The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 32 (2021)
Copyright © 2021 Yuko Takahashi. All rights reserved. This work may be used, with thisnotice included, for noncommercial purposes. No copies of this work may be distributed,
electronically or otherwise, in whole or in part, without permission from the author.

Transgender Students and New Admission Policies
at Historically Significant Women’s Colleges inTwenty-First Century United States and Japan

Yuko TAKAHASHI*

INTRODUCTION
On July 10, 2018, Ochanomizu University held a press conference inorder to explain their decision, effective 2020, to accept transgenderstudents who were identified as male on their family registers but selfidentified as female. This was the first case of such a decision in Japan. In
this article, I would like to explain the historical background of this decisionfrom both American and Japanese perspectives.
I was a Fulbright visiting scholar at Wellesley College in the UnitedStates from September 2013 to March 2014. The main purpose was toinvestigate historical developments and contemporary strategies at theSeven Sisters, a collection of leading women’s colleges, in twenty-firstcentury United States.1 While many of the women’s colleges founded at theend of the nineteenth century have become coeducational since the 1960s,
my study aimed to explore the strategies of those institutions that areprevailing in the twenty-first century. I conducted a seven-monthparticipatory survey to gain an understanding of their missions and theirmodels for developing educational good practices. Of the seven institutions,*President and Professor, Tsuda University
President (2018–20) of the Japanese Association for American Studies

7

8

YUKO TAKAHASHI

I focused on those that have maintained their status as women’s colleges,
namely, Barnard College, Bryn Mawr College, Mount Holyoke College,
Smith College, and Wellesley College, and attempted to understand theirkeen roles of leadership education in developing new and innovative
strategies to empower women students and alumnae as well as womenaround the globe in women’s colleges today.2
Within that context, the issue of admission of transgender students arose.
This was an extremely controversial issue that occurred precisely at the
point where the raison d’être of women’s colleges and leadershipdevelopment for women intersected and that demanded a decision on whereto draw the line as a women’s college from the perspective of body andidentity. While these five prestigious Seven Sisters colleges attach
importance to their identities as women’s colleges, it is no longer possible toidentify “female” as a “gender” in the framework of gender binarism as
before. The new policies were released in 2014–15. Through exploring these
new admission policies, the raison d’être of women’s colleges is criticallyreconsidered. By examining the policy of each college, we can tell that thegender binary is critically questioned not only in theory but also in practiceunder the settings of higher education, particularly in women’s colleges in
the United States. At the same time, however, the needs and significanceof women’s colleges are reconfirmed and emphasized through thesecontroversies and have led to discussions on women advancing in diverse
fields. This issue became, so to speak, another “coeducation” controversy
facing women’s colleges in the twenty-first century. Bearing in mind thedifferences from the coeducation debates of the second half of the twentiethcentury, my discussion will attempt to reveal how the gender binary haspresented itself as a very real issue around admission policies for women’scolleges, while also emphasizing the keen characteristics of women’scolleges in the United States today. In doing so, I aim to provide aperspective that reconsiders the category of “gender” while focusing on thediversity of gender identity.
This article consists of five sections. After briefly reviewing media
coverage of women’s colleges in the 1970s and 2010s regarding issues
related to single-sex institutions in section 1, I will touch on some findings
based on my research conducted at Wellesley College and Barnard College
in 2013–14 in section 2. Section 3 illustrates new admission policies
regarding transgender students adopted by five women’s colleges andexamines how these institutions managed to maintain their institutional
identities as women’s colleges. After looking at some perspectives on

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

9

student support and exploring the concept of “trans inclusiveness” in section
4, I conclude with an overview of recent developments in admission policies
for transgender students at women’s colleges and universities in Japan.
I.

NEW YORK TIMES COVERAGE OF WOMEN’S COLLEGES IN THE 1970S
AND 2010S

The “Coeducation Controversy” in the 1970s
The April 17, 1971, edition of the New York Times published an article on
coeducation. Under the eye-catching headline “Wellesley Trustees Reject aPlan for Men’s Degrees,” it reported that the Commission on the Future of
the College had made recommendations on coeducation based on thefindings of a twenty-two-month survey, which included increasing thenumber of students from 1,750 to 2,000; allowing 500 male students, half ofthem for the purpose of earning a degree and the remainder for credit
transfer; maintaining a female faculty ratio of at least 50 percent; and,furthermore, recommending coeducation under the condition that half of theupper decision-making posts be held by women. The board of trustees,
however, overturned the Commission’s decision to award degrees to malestudents, which triggered controversy in the field of higher education andamong the general public.
Details related to this research report are stored in the archives ofWellesley College, which allowed me to examine the decision-making
process of the Commission thoroughly. It is apparent that, at that time, therelatively young generation of faculty members perceived a coeducational
environment to be more “natural” and that there was a difference in views
between the faculty and the board. At the same time, collaboration withcoeducational universities in the Boston area, such as Harvard University,
Dartmouth College, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was alsosought. Although the opinions of minority faculty and students were heard,
it is also clear that the opinions of these minority members on campus werepositioned at the periphery during the survey process. Incidentally, an
African American woman was appointed president in July 2016, the firstsince the opening of Wellesley College, and I attended her inauguration
ceremony in September 2016.

