Document EN 25.2). As the author states, these comments are “based upon the assumption that coeducation is desirable and feasible.”

Similarly, two student-written letters to the editor of the Orient also from February 11, 1972 (Document EN 25.3) suggest that coeducation is a worthwhile endeavor for Bowdoin. The letters provide thoughtful reflections not just on the poll, but also on the situation of coeducation at Bowdoin. If the poll is discouraging, these letters and the February 11 article help show that, in fact, coeducation did have support and that at least some students saw it as an important improvement on the College.

Women’s Healthcare and Birth Control

Represented here are four interesting documents that all have to do with the issue of women’s health, in particular access to birth control and gynecological exams. First, a memorandum from the Ad Hoc Committee of Coeducation in 1972 addressed the fact that Bowdoin’s infirmary and counseling facilities were not equipped to deal with women’s issues (Document AK, 26.1). Moreover, the college had at this point failed to fulfill promises that women could obtain gynecological exams from the health center.

Following this discussion, the “Bowdoin Women’s Proposal on Gynecological Service” in May 1974 noted how surprising it was that Bowdoin did not have a more comprehensive health policy designed for women (Document AK, 26.2). These women claimed first that the few available health services were inadequate and male-oriented, and second, that the services were actually negligent, resulting in the misdiagnosis and failure to treat numerous gynecological problems. The women sensed a general reluctance from the infirmary staff to deal with the issue of birth control “because of their own traditional or moral values.” This “hesitancy,” they declared, was dangerous and unacceptable, and they demanded more and better health services for women. A letter from “Concerned Black Women” threw support behind this initial women’s claim, stating, “As black women, we would like to give our support to the womens group seeking to secure adequate health care for women on campus” (Document AK, 26.3).

Furthermore, a 1971 Orient article written by Jo Dondis exposed the fact that the college had no policy whatsoever with regard to birth control (Document AK, 26.4). Although in all of these cases the infirmary seemed willing to accommodate women on paper, in practice they did not deal effectively with the admission of women to the college and the special health needs this would bring. As a result, many women sought out or were referred to local clinics and gynecologists unaffiliated with Bowdoin. While this may have been adequate for some and even sanctioned by the college for others, it put an unfair strain on local clinics, as these women pointed out, and contributed to an overall sense that women did not exercise full citizenship in the Bowdoin community.

AK26.1a - Ad Hoc Committee on Women's Health Services

AK26.1b - Ad Hoc Committee on Women's Health Services

AK26.2a - Bowdoin Women’s Proposal on Gynecological Service

AK26.2b - Bowdoin Women’s Proposal on Gynecological Service