This Is Where We Post

3 Sep
Posted on Author ProfSi 25

Dear Students:

Here is where we will post. I think it is better to get our feet wet on the content, then begin to post. Once you write your post, don’t forget to hit publish. We will go over all of this in class Monday.

Best,

ProfSi

25 Replies to “This Is Where We Post”

  2. In chapters 4-6 of Are Prisons Obsolete? (this platform will not let me italicize) Angela Y. Davis discusses two specific ideas that contribute to the book’s main argument: the United States’ prison system is obsolete because it does not serve its intended purpose— rehabilitation. The first of these ideas is that the nature of punishment in the United States has starkly gendered characteristics that have not manifested in isolation but rather reflect the deeply gendered structure of larger society. Davis’ discussion of the impact of gender in the prison system is grounded in a thorough explication of the history of the penitentiary in the United States. She highlights that from the emergence of imprisonment as the primary mode of punishment, convicted women were viewed differently than convicted men. This difference— she contends—- is rooted in traditional perceptions of masculinity and femininity; masculine criminality has always been an understood, normal phenomenon, but feminine criminality was always synonymous with insanity. Female convicts were also treated differently from their male counterparts because—unlike men, who were considered citizens and therefore possessed rights outside of prison—- women convicts were assumed to have forfeited rights that they didn’t even possess in the free world. Women could not participate in the process of “redemption,” for they were labeled as “fallen women,” women who transgressed fundamental principles of womanhood, and were thus incapable of the salvation prison was intended to provide. Women were not provided with special arrangements (in other words, they were not housed separately from men), and instead of being subject to traditionally harsh practices—such as isolation—- women were subject to sexual abuse. Even when early prison reformers such as Quakers initially argued for reform in the prison system— contending that women could achieve salvation—their proposed reforms were not only marked with gender inequality but led to deeply racist outcomes. Quakers advocated that womens’ cells be replaced with cottages to “infuse domesticity” (motherhood and wifehood) back into women. However, Angela Y. Davis emphasizes that these “feminizations” were ideologically designed to “transform” affluent, white women— not women of color.

    Despite the obvious influence of gender in punishment and the insurgence of women as the fastest growing sector of the US prison population, Davis contends that people not only fail to recognize the importance of these issues and the influence gender still holds over the modern prison system, but they also fail to recognize that these early conceptions of female criminality continue to shape modern prison practices. The parallelism between female insanity and female criminality is still apparent in the disproportionate rates in which women convicts are given or prescribed psychiatric drugs in comparison to male convicts. In addition, and most importantly, women are still subjected to institutionalized sexual abuse. Davis emphasizes the state-implemented strip search procedure as a clear example of the prevalence of this abuse. During a strip search, officers examine the genital and anal areas of the suspect (in the case, a female convict) to ensure that the individual does not possess hidden contraband. Davis emphasizes that if officers were not adorned with a uniform or the safety of the state’s power, these practices would be sexual assault. Additionally, the effects of the intersectionality of race and gender in the prison system have also manifested in modern realities. Angela Y. Davis contends that the prison incarceration rate for black women exceeds that of white men, and Native American women are drastically overrepresented in the prison system, constituting 25% of the entire female prison population.

    One aspect of this chapter that piqued my interest was the influence of feminist attitudes on the treatment of women in prison. Davis highlights that the growth of feminism not only led to calls for “separate but equal” institutions but subsequently equal treatment of men and women in institutions. In other words, feminist arguments led to more repressive conditions for female convicts (even going so far to include the equal right to be fired at). I was particularly struck by Davis’ phraseology and characterization of these requests; she described them as “bizarre.” Although she clearly believes in the complete abolition of these practices, I was surprised that she considered these feminist requests ‘bizarre.’ Although these requests certainly result in bizarre outcomes…would you say that these requests for equal treatment in the prison system were bizarre? Even more importantly, would you say that these repressive conditions were truly an establishment of a new frontier for female punishment in the prison system? Considering the record of sexual abuse women endured, did feminists truly need to fight for women to receive equally repressive punishment in comparison to their male counterparts? Weren’t they already experiencing violence, although it manifested itself differently?