10

YUKO TAKAHASHI“Admission Controversy” regarding Transgender Students in the 2010s
While investigating the relevant archives at Wellesley College, I was
informed through informal meetings of faculty members that the use ofterms such as she and sisters to refer to students was not “politically correct”
at Wellesley College because there were some female-to-male transgenderstudents on campus. In fact, it was possible to interview faculty and staff at
Wellesley College, as well as a trans man student who had transitioned fromfemale to male. In retrospect, it became clear that in 2014, college
administrators had finally found themselves in a situation where creating a
new admission policy in written form had become necessary.
On May 24, 2014, after my return to Japan, an article titled “Who Are
Women's Colleges For?” was published in the New York Times. This article
was written in reference to Title IX, which was enacted in 1972 andprohibits sex discrimination at educational institutions. The report included
an announcement made by the US Department of Education on April 29,
2014, that transgender students must be protected from discrimination under
Title IX, and it cited the case of Calliope Wong, a male-to-femaletransgender high school student whose application had been rejected bySmith College in 2013.3 It also noted that Barnard College had started a
project to provide free legal counseling for transgender students and had
invited a transgender woman writer to teach creative writing courses.
Through these examples, the article made the case that women’s colleges
should accept transgender women.
In addition, an article about transgender students at Wellesley College
titled “When Women Become Men at Wellesley” was featured in the New
York Times Magazine on October 15, 2014. Introducing numerous
transgender students and different voices demanding what a women’scollege should be, it depicted a conflicting and complex relationshipbetween transgender students, especially trans men—that is, those who wereassigned as female at birth but who self-identify as men—and the traditions
and policies of women-centered colleges.
Because women had been excluded from the space of academia, women’scolleges were founded with the mission of providing them with the sameacademic opportunities as men. Coeducation at the most prestigious highereducational institutions developed in the latter half of the twentieth century,
seeing more women gaining places in Ivy League schools. However, theimportance of women’s colleges as educational spaces and communities has
been keenly noted because they took women seriously and welcomed them

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

11

wholeheartedly, and truly expected them to play an active role in society.
Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, controversy has arisenover the admission of transgender students. There are cases in which
students who declared themselves to be female at the time of admission
have selected the gender of male after being admitted. In particular, thediscussion raised the issue of whether to include or exclude sexual
minorities such as transgender or gender nonconforming students, who do
not choose either gender, and women’s colleges had to face the issue of
determining whether to include “men” or “diverse women” from acompletely different angle than that of the “coeducation controversy” that
occurred around 1970.
While the value of women’s colleges as safe spaces where women could
fully exercise and develop their leadership was emphasized, there werequestions about what to do if a trans man student, who had changed genderfrom female to male, became a leader on campus. Moreover, if a white man,already overwhelmingly dominant in US society, were to become a leader at
a women’s college, how would the significance of women’s leadershipeducation at women’s colleges be affected?
II.

RESEARCH AT WELLESLEY COLLEGE AND BARNARD COLLEGE

Students
At Wellesley College I was able to speak to a trans man student.4 The
student said that in high school he had applied only to women’s colleges.
Asked to give a reason, he mentioned first and foremost that women’scolleges were “safe spaces” for sexually marginalized students and,furthermore, that they were educational institutions where gender-related
issues were always at the center, both inside and outside the classroom. In
other words, there was no place where he could feel more comfortable andsecure than at a women’s college, and as such he felt he gained the strength
to change genders and become a trans man. He admitted that women’scolleges were spaces for women and that it was understandable that there
was a need for spaces that he should not be permitted to enter, possibly suchas some meetings in the dormitories. He also mentioned that, although it
seems contradictory, having women-only spaces was very important.
However, as a safe space for transgender students, where cutting-edge
research into gender issues is well-developed both inside and outside theclassroom, Wellesley College was his choice because he desired to be

12

YUKO TAKAHASHI

nurtured in such a community.
Faculty and Staff
Faculty and staff working in the offices of admission and other areas at
Wellesley College and Barnard College offered their insights. For example,
when recruiting students, there is the issue of referring to Wellesley College
as a women’s college. There is some controversy around this. On the one
hand, there are female-to-male transgender graduates who have a sense ofresistance to those words. On the other hand, college faculty and staff
believe that promoting the institutions as women’s colleges is important forschool branding. Wellesley College is known as a women’s college, so somefemale-to-male transgender graduates who wish to keep their transitionsprivate refuse to receive the alumnae newsletter.
Regarding the controversy surrounding the application of a trans woman
student at Smith College, mentioned previously, universities do not use birthcertificates, driver’s licenses, passports, or other government-issued
documents to confirm the gender of applicants. Basically, if the applicant
chooses female when submitting the application documents, the criteria foradmission to a women’s college is said to have been met. In the case at
Smith College, however, there was a checkmark indicating male in thefederal application documents for financial aid. This led to a discrepancy
with the gender chosen in the admission application, and the applicant wastherefore excluded from the selection process.
From the talks with the above-mentioned college faculty and staff
members in the latter half of 2013 through the beginning of 2014, I learned
that the five women’s colleges were exchanging opinions on such matters,
including admission policies. Faculty and staff at both colleges shared therecognition that it was an important issue requiring a prompt response. It
became clear from each college’s official website, thereafter, that the time torelease new admission policies on transgender students in written form wasimminent.
III. ADMISSION POLICIES REGARDING TRANSGENDER STUDENTS
ANNOUNCED BY FIVE WOMEN’S COLLEGES
Mount Holyoke College
From 2014 to 2015, policies regarding admission qualifications forTRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

