It’s not easy being a woman at Harvard. By and large, many female undergraduates express frustration with what they consider to be a male-dominated Faculty, a male-dominated social scene and an overall male-dominated atmosphere that this institution seems to perpetuate. If anything can be interpreted from the deluge of female-focused groups on campus, it is that many, many students are sorely aware of this problem and are actively trying to do something about it. The Radcliffe Union of Students (RUS) recently called for the conversion of part of Hilles Library into an on-campus women’s center—a resource they hope many female groups at Harvard could share. But it is going to take a lot more than a room in a concrete building to help these organizations come together.

When it comes to advancing women’s issues on campus, Harvard is certainly not lacking approaches. A quick perusal of campus groups’ websites suggests that while the organizations cater to different subgroups, they share the same ultimate concerns. For the more assertive feminists among us, there’s RUS which is “focused on women’s issues on campus” and “seek(s) to strengthen women’s community and to improve women’s experience.” With an almost identical vision, the more membership-exclusive Seneca lists among its goals “providing community opportunities for the campus” and “promoting awareness of issues that affect women.” Likewise, the more professionally focused Harvard-Radcliffe Women’s Leadership Project aims to “reinforce the undergraduate experience of Harvard women students,” “promote women’s participation in leadership roles at Harvard and beyond” and “increase visibility of women’s issues at Harvard.”

Beyond these general female-focused organizations, other groups have catered to more specific niches within the Harvard population. The Association of Black Harvard Women (ABHW), Latinas Unidas and the Hillel’s Women’s Group all aim to foster a similar community specifically for women who identify with a particular ethnic/religious group. A scarcity of roles for women in theater prompted a few undergraduates to form the Athena Theater Company, the Coalition Against Sexual Violence was founded in 1998 to increase Harvard’s existing education and resources regarding sexual assault, and Girlspot was created in 1995 to function as an open forum to voice concerns of queer women at Harvard. At the academic level, Women in Economics and Government, Harvard Undergraduate Women in Business, Women in Science at Harvard-Radcliffe and Women in Philosophy are all dedicated to making their fields more accommodating for female students.

With their own unique focus and approach, each group has helped to tackle this larger concern of making Harvard a better place for women. But while all these efforts are extremely well-intentioned, the diffusion of these various approaches risks undermining the united effort. Campus resources—and potential female members—have become separated amongst the different groups. Their division obscures the larger focus that all these groups share.

As these organizations compete for the attention of female undergraduates, time constraints often make it impossible for a student to commit to more than one effort. As a result, while amazing events and opportunites allow women to thrive on campus, many females are too focused on the efforts of their own group to utilize the opportunities offered by other organizations. As former ABHW president Allana N. Jackson ’03 explained to The Crimson last year, “sometimes black women or minority women in general feel like they are asked to make a choice between being a feminist and having group loyalty to their ethnicity or racial group.” And women who chose to dedicate to specialized focuses might miss out on the activities of other groups as well. The members of Women in Business could have certainly benefited from an involvement in the “Women in Power” conference that the Seneca held last fall.

So as these groups all strive to improve the lives of women on campus, the niceties of their missions risk undermining the common goal. And when topics like creating a women’s center—an issue all these groups care about—comes up, Harvard women lack one united voice which can take on the administration. While many groups have worked together in the past, the relationships are still tenuous and underutilized. An official, united front would be much stronger.

If all of Harvard’s concerned females were joined under one umbrella organization, they could certainly be more effective. Communication and resource sharing between the groups would be easier and more efficient, and as a political tactic, one united voice certainly has more power to bend the ear of the administration than many factious ones.

Of course I do not mean to undermine the significance and individuality of the various groups on campus. And I am not suggesting that they should be dissolved and replaced by one omnibus organization. But the current defocused array of subgroups divides our efforts and our women power. And until all these groups are able to at least identify with one larger organization with an all encompassing mission, we will never see the changes that we have all aspired to achieve on our own.

Lia C. Larson ’05 is an economics con-centrator in Adams House. Her column appears on alternate Fridays.