I will play the “what if game” from both sides of the coin on this issue. Let’s say that employee did called the police due to some inherent bias for the student based on the color of her skin. We should still want to get down to the root of why the employee felt that way through communicating with one another. I am sure that the employee would be vilified/fired, but I am always more interested in finding a way going forward so others that feel that way can overcome any fear/bias based on race. And lets say that the employee called the police only because something was “out of place” with the student laying/sleeping on the couch after the cafeteria stopped serving food and there was no racial bias for the call. We still need to talk about what happened because it helps all involved when minorities can communicate about their experiences that cause large swaths of us to have an inherit distrust in systems that are built to protect us all.
@roycroftmom, I don’t know if future calls will be made for possible issues on Smith’s campus, but any police officer who would hesitate to respond to a call for help should probably be in another line of work. As far as common ground goes, I think we all can agree that racism is bad so that is the common ground and makes the further training for all staff a smart move. But they will need to determine what the caller was feeling/thinking in this individual case (Slightly surprised that a review of the case wasn’t handled by Smith employee instead of a law firm, but it shows that they are serious about finding out the truth). The truth of what actually happened is needed so that the facts dictate the thoughtful dialog between the students and the Smith administration.
I work at a college, and my daughter attended Smith. Summer programs geared towards minors (for everything from academic to athletic programs) require particular vigilance. Smith hosts multiple pre-college sessions. At my college every employee, no matter how long we’ve been there, are required to undergo background checks EVERY summer if we even step foot on campus. No messing around when it comes to the protection of children (and yes, some of that is for liability purposes, surely). The employee never mentioned race, may have thought this was a strange man on campus (in a campus building) with minors around during summer, and was doing as instructed. S/he is getting a very raw deal.
There are a lot of people making excuses for this employee. It comes down to a question of why this employee though the person lounging on the couch was out of place, AND - here’s they key to why it bothers some of us - why the employee was so uncomfortable that she felt it was more appropriate to call campus security than to simply ask the person what she was doing there. The way it was handled once security was called was appropriate, though that is often enough not the case. Few people make me that level of uncomfortable, but you can bet if I make that call I will let the dispatcher, or the police know what’s making me uncomfortable., because it helps them do their job.
The reasons for this employee being uncomfortable can guide the discussion. Was there something that the student could have done differently, and is that something that should be addressed by campus policy? Should the employees have some sort of training to recognize their own bias? I don’t mind bias, but appreciate when people can recognize their own bias, and adapt their actions accordingly. If the building was empty, then nobody else was “in danger,” and it wouldn’t hurt for the employee to ask herself “why am I uncomfortable” before placing that call. If you have private property, and someone wanders into your woods from the adjacent property, because the border is not obvious, do you immediately call the police and charge them with trespassing, or do you advise them that they are on your property, and ask them to leave? It is not only bothersome to those being reported on a regular basis, because of their very existence, but it is also a misuse of resources.
If this results in a discussion at Smith (and I believe it is more likely to happen precisely because it made it to social media), perhaps it will result in fewer such calls, with the understanding that it allows the authorities to focus on more pressing matters. Many schools now utilize conflict resolution programs, in the hope that conflict doesn’t have to rise to the level of administrative involvement. This is a perfect example of the employee not understanding the harm done by her call, and many people not understanding the harm done when they dismiss it is “no harm no foul.”
@CTScoutmom Did you read the Smith safety rules. The employee was following those rules that EXPLICITLY said to call the police even if the employee could not artulate even to themselves why the person sleeping on the couch in an empty building felt “off”. There was no need for the employee to be able to explain their feeling under the rules that the University dictated. This is why the employee is getting a raw deal.
Specifically those rules say Get involved by becoming more security conscious,” Smith College says , “and [report] all incidents of suspicious or criminal activity, NO MATTER HOW INSIGNIFICANT , to Campus Police IMMEDIATELY.”
It explains that “suspicious behavior” isn’t always articulable.
“Sometimes, callers are unable to identify what is suspicious about a person, and often the person about whom a concern is filed is . . . here for legitimate purposes.” But even if there are “innocent explanations,” it says, “your campus police department would rather investigate these situations sooner rather than be called when it is too late.”