13transgender students were released one after another on the websites of thefive women’s colleges. Mount Holyoke College was the first of the Seven
Sisters to explicitly state that trans women (who were assigned male at birth
but self-identify as female) and nonbinary (neither male nor female)students were eligible to apply.5 At the opening ceremonies, or convocation,of the new school year in August 2014, President Lynn Pasquerellamentioned in a speech that she had considered admissions for transgenderstudents during the summer vacation and had decided to grant eligibility towomen or students who identify themselves as women. She insightfullystated: “We recognize that what it means to be a woman is not static. Just as
early feminists argued that reducing women to their biological functions wasa foundation of women’s oppression, we acknowledge that gender identity is
not reducible to the body. And we are mindful that exclusion from thecategory of ‘woman’ based on contingent properties of birth is nothingnew.” She continued by quoting Sojourner Truth, the nineteenth-century
African American activist for the emancipation of enslaved people, in
asking, “Look at my arm. I have ploughed and planted and gathered into
barns. . . . And ain’t I a woman?”
The Mount Holyoke College website contains a detailed section ontransgender student admissions. At first, it affirms that “Mount Holyoke
College welcomes applications for our undergraduate program from any
qualified student who is female or identifies as a woman” and lists ten
frequently asked questions. Other universities had not described theirpolicies in such detail at that time, so some notable points are introduced
here. The first question and response are:
1. Is Mount Holyoke College still a women’s college?
Yes. Mount Holyoke remains committed to its historic mission as a
women’s college. Yet, we recognize that what it means to be a woman
is not static. Traditional binaries around who counts as a man or
woman are being challenged by those whose gender identity does notconform to their biology. Those bringing forth these challenges
recognize that such categorization is not independent of political andsocial ideologies. Just as early feminists argued that the reduction of
women to their biological functions was a foundation for women’s
oppression, we must acknowledge that gender identity is not reducible
to the body. Instead, we must look at identity in terms of the external
context in which the individual is situated. It is this positionality that
biological and transwomen share, and it is this positionality that is

14

YUKO TAKAHASHI

relevant when women’s colleges open their gates for those aspiring to
live, learn, and thrive within a community of women.
In addition, for the purposes of clarifying who is qualified for admission
consideration to Mount Holyoke College, the following criteria areprovided:・ Biologically born female; identifies as a woman
・ Biologically born female; identifies as a man
・ Biologically born female; identifies as other/they/ze
・ Biologically born female; does not identify as either woman or man
・ Biologically born male; identifies as woman
・ Biologically born male; identifies as other/they/ze and when “other/
they” identity includes woman
・ Biologically born with both male and female anatomy (intersex);
identifies as a woman
Such students who are academically qualified are eligible to apply. It is also
clearly stated that an academically qualified student who was “biologicallyborn male; identifies as a man” cannot apply for admission consideration.
Bryn Mawr College
On February 9, 2015, a letter from Bryn Mawr College chair Arlene
Gibson regarding application qualifications for transgender, nonbinary, andgender nonconforming applicants was posted on the college website.6 It
includes the following announcement: “During its meetings this past
weekend, the College’s Board of Trustees discussed and approved arecommendation from a Board working group that was created at the
September 2014 Board meeting to examine the mission of the College withrespect to transgender, non-binary, and gender nonconforming applicants.”
First, the working group unanimously agreed, in a sense, that “the missionof the College at the undergraduate level is to educate women to be future
leaders.” The announcement further reveals that “Bryn Mawr’s identity as a
women’s college is fundamental to its distinctive environment, one in which
women are central, faculty assume and expect excellence from women, andwomen assume positions of leadership. The working group also
recommended that the College use language that affirms [their] institutional
identity as a women’s college (e.g., use of gendered language) while

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

15

respecting the diversity of individual identities in the community.”
Specifically, “in addition to those applicants who were assigned female atbirth, the applicant pool will be inclusive of transwomen and of intersex
individuals who live and identify as women at the time of application.
Intersex individuals who do not identify as male are also eligible foradmission. Those assigned female at birth who have taken medical or legal
steps to identify as male are not eligible for admission.” On enrollment,
however, it was made clear that “within the context of [their] mission as a
women’s college, all Bryn Mawr students will continue to be valued andsupported members of the community, no matter how their gender identity
shifts during their time at the College.”This is the admission policy of Bryn Mawr College. The main difference
between Bryn Mawr College and Mount Holyoke College is that Bryn
Mawr does not include individuals who self-identify as male, even if they
were assigned the gender of female at birth, while Mount Holyoke does.
Wellesley College
In the case of Wellesley College, a document titled “Reaffirmation ofMission and Announcing Gender Policy and FAQ” was released in thenames of both Chair of the Board of Trustees Laura Daignault Gates andPresident H. Kim Bottomly.7 Foremost, it reaffirms Wellesley College’s
status as a women’s college. It clearly states that “every aspect ofWellesley’s educational program is, and will continue to be, designed andimplemented to serve women and to prepare them to thrive in a complex
world.” Moving forward, “Wellesley will consider for admission any
applicant who lives as a woman and consistently identifies as a woman.”
While the college will continue to use female pronouns and the language ofsisterhood, it also promises to offer guidance and resources to assist students
who change their gender identity while enrolled in making various choices.
As for the meaning of the phrase, “live as a woman and consistently
identify as a woman,” it is clearly explained by saying that “Wellesleyinvites applications from all those who live as women and consistently
identify as women and who are prepared for a rigorous academic
environment that challenges them to achieve at their highest potential.”
Therefore, those assigned as female at birth yet who self-identify as male atthe time of application, that is, trans men, are not eligible for admission
consideration. On the other hand, students who identify as women are
eligible to apply even if assigned as male at birth. Furthermore, regarding

