Why are most of the colleges I'm finding for my college formerly all women's schools?

As a very proud graduate of a women's college, I have to admit that there's something about this question that kind of icks me out, but I realize that's all me and not you, so here's my best shot at an answer. Are small formerly all-male east coast liberal arts colleges more selective than small formerly all-female east coast liberal arts colleges? Think about stigma. There was a lot of prestige (and difficulty, to be sure), in being the first woman to enter a formerly all-male institution. Women's colleges were founded to provide educational opportunities to women that were not otherwise available. Men had plenty of other options. Many women's colleges were perceived (rightly or wrongly) as white-glove finishing schools, and far less academically rigorous. Because of that, there was long considered to be something "off" about the men who chose to make them co-ed institutions. Thus, the gender balance has remained tipped towards women much longer. It is easier for men to gain admission to colleges that are largely skewed towards female students. Thus Vassar is considered to be more competitive than the others, because Vassar is closer to 50-50 male-female than the others. Vassar is also simply a more prestigious school than Goucher or Connecticut College, which are essentially unknown outside of the northeast.

I would add to cranberry_nut's advice that ALL universities are what you make of them. I started school at Emerson, a small liberal arts school with individual attention and tiny classes which specialized in my particular interests. I hated it there, partially because I didn't do a great job of realizing I needed to be proactive about making my own social life and developing my own interests. Then I transferred to a CUNY school, Hunter College, which is the sort of school I never in a million years would have considered my first go-round as a high school junior/senior. It's a huge and very impersonal school in the middle of Manhattan, with a reputation as a commuter school. This time, I was more on the ball about making my own college experience, and the difference was dramatic. I moved into the dorm, met a bunch of people (many of whom are still my friends years later), got involved in my academic department and in campus politics, fell in love, made art, questioned everything - basically had that classic "finding yourself" college experience that we associate with liberal arts schools. And I have no debt, since (5+ years ago) Hunter's tuition cost less than the parochial elementary school I attended. None of this is to say that your son should be looking at different colleges - but I really don't think you realize how much of all this is going to depend on HIM, not the school itself. And less on you and your involvement with this process.

I know one person who went to Drew, a gay dude who is currently 100k in the hole from his attendance there. I don't think sexuality has anything to do with a school's history as a woman's college, or a Methodist college, or whatever. Is there a reason you're not looking at the SUNYs? Many of them are great schools, and freedom from debt will give you son lots of options (or, help you save for retirement).

Many of these schools have a lot of trouble maintaining gender balance. They generally shoot for 50/50 male/female in their incoming classes, but lots of liberal arts colleges (especially those which used to be all women) are attracting far more very strong female applicants. (There are some speculative explanations for this floating around). This means that these colleges give male applicants a boost, compared to female applicants with the same general profile/scores. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/11/02/admit. Is it possible that your son's scores make him a strong applicant for these schools that are trying to improve their gender balance, but not for schools where male applicants don't get this "boost"? Basically, he can get into a higher-ranked school than he otherwise would if it is a school that needs more men in its incoming class.

For music and liberal arts, this very proud first-gen high school grad and women's college grad says SUNY Binghamton (small once you drill down), SUNY Oneonta (small), Hartwick (small), or SUNY Potsdam (small).

I would think that, speaking as a straight man myself, getting a boost on my resume to a prestigious liberal arts college, especially one with lots of smart women, would be a good thing. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Also, I grew up next to Skidmore College and I know a few alumni. I didn't realize until today that it was once a women's college, about 40 years ago.

Your son probably wants to go to Kenyon.

But, back to statistics... maybe when I go to these websites and I am of course saying "male" this is automatically increasing his chances at e.g. Sarah Lawrence? Because these schools are still (after 40 years or so) looking for men who will not feel that residue of stigma? I think that's how it started out, absolutely. However, I think now the effect is coming from the desire for gender balance within the student body that cushie points out. Which is generally about socializing and dating. Women who are interested in co-ed institutions want fairly even gender ratios, as do the males. Women have, generally, more competitive applications at these types of schools these days, which, oddly, makes it easier for men to get in when the school is trying to maintain gender ratios. Also, there's just the simple fact that much of what is female-dominated is also devalued in much of US culture, and this affects college admission rates as well. Your son's reaction to the fact that these schools all talk about being founded as women's colleges speaks, even ever so mildly as noticing and wondering why they'd bother to mention it, to the devaluing of that history. I mean, geez, every college goes on and on about their history as though it were the most auspicious of all collegiate histories in the annals of time. It's what recruitment tours do. But who would think to comment on the fact that Williams mentions it started out as a men's school? There's nothing transgressive there, nothing to catch one's attention. Additionally, I think that a lot of those schools point out that they were founded as women's colleges because it shows a serious dedication to education. These are schools that are so devoted to the principles of liberal education that they were founded to extend that education even to women in a time when women's education wasn't valued. It's a history to be proud of.

"As if, who but a gay man would want to go to a girls' school??" Why would a gay man want to go to a girls' school? I can see why a straight man would be all over it, though. :)