From the Editorial Staff... - Campus Safety: A woman’s worth

the Editorial Staff
11/04/11

Nourishment, acceptance and safety—these are the prerequisites that allow humanity to flourish. Psychologist Abraham Maslow considered these factors the most important in his concept of people’s hierarchy of needs. Here at William Jewell College, these three basic needs are attended to by the cafeteria; faculty, staff, peers and campus safety respectively. Generally, the students have full stomachs, a sense of camaraderie and a feeling of security on campus, but sometimes the sense of security is lacking, especially in the female population on the Hill.

The current members of the campus safety team perform their jobs well, but there is some concern among students about the lack of women security officers since the retirement of Sharon Carey last year. The presence of a woman in the capacity of a security guard benefited students, regardless of sex.

The issue of safety on campus becomes especially pertinent when discussing the Hill after dark. Female students walking around after nightfall often are met by a campus safety vehicle somewhere between destinations. For most, it is comforting to see a friendly face offering a quick zip to the security of a residence hall. There are students, however, who are uncomfortable with receiving a ride from a male security officer. While no one has had an overwhelmingly negative experience with the current staff, there exists a certain mentality concerning this type of scenario. Young girls are taught that sometimes the greatest dangers lurk where you least expect them, and this translates into the awkwardness that some may feel. The addition of a woman to the campus safety team could alleviate this worry.
Regarding the male student population, many of them would be reluctant to oppose physically women in an authoritative role. In the middle of a fight, a woman might be more apt to subdue verbally the aggressors without any physical intervention. In short, men are less likely to lash out against a woman than a fellow man. Perhaps all that is needed on the scene of an altercation is a sympathetic, kind person to diminish ire.

One of the arguments often deployed against women as security officers is that women are not as strong as men, and therefore, may be less effective in certain situations. But, this “con,” so to speak, does not have to be limited only to women. Male security officers cannot be guaranteed to be bigger, badder and better equipped than their assailants. No one is impervious to bullets, a switchblade or an old-fashioned punch to the nose. What combat situations draw upon more than physical strength is a person’s logic and the ability to maintain rational behavior in chaos. This may be found in members of both sexes, as well as re-enforced in job training.

This viewpoint is not isolated to the Monitor editorial staff.  It seems to permeate into the rest of the student body. Proper security measures (which include staffing) are a benefit to the entire College community. For students, this means we may feel safe in any condition on campus. Faculty and administration, in turn, would have the knowledge that the College is well-staffed for its needs. The proposed change would even increase on-duty safety for the current members of campus safety. For these reasons, we would like to see the addition of a woman to campus security. It simply seems the prudent thing to do.