16

YUKO TAKAHASHI

those assigned as female at birth but who identify as nonbinary, they are
eligible to apply if they “feel they belong in [their] community of women.”
For students who change gender after enrollment, Wellesley College
stated that it would offer continued full support to students, whether they
maintained enrollment or transferred to another school. It also added that“the necessary procedures and guidelines” were developed and implemented
under this admission policy for students entering in the 2016 academic year,that is, Wellesley 2020 graduates.
Wellesley College and Bryn Mawr College are similar in that they do not
accept trans men applicants, as Mount Holyoke College does. An importantdelineating indicator is that applicants demonstrate their willingness tobelong to a community of women and retain their identity as women.
Smith College
Smith College released its admission policy, signed by both President
Kathleen McCartney and Elizabeth Mugar Eveillard, chair of the board oftrustees, on May 2, 2015.8 It states that “in keeping with our tradition andidentity as a college of and for women, Smith will continue to use genderedlanguage, including female pronouns, in institutional communications.” Italso articulates that “the mission of Smith College is to educate women ofpromise for lives of distinction,” noting that although concepts of female
identity have changed since Smith’s inception, Smith’s graduates haveplayed a leadership role in expanding their freedom to work in diverse
fields, embrace their ambitions, and express themselves. It emphasizes that“at the same time, educational settings in which women are central remain
powerfully transformative” and adds, “We will be called, in changing times,
to consider anew how we will choose to be a women’s college. . . . Our
clarified admission policy reflects a women’s college that is steadfast in its
founding mission yet evolving to reflect a changing world.”
Smith College has also created a Frequently Asked Questions page toprovide clarity on various issues. Here again, it is reiterated that Smith
College is a women’s college, declaring that trans women can apply whiletrans men cannot. Since Smith College’s application policy is one of selfidentification, applicants need to select female on the Common Application
form. In response to the question of whether gender queer or gendernonbinary students are eligible for admission, neither a yes nor no response
is given. It states, “Our focus on women’s education means that we consider
for admission applicants who identify as women and who seek entrance into

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

17

a community dedicated to women’s education.” Although no is not explicitly
stated, the response is similar in meaning.
However, it clarifies that students who change their gender after
admission will receive full support and notes that the same is true for transmen. Those who meet the college’s graduation requirements, no matter what
gender they are, will be eligible to receive a degree from Smith College andwill be welcomed by the Alumnae Association of Smith College. (Note theuse of the word alumnae, a plural female form.) It also noted the policy
would be in effect for any students applying in the fall of 2015 onward.
Barnard College
Following a decision by the board of trustees, on June 4, 2015, Barnard
College posted an announcement on its website addressed to “Members of
the Barnard Community” regarding its admission policy for transgenderstudents.9 At the beginning of this announcement, the significance of being awomen’s college is clearly articulated: “Since its founding in 1889,
Barnard’s mission has been to provide generations of promising, highachieving young women with an outstanding liberal arts education in acommunity where women lead.” It confirms that “every aspect of thisunique environment is, and always will be, designed and implemented toserve women, and to prepare [their] graduates to flourish and make adifference in the world.” Such women-centered education is even more
important today.
Based on this mission, Barnard College declares that “in furtherance ofour mission, tradition and values as a women’s college, and in recognition of
our changing world and evolving understanding of gender identity, Barnard
will consider for admission those applicants who consistently live andidentify as women, regardless of the gender assigned to them at birth” andthat “[they] will also continue to use gendered language that reflects [their]
identity as a women’s college.” In addition, it clarifies that individualized
support will be provided to students who change their gender after
enrollment, regardless of whether they maintain enrollment or choose totransfer.
Among the various opinions of students, faculty, graduates, parents, andstaff, there was clear consensus on two points: “Barnard must reaffirm its
mission as a college for women” and “There was little debate that transwomen should be eligible for admission to Barnard.” Regarding
implementation of this policy, it was noted that preparations would be