Ctscoutmom, you are of course assuming the caller was white. If the caller had been black, then the exact same behavior would no longer be judged racist but rather a concern about safety by an employee following the rules.
Yes, but here’s the rub: Being black, and having short hair, is not suspicious activity, and will never be. And it’s not neutral to say “let the police investigate any suspicious activity, even if you can’t articulate the reasons for your suspicion,” not if the essence of the suspicion is based on race. Because the experience of constantly being treated as “suspicious” in one way or another is one of the most important ways African Americans are alienated from the institutions controlled by the white establishment, and because the frequency of those “suspicion” investigations creates a constant risk of error and fear resulting in real danger, and, yes, sometimes death, for the person being investigated.
None of you would ever want to play a game where anyone you made uncomfortable could force you to play a round of Russian Roulette, especially if you knew that you made lots of people around you uncomfortable for reasons mostly beyond your control. It wouldn’t matter if you “won” every round of Russian Roulette so far, because being forced to play is stress inducing, and you only have to lose once and everything is over. And there’s no special payoff for winning. If you “win,” you get to continue worrying about midterms and papers and jobs and lovers like every other normal person.
Whether or not the caller’s suspicion in this particular incident was race-based, it should be noted that people can be racist against their own race. For example, black people trying to hail taxis on the street encounter black taxi drivers who refuse to pick them up: http://www.northstarnewstoday.com/news/hailing-a-cab-while-black-in-chicago/
JHS, you once again are assuming that race sas the reason for the call, and not the behavior. And if the student had been sitting up or at a desk or otherwise lucid, I too would wonder what prompted the call. But being sprawled out either asleep or passed out on a sofa at that time of day that month in that place wasn’t “normal”, was it? Any other students doing that then? And your Russian roulette analogy is just silly.yes, there are too many violent police encounters with poc, but it is hardly like Russian roulette. All women, regardless of color, are much more likely to be victims of crime by both known and unknown assailants than by police.
I am confident that everyone is far more likely to be a victim of crime by non-police than by police. There are lots more non-police than police in the world, and I think the vast majority of violent injury is caused by someone whom the victim knows, not a random attacker or a police officer. That’s true for me, and it’s true for African American men, too.
That doesn’t change the fact that interactions with police officers feel far different for African Americans than they do for me. That is a fact, not an assumption, even if somewhere maybe there’s an African American whose attitude and experience lets him or her have the same attitude I have (trusting, confident that I will be treated fairly and respectfully, feeling a common stake in maintaining civil society).
I did not say, however, that I presumed the call was race-based in this case (although that’s for sure how I would bet if someone asked me). I said that the “neutral” see-something/say-something-to-the-police rule is not neutral in a world where black people are far more likely to be seen as “something” rather than “someone.” Do you seriously dispute that?
Well, black people are also much more likely to be the victims of a crime, so I am not sure how that plays out. Presumably, those more likely to be victimized might wish greater investigations of potentially suspicious activity
However, someone who has had bad experiences with police in terms of being treated as a dangerous suspect when s/he was not doing anything that should be suspicious may understandably be hesitant to want to call the police when there is a criminal threat. Example:
I can’t hep but wonder if the whole controversy could have been avoided if the police were trained to be more respectful. Like, you know, instead of asking “what are you doing here” ask “are you OK? need any help?”
Sometimes unease really is a gut feeling. What seems like no big deal to one person might cause discomfort in someone else.We haven’t heard any statement from the person who made the call in the Smith incident. I sometimes get creeped out at ATM’s, empty buildings, in elevators, empty parking lots, etc. I’m obviously easily creeped out!
Oh I get that unease is a gut feeling, the problem is that people have been conditioned to feel unease in the presence of black men they don’t know. As a white person, I know I have been guilty of this. You are alone and you see a black man coming towards you. Do you decide it’s time to cross the street? In my neighborhood it would be silly. Most of the guys I’ll see are just coming home from their well paying jobs in NYC. But in neighborhoods I know less well I might. And I am positive some of those guys are thinking there’s another white person profiling me. And they would be right. And I would be in the wrong most of the time.