    The second argument Angela Y. Davis makes is that the prison industrial complex (PIC) has had an integral role in the dramatic increase in prison populations in the United States (despite public perception that an increase in crime has driven the increase in incarcerated individuals). She argues that the PIC is a carefully curated system “driven by ideologies of racism and the pursuit of profit” that has not only made punishment a reliable aspect of the larger economy but pursues profit at the expense of social damage (84). In making this argument, she contends that the PIC and the military industrial complex have a symbiotic relationship, for they both prioritize profit at the expense of damage to communities of color. This damage is evident in the current rates of incarceration; according to data from 2002, African Americans represented the majority of prisoners in federal, state, and county prisons (803,400 individuals). Davis highlights that the racial composition of prisons is approaching the composition of black prisoners to white prisoners during the southern convict lease and county chain gang system. These systems all have direct incentive to keep prisoners for as long as possible.

    In addition, Davis emphasizes the complexity and encompassing nature of the PIC by highlighting that even organizations and realms that appear completely removed from the PIC— such as the medical and scientific research field— are actually profiteers from its capabilities. Medical research specifically profited from full prison populations, as many researchers used prisoners as subjects for their experiments. Davis highlights that even if private prisons were abolished, the PIC’s many strategies for profit would still exist, for many companies profit by selling their products to correctional facilities (such as cellular service providers like Verizon). This led me to wonder…is there truly a way that the profiteering powers of the PIC can be entirely addressed? If commodities are required in correctional facilities, as they are, how can we expect companies to provide their services for free? Although there are clearly ethical concerns on this front, what role do fundamental business practices play or should be allowed to play?

    Davis concludes the book with proposed abolitionist alternatives, policies and recommendations that could—over time— remedy the deep-seated, systemic issues present in the current prison system. She highlights that we, collectively, find it hard to imagine alternatives to prison. However, Davis emphasizes that we must let go of our desire to find a quick, alternative solution to prison, and adopt more complicated frameworks that yield real results. In other words, proper solutions will not merely be “prison substitutes” but deep-seated change that removes prison from the social and ideological landscapes of our society and minds. Davis contends that a revitalization of schools— a process that would eliminate violence from schools— is the most powerful alternative to jails and prisons. While the quality of education individuals receive may be adequate, Davis implies that the need for the revitalization of the education system is based upon the need for a change in environment. The presence of armed security guards, police officers, and metal detectors throughout various levels of the school system not only impedes learning but act as “prison conduits.”

    This point reminded me of our in class discussions about Dr. Simpson’s experience teaching inmates. Specifically, I was reminded of inmates’ eagerness to learn. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, approximately 52% of state prison inmates and 57% of federal prison inmates have taken education classes since admission to a correctional facility. Although emphasizing education (and the impact of school in general) when an individual is already incarcerated strays from Davis’ point, I believe it is important to note that the value of education already appears to be recognized by individuals who have both experienced the realities of incarceration and failing school systems. As Davis implies, many incarcerated individuals’ prior school experiences have been ones riddled with violence. Regardless of these negative experiences—- and much to my surprise—over half of the inmate population in state and federal US prisons (according to the data above) express a desire to return to learning. This leads me to believe that a revitalization of the education system would have uniquely beneficial outcomes on the lives of young people in historically oppressed communities, for if inmates are eager to learn— despite previously difficult educational experiences— how eager will they be to learn if school was always a safe, nurturing space?

    Davis also calls for further mental health and drug rehabilitation facilities, specifically free facilities where individuals of all socioeconomic statuses can seek treatment, and further defense of immigrants rights. Overall, she emphasizes the need for society to separate crime from punishment and opt for restorative law practices rather than criminal law practices.

