Rule-Breaking and Clandestine Activities at the Women’s League Cabin

Sophia Jazaeri, Arthur Koenig, Adria Major, Shreya Mehta

  1. Introduction and Research
  2. Methods
  3. Sherry Nelson: A Case Study
  4. Campusing and Our Work In the Archives
  5. Excavation
  6. Community Archeology Day
  7. Conclusion

Introduction and Research Questions

This project investigates the nature of rules and rule-breaking in the Women’s League and at the Women’s League cabin during its most active years (from the 1930s to the 1980s). We also compare this period to later clandestine activity in the 1990s before the cabin’s demolition in 1998. Our research questions included but were not limited to: What were the rules of the Women’s League and how were they enforced? What is the history of rule-breaking at the Women’s League Cabin? Can we find any archaeological evidence of rule-breaking?

Methods

Our primary archaeological method was cognitive archaeology. We interpreted artifacts, data, and written histories as related to past thought processes and social structures. In showing the severity of the Women’s League rules, our project simultaneously raises questions about gendered rules and divides on campus today. In this way, our archaeological project functions as a form of activism, as it aims to shed light on present and historic inequities on our campus.

Conclusion

Our archaeological research about rules and rule-breaking in the Women’s League illuminated the strict nature of the organization: despite being entirely peer-governed, women were subject to intense rules that tightly controlled many aspects of their lives, from when they returned home to how they spent their free time. This project forced us to imagine being a part of the Women’s League, and to reflect on the role of guilt and shame in sustaining this harsh environment.

As the saying goes, however, rules are meant to be broken, and the Women’s League had its fair share of rule-breakers. Our project, both in excavation and archival research, also illuminated moments of rebellion and resistance in the Women’s League. The beer cans and liquor bottles discovered at the site suggest that these rules were being challenged, broken, and undermined throughout the history of the Women’s League. Sherry Nelson’s trial, furthermore, despite resulting in an unsuccessful appeal, was an attempt to work within the structure of the Women’s League to push back on an unfair punishment. Ultimately, these structures had to be challenged from the outside: as students began to protest the rules of the Women’s League, it eventually disbanded entirely.

In illuminating the absurdity of many of the Women’s League rules, we also reflect on the rules that students are subject to today, particularly their effect on women. Peer-governed institutions may seem strange today, but as one Women’s League alumni asked us at Community Archaeology Day: “Would you rather the Carleton administration or the Northfield Police were in charge of discipline?”

Indeed, even though the days of peer-enforced curfews and hearings over tardiness are gone, Carleton students are still governed by many unwritten or unclear rules: students who work part-time or have family responsibilities may be ostracized by Carleton’s strict academic environment. Given that Carleton does not provide child care, is a student implicitly expected to drop out if they become pregnant? There are also many campus traditions that students are implicitly expected to participate in, and they can, therefore, function as either inclusive or exclusionary. If, for example, a student doesn’t attend Rotblatt because they are uncomfortable with consuming alcohol, are they breaking an unwritten Carleton rule? Ultimately, we came to ask ourselves: what rules exist for Carleton students now that might be questioned, challenged, or even ridiculed in the future? What rules exist for female-presenting students that are not explicitly written? How might “campusing” and the restrictive Women’s League culture have affected past students’ social lives?

Bibliography

Carleton Archives, 1917-1969. Use of The Women’s League Cabin.

Carleton Archives, 1930-1931. Dorm Life of Women.

Gould Library Archive, Carleton College. Untitled [Photo]. Series: 1930/1931 to 1939/40 Subseries: Dorm life – women [176903]. https://archive.carleton.edu/Detail/collections/189702 

Matson, Lisa. (1991-1992). Untitled [Photo]. Personal collection. 

Matson, Lisa. (1991-1992). Apparently we played Trivial Pursuit [Photo]. Personal collection. 

Matson, Lisa. (1991-1992). I guess we made a fire? [Photo]. Personal collection. 

Matson, Lisa. (1991-1992). It got messy [Photo]. Personal collection. 

Scharding, Mike, et al.. Gatorr – The Fighting Rabbit

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 42.

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 23.

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 29.

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 31.

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 32.

Kennedy, Sarah. Carleton Women’s League Cabin Alumni Survey. Carleton College, 2024, respondent 38.