It took only five minutes of debate for the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life (CHUL) to decide that its predecessors had made a mistake, and in a unanimous vote Wednesday, CHUL rescinded the recommendation made last month that specific House sex ratios be eliminated.

In January CHUL's decision was designed to end the enforced one-to-one ratios in the three Radcliffe Houses--and this week's reversal came about largely through the efforts of Radcliffe residents, who have been vociferously protesting last month's vote for the past three weeks.

The original vote had hardly been very conclusive: The motion to end House sex ratios passed by only two votes, and Dean Rosovsky, the man who decides whether to implement CHUL recommendations, said he was disappointed at the "clear-cut lines drawn at the meeting between representatives from Harvard and representatives from Radcliffe."

For the next three weeks, there were constant protests against the vote--from Radcliffe residents, Radcliffe CHUL representatives, Radcliffe freshmen and the Freshman Council,among others.

And a group of women living at Radcliffe circulated a petition at registration and afterward calling for a one-to-one Harvard admissions policy. The petition, which drew 1770 signatures, had no direct bearing on House sex ratios, but it was prompted by the concern about one-to-one that the CHUL vote raised.

The petition was on the agenda for discussion at this week's CHUL meeting, but the CHUL did not have time to discuss; it will be the first item on the agenda at next month's meeting.

But the problem that prompted both the January and February CHUL votes still remains: Most students at Harvard and Radcliffe want to live in Houses that have sex ratios as close to one-to-one as possible. And as long as Harvard continues to have unequal admissions policies, the CHUL will never be able to resolve the problem of ratios to everyone's satisfaction.