    The final aspect of the book that I was uniquely affected by was one of her last sentences, which contended that when an individual commits a crime we should not first think of the punishment that should be inflicted but rather we should ask…why do these things happen? Why was this crime committed? Personally, I believe that this question encapsulates her message; nothing occurs in a vacuum, but rather everything is a reflection or extension of greater societal systems and structures. In order to combat these issues, we must not only acknowledge the corrupt systems that are in place, but we must commit ourselves to understanding them.

  3. I agree with your argument about the treatment of female prisoners. Something that really stood out to me in the reading was the strip search which is incredibly invasive and inhumane treatment of people who we are supposedly trying to reform. An incredibly meaningful part of the chapter was reading about how the guards broke down crying upon watching the representations of their own actions out of the prison context. To me, I took it to mean that the typical mentality of prison guards is that they believe that prisoners are people without rights due to the crimes they have committed. Whether that is the right to freedom or basic human respect and fair treatment, I’m not sure they know the answer to this. Why does the state give them so much power to the point where such sexual assault is normalized in female prisons. I also thought that your point about the requests for equal treatment were extremely bizarre and I think that it is this type of feminism that people usually look at and therefore attack. Instead of trying to make one worse to make it equal to the other, why not better one so they are both equal?

  4. Sarah, thank you for the wonderful post and interesting questions posed within it. In response to your questions about the influence of feminism attitudes on the treatment of women in prison I would say that it is not bizarre for women to ask for equal treatment in the prison system although I agree that the results of these calls for equal treatment did yield bizarre results. As Davis mentions in chapter 4 women have historically been viewed differently than men under the eyes of the correctional system. While society has viewed male criminals as people that needed to be punished so they could achieve “penitence” or “reform” and therefore achieve redemption, female criminals were oftentimes viewed as “insane” or that they violated some kind of social contract making them unable to achieve redemption like their male counterparts. This resulted in many of them being sent to mental/psychiatric institutions because their criminality wasn’t a poor choice or lapse of judgment but an actual mental deficiency or mental instability. Additionally female criminals were far more likely to be inebriated with loads of drugs that the state believed would “help them” but in reality were just being used to control them which was a practice not often used with their male counterparts. While the actual experiences that male and female criminals endured in prison were different, I think that it is safe to say that the treatment was indeed unequal, because of the different ideology surrounding female criminals as well as the where they were sentenced to and the way they were treated, therefore it isn’t bizarre to me that feminists called for a more equal treatment of male and female prisoners. Now with that being said I do not think that feminists had any idea of the potential consequences for their push for equal treatment of male and female prisoners and would probably not be happy with the results that came from their efforts i.e. more repressive conditions for female criminals. In response to your other questions about, did feminists truly need to fight for women to receive equally repressive punishment in comparison to their male counterparts, I don’t think they necessarily had the foresight to understand the consequences of what they were asking for. Additionally, I think that the feminists call for equal repression came from a desire for women to be punished in more traditional ways and not have the punishments be focused around sexual abuse. So no, I do not think that feminists needed to fight for women to receive equally repressive punishment in comparison to their male counterparts, I think that they more so wanted the stigma surrounding the different ideologies for male and female criminals to become more equal and for them to be treated as such.

  5. (Note: It won’t let me edit/revise/delete my previous post so I’m submitting another one, please ignore the first one)

