Cartoon depicting the AWS as a controlling body, Daily Nebraskan

A yearbook photo of the A.W.S board in 1926.

Zoe Battaglia, History 250: The Historian Craft, Spring 2019

Even at the beginning of the Association’s reign over the females at the university, there were still problems that occurred with the outside students and a prominent lack of interest amongst students at the school. For one of their events, the Activity Mart, they opened it up to men in 1961 and “the board [felt] that it was successful and should be continued.” [2]  The establishment of men into the program meant that they were not getting enough satisfaction or impact from only having the female students, so they needed to implement men within it, and it ended up being more successful for them. The implementation showed how they were not getting enough praise for their event, and that others were upset for not being included into the matter.

The main problems started stemming during the 1960s, when ideas were changing among the students. More of the students involved with AWS were becoming upset about the whole idea of the organization. In 1967, a student named Diane Hicks spoke out against the Association of Women Students and “approximately 75 students…left the Nebraska Union Lounge and stood outside the court door while Miss Hicks read her statement.” [3] The court event was important in regard to this organization because it is a time where someone outright questions the authority and the rules of AWS. Hicks says, “I have no say in the making of rules. I have no choice in membership. Because of this I do not recognize the authority of AWS and will not submit to any stricture from this court.” [4]  Her speech was a clear representation of the dislike that students are feeling regarding the whole association, and the fact that 75 students left an event to come listen to her speech showed that her feelings were not a singularity. There were more people who felt the same way as she did about this group. It also represented the ideas of people being upset over AWS and finally showing that they were not liking what happened within it.

Her question of this authoritative group was not an uncommon occurrence at this time, and it stemmed from within the growing progressive culture of students within the 1960s. In fact, “the 1960s began with a small, though significant number of cultural and political radical on campus,”[5] which sparked a larger number of growing radicals. More and more students would rebel on campuses, thus eventually leading to students at University of Nebraska, with people like Diane Hicks. Granted, hers was on a much smaller scale but there was still someone going out there and protesting the nature of one of the governing systems on campus. A former student from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln who attended the school in 1965 said, “we 60s women rebelled.”[6] The author of this admitted that people started to try and fight back against the rules that AWS was creating and enforcing on the campus. It is clear that this liberal nature that was beginning to form in the 60s on college campuses across the nation was a reason that students at the University began to try and take control of what they wanted and have more say in the rules on the campus.

The rules that ended up changing among the campus because of the outcry of students was another reason that AWS ended up disbanding. The conservative rules were slowly changing and becoming liberalized because the students attending were not in favor of those rules. These new liberal rules were mainly stemming in 1967 when the students on campus elected Ann Windle, who was more liberal in terms of the other candidates running. In her interview during her candidacy, she said that she wanted to remove the “absurdities” that were part of AWS. She wanted to change the dress rules at the time to match the time of the 60s instead of being the more conservative code they were at the time. She also wanted AWS to have a stronger feeling when it came to issues that were regarding the students. She did not like how they waited until they were coming under heavy pressure to act. She also wanted to liberalize the current judicial system for AWS.[7] She ran for all of this and the students ended up choosing her. By having her be chosen as the president, the students showed that they were not in favor of the rules that the school had currently set out for them. Ann Windle, during her presidency, wrote that the rules for girls signing out of their dorms is only to be there if they wish to do that. She goes on to say that it is their privilege and right to sign out.[8] Her presidency in 1967 was a good reflection of the changing desires of the students and that they were now trying to change the current administration of the AWS.

Another act of rebellion that took place amongst the college was when a female sophomore student tried to defy the rules of housing for women. This happened in 1967, and the student was someone who could not afford to live in the university housing at the time, and she decided to live somewhere off campus. The rule that she broke was all unmarried women would have to live on campus for the school year if they were not living with their parents. The student, Jo Carrol Flaugher, kept arguing against the Dean of Women that she was not willing to pay for it.[9] Her act of rebellion and this piece being written in the Daily Nebraskan sparked a lot of interest and others decided to take interest in her case. Her dismissal of the rules caused a larger rebellion from the majority of the students and Flaugher was readmitted into the university system.[10] Many others were able to see the outrage of what she did because it was written in the public form of communication for the university, showing how more people were upset over how the rules were being run and enforced by the Association of Women Students

Furthermore, the Association of Women Students faced scrutiny from not only the students who were enrolled within the position but also among other student organizations on campus. The major opponent that questioned AWS was the Association of Students of the University of Nebraska (ASUN). Scrutiny was a major factor for why the group ended up disbanding. ASUN began attacking and questioning the AWS group and what they stood for. This negatively impacted the group because ASUN got a lot of supporters for calling out AWS, especially with the women who were under the control of the association. A group of women wrote in to the Daily Nebraskan and state that they were speaking on behalf of women who were concerned and that they were in support of ASUN calling out AWS and making them explain who they were. In this piece, seventeen women wrote it and signed it.[11] Another major form that provided scrutiny to the AWS was the Daily Nebraskan. In one of their issues, they included a “political cartoon” that depicted AWS as a large person trying to control a female student with the conservative rules that were in place. The female student is running toward an object listed as “reality,” so it shows how controlling AWS was and that they kept the female students from being independent.[12] Due to this, many students were able to see how the AWS was acting more as an oppressive figure within the university. It showed how not just one, but multiple students felt about this organization that existed within the university.

The Association of Women Students has not completely made a good, lasting impact for the students who were within the Association and for the students currently attending today. Another good factor that came into existence with the help of this group was the Black Masque Chapter of the Mortar Board. The Mortar Board still exists on campus today and is a very active organization on campus. However, there is really nothing else that they have done that has helped further the students on campus. Women students do not have to follow the same rules that this association because they are on a more equal status with the male students on the campus. The same housing rules apply to all the students on the campus. Also, the former student as mentioned before wrote that piece where she spoke negatively about the Association of Women Students and that was written in 2017. After she mentions that AWS is gone, she also says that so are the rules that they enforced. She mentions that it is a good thing that it is all gone. [13] Her piece is one of the ways that shows that this group left more of a negative impact on the women because of their enforcement of the harsh rules for the women students.  

At the end of its days, the association was faced with disbandment also because of the lack of interest that students had with its membership. On the day that they resigned, “the president and both vice presidents were absent,”[14] which meant that the people who were large members for AWS and elected into that position were not really engaged with the group. They did not care to give the resignation speech. Then, the same article goes on to say that most of the members within the group did not have any problems or arguments when it came to the club resigning.[15] By not having any current board member care about the thought of resigning the group just goes further to show its minimal positive impact on the students there. The fact that no one reacted or had any qualms with the idea of the group disbanding further shows how this group was not meaningful to the people who went to the university at the time. The growth of dislike toward this group culminated into an overall feeling of this group needing to end.

The Association of Women Students was a long-lasting group that was there to enforce the school rules upon the women at the University. They were formed “to reflect the interests and execute the will of the women students,” [16]but it ultimately failed at doing that because it never reflected what the women students wanted. They did not allow the women to choose where they live, join to many clubs, where what they want or stay out late. Even though there was a high membership in the beginning, it was because any woman that was enrolled at the school would have to be a member of it. In the 1960s, there was more outright anger toward AWS among the females of the school, and they decided that this group was not right for what they wanted and that there needed to be less regulation toward only the women. Because of these more radical ideas, the association lost interested students and ultimately failed when women and other organizations within the University started to call out and question the rules in place for them.

Endnotes