For women, going to the gym is often an uncomfortable experience. Around 56% of 1,107 women surveyed by Run Repeat in 2021 had first-hand experiences of unwanted attention, commentary or physical contact in the gym. The #gymcreep trend that garnered widespread attention and participation on TikTok is a testament to the prevalence of gender-based harassment in gyms. Women on TikTok documented and exposed men who followed women around gyms or inappropriately touched them.

Experiencing harassment negatively affects gym usage: 14% of the women surveyed who experienced harassment firsthand stopped going to the gym, 20% changed their gym routines to avoid certain areas and 20% changed their clothes or appearance.

These facts should raise concerns because exercise is important for physical and mental well-being. When gyms are uncomfortable places for women, women are left without welcoming spaces to exercise. Women need comfortable, harassment-free gym spaces. This is especially true for undergraduate women. Low levels of physical activity are associated with increased anxiety. Stressed-out undergraduate women need spaces to workout to maintain their mental and physical health.

It is time for William Jewell College to consider how it can better accommodate women seeking spaces to exercise. Currently, the school has one 24-hour gym that is open to all students. Many women, myself included, avoid the gym out of fear of harassment. For myself, this is not due to any experiences of harassment on campus but an aversion I have developed from interactions with men in gyms off-campus.

One popular solution to the problems faced by women in gyms has been to create women-only gym spaces. Designing separate spaces for women in gyms is intended to protect them from the predominant perpetrators of harassment: men. In women-only spaces, women can exercise without fear of uncomfortable staring, inappropriate touching and unwelcome recommendations or compliments. Instead, women get to enjoy the company of other women, which may also provide opportunities for camaraderie and new friendships.

Women-only gym spaces have a few flaws. First, these spaces often limit women to a certain set of training equipment or training classes designed for women. Many find these limitations frustrating and exclusive. Second, women-only gym spaces sometimes limit access to only cisgendered women. As a result, these spaces fail to accommodate non-cisgender people, who are also common victims of harassment.

Despite these flaws, a solution like women-only gym spaces would prove beneficial at William Jewell College. The college could designate a few hours on two or three days a week for woman-identifying and non-cisgendered students. This solution would grant both women and non-cisgendered people on campus exclusive access to all available gym equipment, free from the risk of harassment. Although some may argue these would merely be gym hours that exclude cisgendered men, the fact that women and non-cisgendered people are the common targets of harassment by cisgendered men makes the exclusionary period acceptable. 

Enforcement may raise additional concerns. How would the College enforce this policy given the complicated politics surrounding gender identities? Enforcement, however, may not be necessary. By simply designating certain hours as “women and non-cisgendered only,” women and non-cisgendered people would know of specific times when other women and non-cisgendered people would also be in the gym. There is comfort in numbers, and such comfort may help to encourage students with these identities to utilize the gym. Furthermore, cisgendered men may respect the policy and avoid using the gym during these hours without enforcement.

Another solution to the problems faced by women in gyms would be the creation of a supportive fitness organization for women and non-cisgendered people. For example, CHAARG is an up-and-coming national organization that has established health and wellness communities for undergraduate women at numerous United States colleges. The organization provides weekly fitness classes and connects members with small groups to help women grow confident in their fitness journey. This organization, or organizations like it, would provide women with training and support systems to help them feel more comfortable in gyms.

CHAARG has its own flaws. The organization requires interested students to pay $35 to $155 per semester, quarter or year (depending on the university) to become a member. The organization does provide accessibility support for students in need, which may help those who cannot afford such fees. Additionally, the organization does not portray itself as expressly inclusive of non-cisgendered people. According to CHAARG’s terms and conditions, the organization “does not categorically deny membership to an individual, based on race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, sexual orientation, veteran’s status, or the presence of a disability.” Importantly, gender identity is excluded from this list.

A fitness organization like this would benefit the College by providing students new to fitness with training and support. Instead of CHAARG, students could create a more accessible and inclusive organization. The organization could utilize fitness expertise within the student body by offering student-led fitness classes. Also, opening the organization up to all students would extend training and support to any fitness training newbie on campus. The organization would help to prevent the embarrassment many feel when using gyms without prior training or experience.

William Jewell College could encourage better health on campus by designating specific hours in the gym for women-identifying and non-cisgendered students. The college would also benefit from a student-led fitness organization. Both solutions address the harassment and embarrassment that continue to deter students from the gym. If adopted, the College would take significant steps towards recognizing and responding to the challenges faced by women, cisgendered people and those who lack fitness training on campus.