    Sarah, I agree with your argument about the treatment of female prisoners. Something that really stood out to me in the reading was the strip search which is incredibly invasive and inhumane treatment of people who we are supposedly trying to reform. An incredibly meaningful part of the chapter was reading about how the guards broke down crying upon watching the representations of their own actions out of the prison context. To me, I took it to mean that the typical mentality of prison guards is that they believe that prisoners are people without rights due to the crimes they have committed. Whether that is the right to freedom or basic human respect and fair treatment, I’m not sure they know the answer to this. Why does the state give them so much power to the point where such sexual assault is normalized in female prisons. I also thought that your point about the requests for equal treatment were extremely bizarre and I think that it is this type of feminism that people usually look at and therefore attack. Instead of trying to make one worse to make it equal to the other, why not better one so they are both equal? Furthermore, you talk about how the medical and scientific field capitalize/profit off of using prisoners as experimental subjects. This is something that most people either don’t know or don’t care to question. Once again, how can we treat people as if they don’t have basic human rights? There is a lot of outrage (justly so) over animal cruelty and animal testing, but I hear far more about that than testing being done on prisoners. This I believe ties into the comparisons of slavery and prisons. How prison is modern day slavery. The Washington Post has an insightful article which highlights that American medicine was built on the backs of slaves. Our knowledge about women’s health and gynecology can all be attributed to the experiments performed on slave women. This is incredibly similar to your points on the medical and scientific research field being profiteers from its capabilities. I also liked your point about how eager inmates/people in historical oppressed communities might benefit from schools if they were safe and nurturing. I want to add onto that with another observation, some European countries offer students money to attend school. The monthly stipend encourages students to study, motivate activity, and allow them to start becoming responsible citizens as they transition to adulthood. Many students in historically oppressed communities drop out of school or suffer failing grades for many different reasons. Financial instability is one of them. With something like a stipend or perhaps gift cards, this could incentivize them to work hard in school and not be forced to take up second and third jobs that could impact their schooling. Davis and Sarah both point out the importance and the value of a quality education, something that could keep a lot of people out of prisons. That is just one idea to make the quality of education better and there is so much more that could be done. At the end of the day, we cannot keep blaming the people in the system but we must question the actual system itself in order to break the cycle of incarceration.

  6. I also found the effect of feminist movements on female prisoners quite intriguing. Sarah brought up the point: “Considering the record of sexual abuse women endured, did feminists truly need to fight for women to receive equally repressive punishment in comparison to their male counterparts?” A lot of the push for equal punishment for women despite the sexual abuse is rooted in overall gender inequality. As you mentioned, women were almost viewed as second-class citizens as they lacked many of the rights and freedoms their male counterparts possessed. If women are treated as less than in “free” society, these differences would only be amplified in the prison system as Dr. Simpson pointed out in class. Male prisoners are already deemed numbers, psychopaths, sociopaths, animals, inhuman, etc., so it would be safe to assume that women are treated as even less than these awful characters. While the treatment of men in prison was (and still is) already quite undesirable, women faced worse punishment, and therefore wanted to bring themselves up to an already low baseline. Equalizing punishments within prisons (where every inequality is inflated), helped the general population think of these people as “criminals” instead of individuals suffering from psychosis. None of these efforts eliminate the issue of sexual assault, but if the image of women is improved overall, it would reasonably follow that the frequency of sexual assault is reduced, as they closer approach being identified as human. Having said all that, I think that it was vital for women to fight for equal repressive punishment, as what they were receiving was far more repressive in a different way.

    Additionally, as Will mentioned, the feminists pushing these ideas could not have predicted the outcome of their efforts. Of course the punishment that any prisoner receives regardless of the severity of their “crime”, their race, gender, religion, nationality, ethnicity, sexuality, etc., is quite undesirable, women are now a part of this questionable system. They are no longer sentenced to sanitariums and are walking amongst everyone else in the corrections system. Prison systems in the US are incredibly flawed, but until these systems are reformed, punishment will at least be equal across genders. Rehabilitation is certainly a better consequence than punishment, however, women being punished for a crime committed is arguably better than them being treated as having conditions they don’t possess and potentially facing worse consequences, or maybe even death.