18

YUKO TAKAHASHI

undertaken for one year, starting in 2015, and that the policy would apply to
students enrolling in fall 2016, that is, the Barnard Class of 2020 andbeyond.
Similar explanations to those found at the other four women’s colleges
can be found in the Frequently Asked Questions section of the page. In
response to a question about the meaning of “to consistently live andidentify as a woman,” it states that it is a self-identification system and thatall submitted documents must match the declaration. Any discrepancies
should be discussed with an admissions counselor or described in the essay
or personal statement to be submitted. Trans women are eligible foradmission, but trans men are not, as at Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, and Smith.
Regarding the eligibility of nonbinary and gender nonconforming
applicants, it does not respond with yes or no but, rather, states that Barnard
College is for those “who consistently live and identify as women,” and only
explains that the application documents must meet this self-identification.
This is the same style of explanation given at Bryn Mawr, Wellesley, andSmith.
Summary of New Admission Policies of Five Women’s Colleges
Following is a summary of what has been learned through the review of
documented admission policies of these five women’s colleges since 2014.
First, all of them have emphasized their mission and positive
characteristics as women’s colleges since their respective establishments andtheir policies of adhering to their identity as historically significant
institutions of higher education for talented women of promise.
Second, all five women’s colleges declared that they would continue to
use female-specific gendered language. It was confirmed that even if there
were students with male identity on campus, the college identity is that of awomen’s college, and they would continue to use feminine nouns, such assisterhood and alumnae, and feminine personal pronouns. This is deeply
related to making women the central focus of their college. It is premised on
the idea that the mission of women’s colleges cannot be fulfilled if thecampus culture becomes similar to that of coeducational universities.
Third, at the time of application, the student makes a self-identification ofgender identity, and individual identity is emphasized. All five women’scolleges also agreed with the policy that gender should not be determined bygovernment-issued documents such as passports or birth certificates. Thissuggests that gender identity is widely perceived as being fluid by theseTRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

19

institutions.
Fourth, the colleges have clear policies of supporting students to meettheir individual needs once they are admitted, even if their gender changes
to male. Specifically, they will award degrees to students who meet
graduation requirements and will also provide necessary individualized
guidance to those who wish to transfer to another school.
One major difference among the five colleges is that Mount Holyoke
College is the only one that considers those who were biologically born as
women but self-identify as men at the time of application as eligible. In
other words, only Mount Holyoke accepts trans men at the time of
application, whereas the other four colleges do not.
IV.

PERSPECTIVES ON STUDENT SUPPORT

Apparently, it is crucial for women’s colleges to provide transgenderstudents with effective student support once they are admitted. Mills College
in Oakland, California, and Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Georgia, wereamong the earliest women’s colleges to accept transgender students. Mills
College has published “Report on Inclusion of Transgender and Gender
Fluid Students: Best Practices, Assessment and Recommendations,”10 which
serves as a reference for good practices on inclusion of transgender students
at women’s colleges. Revised in April 2013, it was initially prepared by the
Gender Identity and Expression Sub-Committee of the Diversity and Social
Justice Committee.
The introduction to the Mills College report states that in response to
women being historically excluded from higher education, “women’scolleges in the U.S. and beyond have their roots in the passionate interest ofa small number of educators in providing opportunities for post-secondary
study to students who were excluded from or marginalized withinmainstream colleges and universities on the basis of their gender.”11 It points
out that while women still remain marginalized within the setting of higher
education, “academic institutions have also come to recognize transgenderand gender fluid people as similarly oppressed by cultural, economic, andpolitical systems.” Since the mission of women’s colleges has been
empowering those students marginalized and excluded from fullparticipation in higher education, “the education of transgender and gender
fluid students seems a logical and natural fit for women’s colleges of the
21st century.”12 It further emphasizes that “trans inclusiveness is in keepingwith Mills’ long history of countering gender oppression by centering the

20

YUKO TAKAHASHI

experiences, contributions, and leadership of women.”In other words, “trans inclusiveness represents not an erasure but an
updating of this mission.” The oppression of transgender and gender-fluid
people has its roots in a binary gender system from which “both misogyny(female subjugation and a hatred or fear of the feminine) and patriarchy(male supremacy)” originated. As such, Mills College takes the stance thatthe oppression of sexual minorities is an issue that should be addressed in a
progressive manner at women’s colleges in the twenty-first century.
The report advises in detail not only on how to deal with transgenderstudents in classrooms but also with regard to dormitories, bathrooms, andathletic competitions. Of particular importance is the handling of namechanges and preferred personal pronouns or PGP (preferred genderpronouns) in the classroom. For example, it suggests “allow[ing] students to
self-identify the name and pronouns they prefer. Faculty might solicit thisinformation in writing from students or through introductions on the firstday of class.”13 Although usually used in the third-person plural, it advises
using they, them, their, theirs, themself in the third-person singular. Insteadof using she/he, her/him, her/his, hers/his, or herself/himself to indicate
gender, some individuals may wish to use gender-neutral pronouns such asze, hir, hir, hirs, and hirself.14
In the space of higher education for women, women’s colleges haveplayed a leading role in gender equality and social justice since the midnineteenth century. In that sense, it can be said that they have pursued theissues of women’s rights and social equality as issues of social justice andhuman rights. In the twenty-first century, the perception of gender identity
has become more diverse, and the category of “woman” cannot be viewed as
it was before. The growing number of transgender students and those whochoose to identify as nonbinary or gender nonconforming is reflected in thefact that women’s colleges and universities have had to dare to explicitly
state that they are institutions of higher education targeting those who“always live as women and self-identify as women.”
At the same time, it is important to note that the mission of women’scolleges, that is, their necessity and raison d’être, has nevertheless been
reaffirmed even more strongly. This discussion of the inclusion oftransgender students has critically reaffirmed the need for a place that gives
women the positive experience of being at the center, where they candevelop the strength and confidence to participate in diverse fields both
locally and globally.
These five Seven Sisters colleges declare that they will continue toTRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