The Incident
Mary Leniton

On Oct. 4, a student in a William Jewell College Critical Thought and Inquiry (CTI) course faced pressure from a guest lecturer to say a racial epithet. Not long after the event, outrage surfaced on YikYak, the popular anonymous social media app. The Hilltop Monitor interviewed multiple students involved in an attempt to uncover an honest account of what happened. 

The word was said in CTI 284: School & Society in the United States, which is a Power and Justice course taught by education professor Amy Barth. When the incident occurred, a Black male staff member at William Jewell College who is not a part of the teaching faculty, was guest instructing the class. The class discussion that day centered on race and the power of racially charged words.

The Hilltop Monitor has drawn the following details from discussions with students in the class. We have reached out to relevant faculty, staff and members of the William Jewell College administration for comment, but, as of publication, have yet to hear their respective points of view.

Leading up to the event in question, the staff member had previously been a guest instructor for the class over the course of several weeks. During that time, he prompted students to use racially charged language over several class periods. The language the staff member prompted grew increasingly offensive and derogatory in the classes leading up to the use of the N-word on Oct. 4.

During the first class period, a student in the class claims, the staff member prompted students to direct the word “Black” toward Black students in the room – and specifically to do so as a term with negative connotations. In a second class period, according to the same student, the staff member prompted a white male student to call six Black students “negr**s.” Students report that the staff member then repeatedly prompted a student to repeat the N-word during a lecture on Oct. 4. The N-word is a racial epithet considered hateful and highly offensive by many in the Black community. The student who said the N-word wishes to remain anonymous and has not been in contact with The Hilltop Monitor.

The student prompted to say the N-word initially avoided saying the epithet, then did so quietly after facing pressure from the staff member. Multiple students reported that the staff member’s insistence grew more demanding. The student responded by clearly and more audibly repeating the epithet, the students say. According to anonymous comments made on YikYak, the student said the N-word a total of four times.

The Student Senate and students in the class report that some measures have been taken to address concerns about this matter. On Oct. 11, the class met with Professor Barth and members of William Jewell College administration, including Dr. Rodney Smith, the Vice President for Access and Engagement; Dr. Daniel Jasper, the Vice President of Academic Affairs; and Ernie Stufflebean, the Dean of Students. The Student Senate President and other officers were also present. The Oct. 11 meeting provided students with an opportunity to express their views regarding the Oct. 4 class period and collectively process its impact. 

On Oct. 25, the staff member met with students during class to explain his reasons for prompting students to use such words. A student describes how the staff member referenced several influential Black thinkers, including Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Du Bois, to contextualize why he conducted the class as he did. The staff member explained his efforts stemmed from a commitment to an “each one, teach one” mentality—a phrase tied to the slavery era, which encouraged enslaved individuals to educate fellow enslaved persons as a way to combat ignorance from a lack of access to education.

A Student’s Perspective
Mary Leniton

The Hilltop Monitor met with Jewell student Aniya Glenn, one of the students in the class, to discuss the use of racially charged language in the course.

As a Black woman and education major, Glenn provided valuable insight into her own experience in the class as well as that of other Black students in the class. She emphasized that after the Oct. 25 meeting with the staff member, it was clear to her that his error was in the delivery of his instruction. She explained that as an education major, “I understood that he was trying to go somewhere, but I didn’t understand where he was trying to go. I didn’t understand that he was trying to give the words less power, because it felt as if he was trying to give them more.”

During the interview, Glenn expressed concerns about the impact the staff member’s instruction had on herself and other Black students. “Once he started associating the word with me and the other black students, it became more uncomfortable for me,” Glenn said. She further described how another Black woman in the class chose not to attend on Oct. 4 because “she had a bad feeling about going [to class that day].”

Glenn did not hesitate to assert, “It’s unacceptable for a student to feel like it is unsafe to go to class.”

Glenn also reflected on the significance of the use of the N-word in the classroom after the hateful use of the same word on campus last year. She said,  “It seems as if whenever racial things happen on this campus, they’re kind of addressed enough [to save face], and then nothing else happens. There’s no true follow-up. No true consequences.” She recognized the administration did respond to the use of the word in the classroom by attending both the meetings on Oct. 11 and Oct. 25. The Hilltop Monitor is also aware of the fact that there was an email sent out to faculty and staff in regard to the matter by education professor Michael Stoll (via Dr. Smith) on Saturday, Oct 7, but students did not receive this message. 