  7. Sarah, I really appreciate your thoughtful and informative post. Several of your main points resonated with the takeaways that I had from reading Davis’ book as well. Your questions were thought-provoking, and I wanted to comment on one of them. I too feel discouraged by the seemingly inevitable “profiteering powers of the PIC,” as you put it. It appears that various organizations, enterprises, and individuals are all interconnected through this humongous system that would require significant interference to change its methods. If, as Davis desires, there was complete prison abolition and structural reversal, then a large percentage of the country would be economically impacted. However, I do not believe this is an excuse to not reconfigure the system or refocus on rehabilitation. I assume that the process of either abolitioning or updating our country’s current punishment methods would heavily shift the allocation of funds, thus resulting in additional capital that could allow for certain commodities to be provided. Generally, I think the procedure that our government chooses must take into consideration the full extent of the PIC and its substantial list of players. In doing so, I believe that the privatization currently fueling the PIC would be evaluated and subsequently reduced. The line between using prisoners for labor and treating them as slaves is already thin, and Davis underscores this connection between slavery and the PIC’s tunnel vision on profits. Davis writes, “companies court the state within and outside the United States for the purpose of obtaining prison contracts, bringing punishment and profit together in a menacing embrace” (98-99). As Sarah mentioned, the companies that do business in this industrial complex are vast and vary drastically from cell phone service providers to Ace Hardware. As long as companies consider prisons an option to expand their operations, this cycle will continue to persist. Davis explains the difference between private and public prisons, mostly highlighting that it is not as big of a distinction as one may assume. Though I do not have a direct answer for your question, Sarah, I agree that it is an ethical concern that must be addressed in this conversation. I also found it interesting when Davis discussed the way other countries handle supermax security. South Africa, in particular, proved to be a peculiar case study. They began with more progressive ideals but have since transitioned to be more oppressive and are trending towards privatization.

  8. As Dr. Simpson and I were discussing our thesis, she brought up the point that the Bard Prison Initiative does not graduate as many women as they do men. She reasoned that one possibility might be because women do not serve as long as men do. And a program like BPI, requires a dedicated amount of time and women’s sentences do not give them a proper amount of time to undergo the program. While this is certainly a possibility, it makes me wonder what other possibilities there might be that could explain this disparity. And, more generally, why abolitionists and reformists, continue to prioritize men’s issues over women’s when it comes to prisons. Davis’ chapter on how gender influences the criminal justice system demonstrates the pervasiveness of patriarchal values when it comes to punishment and criminality.
    To your point on Davis’ description of feminist requests as “bizzare,” I was slightly confused. The way I interpreted Davis’ usage of the word “bizarre” was to describe how the call for “separate but equal” institutions led to more repressive conditions for women. I think Davis was critiquing the feminist idea that women need to be equal to men in all capacities. By likening the conditions of women’s prisons to men’s, it suggests that the punishment of men is the norm, continuing the idea that female criminality is ‘deviant’ and male criminality is ‘expected.’ I’m not 100% sure of what your critique of her phraseology is, but I wanted to offer my interpretation of the section.

  9. In “Crime and Marginalization of African American Males in Contemporary America,” author Owen Brown skillfully compiles two centuries worth of evidence suggesting that the American legal system has forcefully controlled Black males and hampered their progress in society. Brown uses several powerful examples from various times in US history to bolster his claim, including those from the modern day. In doing so, Du Bois makes the claim that the American legal system has always been designed to control black bodies and movements, which Brown expands upon throughout the course of the paper.
    He begins by analyzing a chapter from WEB Du Bois’ famous novel The Philadelphia Negro, in which Du Bois breaks down the role that the black man has had in several periods of time ranging from before the civil war to the early 1900s. In doing so he discusses incarceration rates, the different classes of black families living in the city, and the many external factors which may push newly immigrated black men to commit crimes. An important item discussed in this section is Du Bois’ notion of the lowest echelon of society is the submerged tenth, which Brown continues to claim exists today as a product of oppression against black Americans.
    Brown uses this piece as a basis for the remainder of his paper, arguing that these objections to the treatment of black men continue to ring true today. He discusses this through the lens of criminal legislation passed which appears to be colorblind on the surface, such as the laws from the war on drugs. By enumerating various drug sentencing laws over the past several decades and their enforcement by white police offers using biased methods such as stop and frisk, Brown illustrates how these laws and their application set back black men to their white counterparts.
    Additionally, Brown describes the lack of educational opportunities at inner city schools and their serious impact on the community. The culmination of underqualified teachers, low resources and poor expectations for students yields an environment which makes it far more difficult for students to succeed. Additionally, heavy discipline procedures result in students being suspended frequently, thus being groomed to end up in prison, disciplined by the state. Consequently, countless school districts are considered “failing,” in which more than half of men do not graduate. Thus, achieving employment without a high school diploma, in addition to implicit biases by white employers, becomes all the more difficult for black men.
    All of these issues culminate together to make American black men far more antisocial than their white counter parts, disarming their ability to establish a nuclear family. Further, Brown claims it prevents them from breaking the cycle of poverty which they have existed in as a product of the geoculture of historic capital that brought their ancestors to America as Slaves in the first place.
    Questions:
    1. A problem Brown raises is the issue of local public schools being underfunded with inadequate resources, yielding poor education and no escape from poverty for young men. A 1973 supreme court case, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, pondered whether to eliminate property taxes funding public schools and to standardize their funding across the state. How might the educational systems or black neighborhoods looked today if this means of funding was found unconstitutional?
    2. What would be the most influential policy congress could change tomorrow to fix the issues faced by Black men that Brown describes?

