First, you present this statement as though all the other conversations on HN about Harvey Mudd have come to the same conclusion. This is demonstrably not true.<p>Second, I&#x27;d like to encourage you to not describe recruiting and admitting women as &quot;lossening admission rates&quot;. That&#x27;s the kind underhanded, unconscious sexism that we&#x27;re trying to avoid here. Even if I accept as true that a higher percentage of men are qualified to be admitted to HMC&#x27;s CS program (which I don&#x27;t, but for the sake of argument...) the <i>absolute</i> number of people -- men, women, and otherwise -- who qualify is so much larger than what HMC can support that it could admit a class of <i>0</i> men and not have to worry about &quot;lowering its standards&quot;.<p>It sounds like you&#x27;ve lost sight of the forest for the trees. Sure, a larger school might be able to have a larger impact. Sure, maybe Mudd isn&#x27;t doing as much as it could, or is spending more money than it should. But it is still doing something demonstrably effective, which is more than most places can say.