The present study enriches our knowledge on the relationship between security personnel and situational cues that may provoke aggression, such as arms and uniforms. The study examined 259 security personnel who completed an aggression questionnaire (AGQ). The study aimed (a) to compare the tendency toward aggression of security personnel who carry or do not carry arms and/or wear a uniform and (b) to compare the tendency toward aggression of men and women security personnel who carry or do not carry arms and/or wear a uniform. The findings indicated no main effect for aggression cueing classification. However, uniformed men had higher scores of physical aggression than women, and women scored significantly higher on anger than men when not carrying any aggressive cues. The findings also revealed that in general, men security personnel reported much higher physical aggression than women, while women showed slightly higher means of verbal aggression than men. The findings are discussed in light of the gender theory and research.
This short comment on Loïc Wacquant’s ‘Marginality, Ethnicity, and Penality’ begins by highlighting three of Wacquant’s most important interventions. It then extends the analysis by drawing on research about urban marginality in South Africa and Palestine/Israel. Whereas Wacquant focuses on the state response to urban marginality, I suggest that it is important to look beyond the state to consider how other actors have responded to the growth of precarious populations. Specifically, I point out that private security companies and residents’ associations are at the forefront of efforts to police poor black South Africans, while an imperial network of security forces polices the Palestinian precariat.