Additionally, Glenn would like to see administration and faculty take active steps to ensure a situation like this does not occur again, possibly by previewing the staff member’s lectures, given the sensitive nature of their content, before they are presented in class.

Glenn also had a few words to share with the student body. She shared, “I ask that students actually try to go reach out and see where [the guest instructor] was coming from.”

Glenn concluded her interview with The Hilltop Monitor by giving her final thoughts on the matter. According to Glenn, the use of the N-word in the classroom was “inappropriate, but it was all in the delivery.” She explained that the word should have been delivered in context and its use made clearly optional for the students involved in the exercise. She also stated, “I think if you’re planning on singling out students or a group of students, you need to discuss…what they are comfortable with [ahead of time, especially if they’re a minority group].”

An Interview with the Student Senate President
Ethan Naber

(Disclosure: The author of this section is on the Cabinet of the Student Senate. The views presented in this section do not necessarily represent the views of the Student Senate.)

The Hilltop Monitor had the opportunity to sit down with Student Senate President Kamerin Hull for The Student Senate’s perspective on the use of the N-word in the class.

When Hull initially heard of the situation, the first thing she did was schedule a meeting with Ernie Stufflebean, Student Senate’s faculty advisor and Jewell’s dean of students, to discuss what the Senate’s response should be to the matter. The Student Senate’s cabinet then attended the class meeting with administrators on Oct. 11.

It was clear as soon as the incident occurred that the Senate was representing student voices. Hull emphasized that “[Senate cares] about the community and we want everyone to feel heard. Those that were negatively impacted, we want to really represent how they felt… If this ever occurs again, [we want students to] know what to do or where to go, [or who] is going to support them.”

The Student Senate did not make an official statement regarding the use of the N-word in CTI 284, though, preferring to wait for an administrative statement. Hull said that “[Senate was going to] give administration [a certain length of time] before the Senate might actively do something about responding to the incident.” College administrators have expressed concerns that issuing such a statement would open them to legal action. Even so, administrators have a duty to respond to such matters, and the Student Senate wants to press Jewell’s administration to respond to this incident, even if an official campus and community-wide statement is not made.

When historical context is provided, Hull explained, students can discuss a racial epithet in an appropriate and useful way. She stated, “If a professor was going to use that word…and say, ‘We are doing this in a historical lens.’ [Students could] understand that we are critiquing this word, we are not… using it or trying to give it any power.” 

Hull explained that the epithet has been “historically used to disempower people.” Given the word’s ability to disempower, she added, it is critical that members of the Jewell community acknowledge its negative impacts. 

Conclusion
Ethan Naber and Mary Leniton

Writers Leniton and Naber wish to express that whether such epithets are appropriate in any circumstance is a sensitive and important matter of discussion. Whatever one’s views may be, members of the Jewell community must make a good-faith attempt to understand each person’s point of view. We must remain empathetic as we consider the staff member’s decision to prompt the use of the N-word, but also as we consider the position of the student pressured to state the racial epithet. 

While the word is certainly hurtful and people may wish to fault the student for using it, the Jewell community must also remember that the student faced pressure from a person in power—the guest instructor—to use the epithet. Students should also remember to maintain solidarity amongst one another and stand up to power when they believe unacceptable behavior has occurred. The Jewell community must do the best it can to build an environment that adequately addresses and, when necessary, condemns unacceptable behavior in classrooms; only then will we progress as an institution.

As of the time of publication, no formal sanctions of the staff member have been announced nor has Jewell’s administration released a formal public statement addressing the incident.

There are a few—some might say many— widely held sources of complaints amongst Jewell’s student body; whether it is the persistently inconsistent, yet dependably uncomfortable, building temperatures or the inconvenient lack of parking. Amidst these things we all care to complain about are laundry services and etiquette. I asked a few students about their experiences.

Not long ago, an unnamed senior experienced what some would call, or at least the senior would, a blatant disregard for basic laundry room etiquette. After placing her clothes in the Melrose dormitory washers, she left her dryer balls on each washer lid with the intent of conveniently placing them with each load once they were moved to a dryer. However, a fellow Melrose resident had other plans. The senior returned promptly, a short thirty-five minutes later, to find her dryer balls missing.

The senior, a force to not be reckoned with, waited to see who the culprit was. It did not take long before the culprit revealed themselves. The culprit denied knowing how the dryer balls wound up in their laundry. However, the senior remains convinced that the dryer balls were taken and used by the culprit and not a mysterious third party. Understandably, the senior does not find the idea of a random havoc inducing laundry room distuber convincing.