21

identify themselves as women’s colleges using gendered language, bridging
the historical context of their foundation in the late nineteenth century with
their mission in the twenty-first century. In other words, this is a testament to
the fact that while they emphasize the values of trans inclusiveness anddiversity, they also see the educational benefits of women’s centrality inhigher education as a prerequisite for women’s colleges and universities inthe twenty-first century.
In the case of coeducational universities, where issues surrounding
dormitories, bathrooms, and athletics need consideration, women’s colleges
as a whole need to determine admissions policies and whether to include or
exclude transgender students, right from the first step, that is, through theiradmission policies. This is a crucial aspect that is distinctly different fromcoeducational universities.
As a gender theory, the problematic nature of the gender binary has long
been criticized. From the perspective of positionality in the practice ofcollege and university education in dealing with sexual-minority students on
the gendered periphery, these colleges have documented admissions
policies, stated whether they call themselves women’s colleges, and havefurthermore addressed the question of “who is a woman” in detail throughtheir Frequently Asked Questions pages. In this phase of dealing withgender-fluid students, the new pioneering role played by these five Seven
Sisters colleges in twenty-first-century America is evident.
V. WOMEN’S COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN JAPANThe MOVE Project and the LGBTI Subcommittee of the Science Council ofJapan
What have the conditions been like at women’s colleges and universities
in Japan? It has been reported that support for sexual-minority college
students in Japan is extremely lacking as the following report indicated. In
March 2015, the Kitakyushu Municipal Gender Equality Center MOVE
published a report on a survey of national, prefectural, and private
universities, including junior colleges, across the country under the theme of“Issues in Supporting Sexual-Minority Students” as part of the Gender
Issues Survey and Research Support Project.15
The Summary and Recommendations section of the report found that halfof the universities, including 80 percent of national universities, hadreceived consultations from students, and it concluded that “efforts for22

YUKO TAKAHASHI

supporting sexual-minority students at university are far behind.”16
Considering the trends in the admission policies of the Seven Sisters
women’s colleges that were developed from 2014 to 2015, one cannot help
but feel that diverse gender identities are still invisible in Japanese colleges
and universities.
In February 2015, the Protecting LGBTI Human Rights in Society and
Education Subcommittee (LGBTI Subcommittee) of the Legal Studies
Committee was established by the Science Council of Japan to focus on
sexual-minority human rights issues. This subcommittee was the first one in
the Science Council of Japan to address the rights of sexual minorities. Miho
Mitsunari, vice president of Nara Women’s University as well as the Science
Council of Japan, served as the chair, and as a member myself, I gave apresentation on new admission policies for transgender students at women’scolleges in the United States, based on what I have covered here, at a
symposium held by the Science Council of Japan in May 2016.17
Symposium at Japan Women’s University and Media Survey
After the symposium, one professor in the audience asked me to give atalk on the same topic at his university. The professor was a member of theLGBT Society of the Faculty of Integrated Arts and Social Sciences at Japan
Women’s University. In February 2017, Japan Women’s University held an
academic exchange symposium entitled “Considering ‘Diverse Women’ andTransgender Students at Women’s Colleges and Universities.” Some faculty
members of Japan Women’s University had been discussing the case of an
inquiry received by their affiliated junior high school at the end of 2015.
This inquiry was from the mother of a fourth-grade elementary school
student who had been assigned male on the family register but self-identified
as female. She asked whether her child, diagnosed with a gender-identity
disorder, could sit the entrance exam for the junior high school.
A project team was established to consider an admission policy fortransgender students. By the end of 2016, the team had concluded that theissue “needed more time to be discussed.” However, the actions of Japan
Women’s University, which openly discussed this case with all theparticipants of the symposium, triggered a response from numerous
women’s colleges and universities. They were willing to consider the same
issue as something relevant to their own circumstances.18
The media have also had some impact. The issues discussed at the
symposium at Japan Women’s University were covered by the Asahi

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

23

Shimbun on March 20, 2017, under the headline “Can Men Who Identify as
Women Enter Women’s Universities? Japan Women’s University Is
Considering This Issue.” This generated a notable reaction. The Asahi
Shimbun also conducted a survey of seventy-six women’s university
presidents in Japan in April 2017, asking whether they would consider
accepting transgender students and about support for sexual-minority
students. Sixty-four universities responded, for a response rate of 84
percent.
The results of this survey were reported in the Asahi Shimbun on June 19,
2017. Pertaining to accepting transgender students who were assigned maleat the time of birth but identify as female, five universities replied that they
are considering this issue, and three universities said they plan to consider itin the near future. In addition, forty-one women’s universities, over 60
percent, responded that this issue requires further consideration. This survey,
which revealed the situation at women’s colleges and universities at thattime, played a vital role for them in either “discovering” this issue for the
first time or reaffirming that it needed to be dealt with sooner or later.
Basis for the Decision by Ochanomizu University
In October 2017, the General Assembly of the Association of Women’s
Universities, held at Kyoto Notre Dame University, added the issue ofadmission policies for transgender students to the agenda. Japan Women’s
University volunteered to serve as the executive at an information-exchange
meeting with eighteen women’s universities, held in December 2017, to
discuss topics such as initiatives in accepting transgender students.
The LGBTI Subcommittee at the Science Council of Japan has held atotal of three symposiums as well. These resulted in a proposal titled“Toward Guaranteeing the Rights of Sexual Minorities: Marriage,
Education, and Work” released in September 2017.19 Supporting admissionsof male-to-female, or MTF, transgender students into women’s universities
was also included. The proposal stated the following:
In accordance with the notification from the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, if an MTF student, whose
school lifestyle is protected according to the student’s gender identity,
cannot enter a women’s university, this infringes on the student’s rightto learn.