    • I also found Brown’s discussion of the lack of educational opportunities at inner city schools to be a particularly salient aspect of his argument. The first question William asks, which is directly related to the importance of establishing quality schools and therefore education, allows for an interesting hypothetical experiment. The Supreme Court case San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez ultimately decided that property taxes could be used to fund public schools (because doing so does not violate the Equal Protection Clause). If this case were decided a different way—namely, if the SCOTUS decided that this discrepancy in funding was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause— I believe that the quality of schools (and therefore education) within a state would be relatively equal (at least much more equal than it is now). In other words, Black and historically poor neighborhoods would be able to benefit from an education that is closer in quality to the education white and historically affluent neighborhoods experience. This increase in opportunity would have monetarily and opportunistically rejuvenated Black and historically poor neighborhoods, and schools would no longer function as school-to-prison pipelines. I do believe that this Supreme Court case was instrumental in ensuring that certain marginalized groups—namely, Black communities— remain marginalized. After watching the documentary Who Are We: A Chronicle of Racism in America the use of systems and laws to perpetuate discrimination, racism, and white supremacy is ever more apparent in my mind. Although the Supreme Court claims to be unbiased analyzers and interpreters of the United States Constitution, they are ultimately influenced and motivated by their ideologies. San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez was a case decided in 1973, merely a decade after Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated— an event that, according to Jeffrey Robinson, highlighted a “tipping point” in U.S. racial progress. The historical context of this case, namely when it was decided, highlights its motivations and allows us to see that had the Court decided differently (had they decided to rule against financial inequality), they would have ruled in favor of a people and a community they were insistent on degrading.

      William also asks a second hypothetical question. This question is one I think everyone would struggle with, as finding the most important solution for a systemic and historically complex problem is never an easy task. Nevertheless, I will contribute some thoughts, however useful they may be. I recently read an article— about the ability of certain policies to address social problems that affect Black men— after finishing Angela Davis’ Are Prisons Obsolete? One of the policy solutions in this article that particularly stuck with me were place-based policies. The article highlighted that high-quality neighborhoods are usually characterized by poor-quality schools, lack of job access, social networks, and healthcare. In addition, they are plagued with common identifiers such as high crime rates and pollution. Interestingly, the article highlighted that boys—rather than girls—- demonstrate more sensitivity to their environments in their youth, meaning that a poor environment often materializes in behavioral issues and lower educational attainment for boys more commonly than it does for girls. The article contends that place-based policies can adverse these negative outcomes as they would “provide neighborhoods with greater resources and invest money in areas that need it.” Considering that 26% of Black households live in high-poverty neighborhoods—the neighborhoods that would be identified as guaranteed benefactors of these policies— I believe that these policies would be beneficial; increased funding would go to sectors in which it is most needed, including schools, and the implications of previously established laws and precedents—such as San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez— would be addressed. Black and poor communities would not only receive increased funding to schools but to other programs that would strengthen the community and support individuals’ future outcomes.

