Not just a video

By Herman M. Lagon

The security guard-garland girl fight has sparked public outrage. A viral video shows a mall guard forcibly removing a young flower vendor and destroying her sampaguita garlands. Many defended the girl and criticized the guard. We must pause before concluding. In the heat of the moment, emotions cloud context. Viral videos show a single moment without context. The incident becomes more nuanced when considering the guard and vendor’s pressures and motivations.

It is easy to forget that security guards are people, too, often under pressure. They must sometimes make snap decisions to keep the space safe and orderly. The guard may have been harsh, but he likely followed mall policy. He wanted to stop disruption or illegal activity. He enforced the rules, so his unprofessionalism and lack of empathy were not malicious.

The young sampaguita flower seller, Jeny, is on the other side. Street vendor Jeny is also a college student working to pay for her education. Instead of lying or causing trouble, she was trying to survive. Context is crucial but often overlooked in viral videos where emotions cloud judgment. Jeny was understandably upset. Being mistreated in public can be humiliating, especially when one is struggling financially. Although justified, her anger does not erase the fact that the guard was also under pressure and constraints. His lack of empathy was unfortunate, but it was a training error.

We must also consider both parties’ emotions. Understandably, Jeny is angry—she works hard to make ends meet, and being dismissed would be frustrating. The guard’s excessive actions were likely caused by stress, confusion, and a lack of conflict resolution training. Security guards learn rules but not how to interact with people. In situations like this, where emotions run high, and the stakes feel personal, losing empathy can lead to a communication breakdown and, as seen, a violent altercation.

Both Jeny and the guard were under pressure. Like many working-class Pinoys, Jeny struggled to pay for her education and meet her needs. The guard was also under pressure to enforce mall rules. Both responded to external pressures, but their responses differed. It is important to remember that the guard was just trying to do his job, but his lack of training caused him to act unprofessionally. His wrong approach was out of duty, not malice.

Empathy is highly valued in our culture. We learn to sympathize with others and help when we can. However, lacking empathy due to ignorance, stress, or training creates a dangerous disconnect. This does not excuse the guard’s actions but raises the question: Why did he do the thing against Jeny? Was he following orders or under pressure from his superiors to follow the rules? We must consider his role and responsibilities in context to understand him.

The virality of the video heightens the emotion. In the age of social media, we judge quickly based on little information. True, social media encourages oversimplifying complex situations. Fast judgment is easy in a world where everything is captured and shared instantly. The guard symbolized authority, while Jeny represented the oppressed. What if the story is more complicated? What if the system failed both parties differently?

The guard’s dismissal may seem justified, but this incident should not be about punishment. It offers growth for the security agency, mall, and the public. Instead of focusing on the guard’s consequences, we should have a larger conversation about how we treat authority figures and vulnerable people. This incident may inspire security industry training, compassion, and understanding. Learning from bad behavior and preventing it is what matters.

Context is key to this incident. Their circumstances shaped Jeny’s survival struggle and the guard’s order keeping. Understanding these dynamics does not excuse anyone’s actions; it recognizes the forces that caused the conflict. Empathy, understanding, and better leadership training can help us address the root causes of such incidents. Instead of assigning blame, learn from the experience and create fair and compassionate systems.

This shows that context really matters. One moment in time does not explain an incident. To move forward, we must acknowledge both parties’ pressures and challenges and work toward a society that values empathy and respect for all. Only then can we create a system that resolves conflicts with understanding, not hostility.

***

Doc H fondly describes himself as a “student of and for life” who, like many others, aspires to a life-giving and why-driven world grounded in social justice and the pursuit of happiness. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions he is employed or connected with.