The chap­ter “The Mys­te­ri­ous Case of the Har­vard Women’s Rug­by Team” explores the intrigu­ing dynam­ics behind Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty’s deci­sion to estab­lish a wom­en’s var­si­ty rug­by team in 2013, a choice that rais­es ques­tions about social engi­neer­ing, ath­let­ics, and admis­sions prac­tices. Dur­ing a rainy day rug­by match against Prince­ton, Har­vard show­cased a well-rehearsed team with expe­ri­ence and depth, unlike Prince­ton’s nascent pro­gram com­posed main­ly of ath­letes from oth­er sports. Despite the spir­it­ed com­pe­ti­tion, this match led to a reflec­tion on Har­vard’s moti­va­tions for main­tain­ing a robust ath­let­ics pro­gram.

Har­vard offers over fifty sports clubs and com­petes in a wide range of Divi­sion I sports, yet the addi­tion of wom­en’s rug­by under­scores a deep­er strate­gic intent. Recruit­ing for var­si­ty rug­by is a chal­lenge in the U.S. due to the sport’s rel­a­tive obscu­ri­ty, par­tic­u­lar­ly among women. The team’s coach, Mel Den­ham, empha­sized glob­al scout­ing efforts, high­light­ing the diverse back­grounds of play­ers, many hail­ing from afflu­ent areas.

The chap­ter fur­ther delves into the admis­sions process, dis­tin­guish­ing between stan­dard appli­cants and a spe­cial cat­e­go­ry known as ALDCs—Athletes, Lega­cies, Dean’s Inter­est List, and Chil­dren of faculty—which encom­pass 30% of the stu­dent body. The admis­sion rates for ALD­Cs stark­ly favor them com­pared to reg­u­lar appli­cants, par­tic­u­lar­ly empha­siz­ing ath­let­ic recruits who receive a sig­nif­i­cant advan­tage despite low­er aca­d­e­m­ic qual­i­fi­ca­tions. The supe­ri­or­i­ty of ath­letes in admis­sions sug­gests that sports serve as a means of main­tain­ing demo­graph­ic bal­ance with­in the stu­dent body.

This phe­nom­e­non draws on his­tor­i­cal con­text, recall­ing ear­li­er admis­sions bias­es root­ed in anti-Semi­tism that shaped Ivy League insti­tu­tions like Har­vard. The chap­ter reveals how Harvard’s para­me­ters for admis­sions and its strate­gic sports deci­sions are inter­twined, indi­cat­ing a delib­er­ate effort to con­trol group pro­por­tions while pre­sent­ing oppor­tu­ni­ties for diver­si­ty. It insin­u­ates that the estab­lish­ment of the wom­en’s rug­by team serves the dual pur­pose of expand­ing ath­let­ic oppor­tu­ni­ties and uphold­ing the insti­tu­tion’s demo­graph­ic bal­ance, ulti­mate­ly ren­der­ing the prac­tices of elite col­lege admis­sions a form of social engi­neer­ing .