As with housing, women were eager to gainaccess to Harvard's resources--and while most menwelcomed coeducation, they were reluctant to sharetraditional privileges.
By far the most emotional issue in thiscomplicated argument was that of admissions. WouldHarvard have to decrease its number of maleundergraduates in order to admit more women into acoeducational college?
Male enrollment was at 4,800 in 1970. That wasfour times the number of women at Radcliffe. Inorder to achieve equality of numbers withoutcutting the number of men at Harvard,Harvard-Radcliffe College would have to beexpanded to admit 3,600 more women.
The other alternative was to cut maleenrollment by 1,800--a possibility which Pusey andmany faculty members angrily protested and opposedon grounds ranging from tradition to diversity.
In 1969, the National Organization for Women(NOW) met with Pusey to demand increased femaleenrollment.
In a now infamous story, Pusey reportedly saidthat in order to do that, Harvard would have tocut down on the number of qualified people itadmitted. One woman spoke up.
"Qualified men, you mean," she corrected Pusey.
"Yes--qualified people," said Pusey.
Chase N. Peterson '52, then dean of admissionsand financial aid, was another powerful figurevehemently opposed to the increased admission ofwomen. In a written report on the impact of themerger upon admissions, he declared that decreasedenrollment of men would-eliminate rather thanfoster cultural and ethnic diversity.
"Each group within the college requires acertain critical mass to allow it to fit withreasonable comfort," Peterson declared. "For thisreason a smaller male enrollment might force us toeliminate a number of such distinctive groupsentirely when their numbers fell below a tolerancethreshold."
"Reduced admissions of men," he continued,"would force us into less diversity at a time whenwe are being asked for more."
Peterson added his perception that merging thecolleges would make the admissions process socompetitive that "even superior applicants in thefuture will be discouraged from applying" and theCollege would not be properly able to accommodatesons of alumni.
But Bunting ultimately had the last word. Shepresciently emphasized equal conditions for womenbefore equal numbers. "Our principal job right nowis to fix this place up for the women whoare here," she said. So the colleges weremerged, with numerical gender equity todayremaining a so-far elusive goal.