      THE SOURCE I DISCUSS AND QUOTE IN PARAGRAPH 2— https://www.brookings.edu/articles/six-policies-to-address-social-problems-affecting-black-boys-and-men/

    • I also thought one of the most interesting aspects of Brown’s argument was the issue of public schools funding and its impact on black men’s lives. I agree that the culmination of underqualified teachers, low resources, and poor expectations for students yields an environment that makes it far more difficult for students to succeed. In addition, school districts are considered “failing,” in which more than half of men do not graduate, are often in underprivileged areas which often include black communities/neighborhoods which lowers their chances of breaking the cycle of poverty or creating a nuclear family that can serve as the foundation for successful futures.
      Regarding Will’s first question, I think education systems and black neighborhoods would look different if funding were standardized across the country. If the Supreme Court had ruled property taxes unconstitutional as a means of funding public schools in the 1973 case of San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, it could have led to significant changes in the educational landscape, particularly in disadvantaged communities, including many black neighborhoods. A potential benefit of this would be more equitable funding. Without reliance on local property taxes, which tend to reflect the wealth of a neighborhood, funding for schools would be more evenly distributed across the state. This would mean that schools in economically disadvantaged areas, including many black neighborhoods, would receive a more equitable share of resources. Underfunded schools in these areas usually lack the necessities to be a successful school/learning environment. With standardized funding, these schools could receive the necessary resources to improve their facilities and provide a better learning environment. Adequate funding would allow schools to attract and retain qualified teachers and staff. Higher salaries, professional development opportunities, and better working conditions could be provided, leading to a more skilled and motivated educational workforce. With more funding available, schools would have been able to attract and retain higher-quality teachers through competitive salaries and professional development opportunities. This would have positively impacted the quality of education provided in these communities. With better resources and support, schools in disadvantaged areas would be better equipped to address the unique challenges that students from marginalized communities face. This could lead to higher graduation rates, improved test scores, and better overall academic performance. I think one of the most important benefits would be more opportunities in extracurricular activities. With more funding, more after-school and extracurricular activities would be available. This would give kids in these challenged communities more opportunities to get into something beneficial to themselves and their future and keep them off the streets and without supervision after school. Overall, if funding was standardized it would most likely help to lift underpriveleged education systems and allow the students to grow and learn better, hopefully breaking the cycle of poverty and the school-prison pipeline.
      I am hesitant to say that this would be the effective policy that Congress could make to help improve the issues faced by Black men that Brown describes. Because I think that this could be hard for the government to manage and afford. Despite our huge budget things usually fall through the cracks and dont work out how the original policy thinks it will. I wonder if standardizing funding would end up hurting certain schools, which wouldn’t be equitable either. I know in my county in New Jersey the funding isn’t standardized but some underprivileged districts receive some extra funding from the better off districts. I think this would most likely be a better system than having the federal government set a standardized budget for every school, which would probably be below what some schools need. Again this would be hard to manage so I’m not sure what the best solution would be.

    • Answering your question of How might the educational systems or black neighborhoods looked today if this means of funding was found unconstitutional? The possible implications of declaring public school funding unconstitutional would be greater equality in educational funding as alternative methods will be sought and this could mean more equal funding, benefiting schools that are in areas with fewer resources.

      On the other hand, it could lead to an improvement in the quality of education, since with more equitable funding, schools in marginalized areas would have the opportunity to improve the quality of the education they offer and could invest in improving the teaching staff and the educational system. One of the most relevant aspects of this issue is that it would mean a reduction of educational inequalities as it would help to eliminate the differences in academic performance in minority groups, having a positive impact by mobilizing young people and being an important factor for them to get ahead and for many of them to get out of poverty. However, this sounds utopian as there is great political and financial resistance in this area that prevents progress and promote changes as significant and important as this.