When asked about her thoughts on appropriate laundry room etiquette, the senior responded, “As a rule, don’t touch other people’s stuff.” She did, however, add a few further considerations: “Because laundry is free, I think it’s okay to move someone’s clothes from the dryers into the washers after waiting five to 10 minutes. It also makes sense to me to move laundry out of the dryers. If you really don’t want people to touch your stuff, do what I do and make sure to move your laundry soon after it is done.” The senior further emphasized, “If it’s not to free up washers or dryers, leave other people’s things alone.”

Proper laundry room etiquette is a topic that students often discuss. Students tend to fall on two sides of the issue. On the one hand, many students argue residents should remove their own laundry within the five to 10 minute window, give or take a few minutes. It’s your stuff, you are responsible for it, or so the argument goes. Other’s adopt the position offered by the previously mentioned senior. As college students, we all have busy lives. It’s understandable if a resident forgets their laundry or does not return to move it for a while. Laundry is free, so it’s not much of an inconvenience for others to move laundry from washers to dryers. However, residents should not take offense if their laundry is moved after five to 10 minutes.

Besides appropriate laundry room behavior, students also have serious complaints about laundry services. Sophomore Kandace Gill notes, “Machines are often broken or occupied, so I usually go off of campus to the laundromat to avoid any issues.” While students enjoy free services on campus, they come with several problems. Many students complain of the lack of washers and dryers available. Yet, the biggest inconvenience is probably the weak dryers. It often takes two to three cycles to fully dry clothes, even when students only partially fill dryers.

To mitigate these problems, students have devised a few coping mechanisms. Some, like Gill, do their laundry off campus either at parents’ houses or at other locations. Some students do laundry at less busy times, such as on Sunday mornings when most students choose to sleep in. To navigate around drying problems, many students choose to air dry their damp clothes when one dryer cycle is not enough.

One of the perks of going to Jewell is free laundry. Undeniably, inappropriate laundry room behavior and recent service issues take a bit of the shine off of the deal. With a shift to more thoughtful laundry room etiquette and a few maintenance repairs, laundry would be one less topic for Jewell students to complain about.

Growing up my parents emphasized the importance of discovering a hobby. Both my brother and I were encouraged to explore whatever piqued our interests – from karate lessons to barrel racing – with no gender specificity, might I add. I attempted several activities, including the aforementioned karate, as well as barrel racing lessons, piano and violin lessons, baking, drawing, photography, crochet and a brief stint in potholder making. I quickly learned that I lacked the patience necessary to commit to these hobbies.

But one hobby has remained as an exception to my slight character flaw: dance. I began consistently dancing at the age of six, stubbornly insisting to be a ballerina and refusing tap and jazz. Over the years, I opened up to a range of styles and appreciate the uniqueness and beauty of each. Discovering an activity to partake in outside the constant rush of life has been essential for my mental health and overall happiness.

If I’m going to be honest, I am not the most talented dancer in the world. I lack the flexibility, natural grace, and athletic physique worthy of any applause. As someone who has always strived to be the best at what I do, realizing that fact was brutally difficult. But a hobby is not something you are required to be amazing at. A hobby is something you do because you enjoy it, regardless if you are good at it. Dance is my escape from feeling like I have to do everything perfectly all the time.

I encourage you to give dance a try, even if you know you aren’t any good. As I said, I am not either. If you are new to the world of dance, I would begin by finding a tutorial on YouTube or TikTok. I would be lying if I denied that I learned the WAP dance one night instead of studying. When choosing a dance, look for songs or styles you enjoy. Kyle Hanagami’s Break My Heart tutorial is a good example of what to look for. I also highly encourage inviting friends to join.

Outside of choreographed dancing, improvisation is my favorite way to relax and release stress. Improv is a great way to connect with your range of motion and explore a new creative outlet. When I improv, I typically warm up to a few of my favorite songs and then choose either one or a playlist of songs to dance to. It can be hard sometimes, not knowing what step to do next, but I imagine improv as acting out a story as a trick to keep moving. 

Dance doesn’t have to be anything complicated. It can be as simple as turning up the music and letting loose. Don’t hold yourself back. There’s no right or wrong way to move, just have fun. There’s also no right time or place. Dance down grocery aisles, under the stars or in the rain. Have your own high school musical cafeteria moment, I dare you. Or maybe dancing is not your thing, but give it a try before you decide – it’s a good excuse to act ridiculous intentionally.