24

YUKO TAKAHASHIThis part of the proposal by the LGBTI Subcommittee is the very idea
behind the decision by Ochanomizu University.
The process of the first decision to guarantee the rights of transgenderstudents at a women’s university in Japan needs to be assessed frommultiple perspectives. Although it was influenced by transnational
movements linked with women’s colleges in the United States, as I
mentioned, this development was also influenced by a chain of events seen
in movements throughout Japan. The road to this decision by Ochanomizu
University included lively discussions and proactive engagement at manydifferent stages.
Following Ochanomizu University, three more women’s universities
decided to accept transgender students in Japan: Nara Women’s University;
Miyagi Gakuin Women’s University, starting in 2020; and Japan Women’s
University, starting in 2024.
CONCLUSION
Dealing with this issue has revealed the need to update the raison d’être ofwomen’s universities in the twenty-first century. These are institutions that
do not admit students who were assigned as male and identify as male into
degree-granting programs. One might question why a learning space for“diverse women” is necessary when coeducational colleges and universities
are available for them.
Even today, women in Japan are extremely underrepresented invarious fields of society, including economic participation and politicalempowerment, particularly when compared with the rest of the world. Japanwas ranked 121 out of 153 countries in the global gender-gap index in 2019.
To ameliorate this situation, “inclusive leadership” that is based on humanrights and social justice and leaves no one behind is in great need. This canbe fostered under an excellent liberal arts education that meets
individualized needs and talents. Also, it is more important than ever tonurture women with a profound interest in social justice who are likewise
willing to be leaders in making a difference in society. The positive
experience of being at the center, surrounded by engaging faculty and staff
in a space of higher education, can have a life-long impact on womenstudents. It is a unique environment and is completely different from the restof the society, where women in both Japan and the United States are still
marginalized today. Women’s colleges and universities must keep
verbalizing their unique missions and articulating their core values, which

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

25

they have held firm since their foundations. As Mills’ report stated, I would
agree that “trans inclusiveness” is in accord with women’s colleges anduniversities’ “long history of countering gender oppression by centering theexperiences, contributions, and leadership of women.”20
NOTES
On behalf of the Japanese Association for American Studies I would liketo extend my deepest gratitude to our colleagues at Hokkaido University as
well as the program committee members of the JAAS board, who
endeavored to plan the 2020 annual conference and its program for the
JAAS, which was supposed to be held on June 13–14, 2020. We sincerely
regret that we had to cancel the conference due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
I am so grateful to the Japanese Journal of American Studies editors forincluding my talk, which I could not give at Hokkaido University, as anarticle in this volume.
This talk/article is part of the findings of the MEXT Grants-in-Aid for
Scientific Research (C) “Sebun Shisutāzu no Rekishi to Josei no Rīdāshippu
Kyōiku” [History of the Seven Sisters and women’s leadership education](2017), first published in “Toransu Jendā no Gakusei wo Meguru
Nyūgakukyoka Ronsō to Adomisshon Porishī: 21 Seiki no Amerika ni
Okeru Sebun Shisutāzu no Joshidaigaku wo Chūshin ni” [Admission
controversy and admission policies on transgender students: Focusing on theSeven Sisters colleges for women in twenty-first-century US], Jendā
Shigaku [Gender history], no. 12, Gender History Association for Japan(2014): 5–17; and “‘Kokoro wa Josei’ no Gakusei wo Joshidaigaku ga
Ukeireru Imi: Toransu Jendā wo Meguru Rekishiteki Keii towa?” [Whywomen’s colleges accept trans women students: Historical context of theiradmission policies regarding transgender students] Tōyō Keizai Onrain[Toyo Keizai online], July 14, 2018, with some modifications. This
presentation is also aided by Tsuda University’s Research Funds for SpecificPurposes 2020 as well as the MEXT Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research(C) “Sebun Shisutāzu ni okeru Toransu Jendā Gakusei eno Shien to
Rīdāshippu Kyōiku” [Support for transgender students at the Seven Sisters
colleges and leadership education] (2019). I am very grateful for the
Fulbright grant for researchers (2013–14), which made the original research(“History of the Seven Sisters Colleges and Leadership of Women’sColleges in the 21st-Century U.S.”) for this article possible. I would like tothank Geoffrey Pierce for his support in preparing the English version of thisarticle.

