> > Wait, aren't these the same women who protest like hell when certain clubs/schools/whatever try to keep women out? What's the deal here? It's ok to have all-women colleges but wrong to exclude women from certain colleges?
> >
> > I don't get it.
>
> I'm sure to get flamed for this, but...
> That's feminism for you.
> We've had debates about the same thing in Finland too. For feminists equality means rights for women and obligations for men.

No, you mean, "That's extremism for you." Feminism is just another admirable ideology that can be and has been turned into an entirely different beast by those who take its goals too far. It happens to the best of them, and there are still plenty out there who believe in the more realistic ideals -- the existence of the extreme doesn't mean that being a feminist (or any other descriptive term) necessarily implies that extreme.

Anyway, the article had quotes from people complaining about the general atmosphere in the school -- a feeling of safety, more or less, which isn't such a bad thing.

Now, the complaints about all-men colleges (not present in this article, I don't think) are a whole different matter. Double standards are fair game for criticism. :) Can't refuse one if you want the other... I'm sure a lot of men would feel more comfortable being able to focus more on studies than on relationships. Not all, but enough to fill a college, certainly. And that's not a bad thing either.

And all this fails to take into account that a lack of the presence of the opposite sex doesn't necessarily mean a lack of sexual tension. And, of course, sexual tension doesn't have to describe all of it, either -- sometimes a girl just wants to be able to run around her "home" in her PJs without any random guys out there seeing.

Ria