26

YUKO TAKAHASHI

1
Seven historically important prestigious women’s colleges located in the eastern part of
the United States. Currently, five of the seven colleges—Barnard College, Bryn Mawr
College, Mount Holyoke College, Smith College, and Wellesley College—maintain theirstatus as women’s colleges.
2
My research included a focus on the Women in Public Service Project (WPSP), which wasundertaken in 2011 by these five colleges in partnership with the US State Department andthen-secretary of state Hillary Clinton. The aim of this project is to increase the number ofwomen in the field of public service to 50% of the world total by 2050. I was specificallyinterested in how institutions of higher education for women encourage women’s
participation in society and what role the US State Department plays in doing so. Tsuda
University, to which I belong, is a collaborating institution on this project. In summer 2014,
after returning to Japan, I had the opportunity to participate in a WPSP-sponsored leadershiptraining program for undergraduate students at China Women’s University in Beijing. These
research opportunities revealed that the innovative strategy of twenty-first-century women’scolleges is the development of leadership specific to women and its unique characteristics.
Wellesley College established the Albright Institute, named after Madeleine Albright, the firstwoman secretary of state in the United States (Albright Institute, Wellesley College, http://
www.wellesley.edu/albright/about, accessed August 20, 2016). Consisting of small,competitive programs that incorporate problem solving, off-campus learning, and internships,
it is especially committed to preparing women for work in the international field.
Participation in lectures and other events on both campuses provided a precious opportunity
to gain insight into the college.
3
The student was disqualified for admission at the time because it was found that a federal
tuition aid application stated that the applicant was male. In response to this, students
launched an opposition movement.
4This student’s preferred pronouns are he, him, and his.
5
“Convocation 2014,” September 2, 2014, Mount Holyoke College, https://www.
mtholyoke.edu/president/convocation-2014, accessed August 16, 2016. For admission fortransgender students at the university, see, “Admission of Transgender Students,” Mount
Holyoke College, https://www.mtholyoke.edu/policies/admission-transgender-students,
accessed August 16, 2016.
6“A Letter from Bryn Mawr Board Chair Arlene Gibson,” February 9, 2015, Bryn Mawr
College, http://news.blogs.brynmawr.edu/2015/02/09/a-letter-from-bryn-mayr-board-chairarlene-gibson/, accessed August 22, 2016. Several minutes later an announcement in letter
form in the name of the president was also posted. “A Letter from President Kim Cassidy,”
February 9, 2015, Bryn Mawr College, http://news.blogs.brynmawr.edu/2015/02/09/a-letterfrom-president-kim-cassidy/, accessed August 22, 2016.
7“Reaffirmation of Mission and Announcing Gender Policy and FAQ,” Wellesley College,
http://www.wellesley.edu/news/gender-policy, accessed August 18, 2016.
8“Admission Policy Announcement,” May 2, 2015, Smith College, https://www.smith.edu/
studygroup/index.php, accessed August 20, 2016.
9“Barnard Announces Transgender Admissions Policy” and “Transgender Admission
Policy & FAQ,” June 4, 2015, Barnard College, https://barnard.edu.barnard-announcestransgender-admissions-policy, accessed December 12, 2015 (the former) and August 20,
2016 (the latter).
10“Mills College Report on Inclusion of Transgender and Gender Fluid Students: Best
Practices, Assessment and Recommendations,” April 2013, Mills College, https://www.mills.
edu/diversity/Final-Report-on-Transgender-Inclusion-4-25-13.pdf, accessed August 21, 2016.
11
Ibid., 3.
12
Ibid.

TRANSGENDER STUDENTS AND WOMEN’S COLLEGES

27

13
Dean Spade, “Some Very Basic Tips for Making Higher Education More Accessible toTrans Students and Rethinking How We Talk about Gendered Bodies,” Radical Teacher 92(2) (2011): 57–62, quoted in Mills College.
14“Gender-Neutral Pronouns,” Carleton College Student Organizations—Sexuality andGender Activism, updated April 1, 2016, https://apps.carleton.edu/student/orgs/saga/
pronouns/, accessed August 21, 2016.
15
Shizuyo Kawashima, Seiteki Mainoritī no Gakusei Shien ni Okeru Kadai: Heisei Nijūroku-nendo Jendā Mondai Chōsa Kenkyū Shien Jigyō Hōkoku-sho [Issues in supporting
sexual-minority students: Gender Issues Survey and Research Support Project Report, 2014].
Kitakyushu Municipal Gender Equality Center MOVE, 2014.
16
Ibid., 56.
17
Yuko Takahashi, “Toransu Jendā no Gakusei Ukeire to Amerika no Meimon
Joshidaigaku—Mō Hitotsuno ‘Kyōgaku’ Ronsōgo no Adomisshon Porishī [Accepting
transgender students at historically significant women’s colleges: Admission policies after
another ‘coeducation’ controversy],” in Kyōiku to LGBTI wo Tsunagu: Gakkō, Daigaku no
Genba kara Kangaeru [Connecting education and LGBTI: Considerations from schools anduniversity sites], ed. Miho Mitsunari (Tokyo: Seikyūsha, 2017), 247–73.
18
The presentations of the symposium were published as a booklet: LGBT Society of theFaculty of Integrated Arts and Social Sciences at Japan Women’s University, LGBT to
Joshidaigaku: Dare mo ga Jibunrashiku Kagayakeru Daigaku wo Mezashite [Aiming forLGBT rights and a university in which anyone can shine like their true selves] (Tokyo:
Gakubunsha, 2018).
19
Shakai to Kyōiku ni okeru LGBTI no Kenrihoshō Bunkakai, “Seiteki Mainoritī noKenrihoshō wo Mezashite: Konin, Kyōiku, Rōdō wo Chūshinni [Toward guaranteeing therights of sexual minorities: Marriage, education, and work],” Nihon Gakujutsu Kaigi[Science Council of Japan], September 29, 2017.
20“Mills College Report on Inclusion of Transgender and Gender Fluid Students: Best
Practices, Assessment and Recommendations,” 3.