    • Will, I agree with your point about the school to prison pipeline that Brown suggests in the reading. Brown states that continuing de facto segregation, school discipline, low expectations by teachers, lack of time in AP college prep courses are all examples of which education for black males is extremely lacking. I also thought it was interesting, the direct correlation of how poor education standards for black males was an example of being groomed to end up in prison. The other readings showcased the big machine which is the Prison Industrial Complex and I agree that this is certainly one of the more basic aspects. If you fail to provide people with the proper education and guidance, how can you expect them to succeed in the real world or obtain successful jobs? I particularly liked your point about the usefulness of a high school diploma in terms of job applications. Lacking a high school diploma or college degree can set you back from a hiring standpoint. Additionally, Owen Brown points out that black men lacking employment skills highly prized by domestic employers are more likely to join gangs and/or be recruited by drug dealers at early ages. By failing to provide this specific demographic of our population with proper education and proper resources, we funnel them right into the hands of gangs and drug dealers which, coupled with the strict laws on drugs, sends them right into our prisons. In terms of your second question, I believe that the most influential policy Congress could change tomorrow is the policies on drugs and drug offenses. Brown lists New York State’s Rockefeller Drug Laws, Michigan State’s 650 Lifer Law, and California’s Three Strikes Law of 1994. He directly connects these laws to harming African-American males disproportionately despite the fact that five times as many Whites are using drugs as African Americans. If five times as many whites are using drugs, then why are African Americans being sent to prison for drug offenses 10 times more than Whites. The main reason he lists for this is racial profiling and racial biases by district attorneys in cases of crimes by blacks rather than whites. In class and throughout the readings, we have read and discussed the tough policies on crimes, often encouraged by private prison companies to get more cheap labor in prisons. By changing some of the policies we have, we can stop breaking up these families and start funneling our resources from cracking down on small drug offenses to strengthening our school systems so that we can fix the problem before it even begins. Owens starts and ends with points by W.E.B. DuBois which are powerful in the fact of their relevance even today. There are inherent biases built into the founding of this country visible in our school systems, our prison systems, and our justice system.

  10. I will now develop a summary of what I read in the reading on race, gender, and the prison industrial complex in order to discuss it in class later on. First of all, as a context and basis on which to work, it is worth mentioning the United Nations World Conference on Women and their Rights, since women and their rights are considered part of human rights. This is very important because in the case of American prisons many of the requirements are not met. It recognizes that violence against women in both the public and private spheres is a violation of human rights. The report stresses the importance of recognizing women’s rights as human rights and paying more attention to the hidden and alarming problem of violence faced by women in prison.

    On the other hand, when referring to the prison-industrial complex, it suggests that the growth of the prison system is related to economic and political factors rather than individual behavior. Similarly, many corporations benefit from the prison system, creating vested interests in its expansion, often at the expense of marginalized communities, especially people of color. This underscores that while women make up a small percentage of the overall prison population, they are currently the fastest growing segment, with California being a prime example. Considering another influential factor, globalization is also contributing to the growth of this prison complex. Because capitalism in the developed world has led to the decline of welfare states and social programs have replaced incarceration as the solution to social problems that disproportionately affect poor communities. communities of color. The prison-industrial complex relies on racist structures and elements that contribute to its economic survival while reinforcing racial hierarchies and inequality. This systemic racism also has a gender dimension, as it affects women differently based on their race and sexuality.

    Racial disparities in incarceration are clear: African-American women are eight times more likely to be incarcerated than white women, and the “war on drugs” contributes to this phenomenon, as it represents one form of increased incarceration of women of color. Cases such as Kemba Smith and Dorothy Gaines illustrate the harsh penalties imposed on women indirectly related to drug trafficking. Another notable phenomenon is violence against women in prisons, and the continued existence of violence in prisons, from state practices to relationships between prison staff and violent inmates. It is a fact. This violence can be not only physical but also psychological. Prisons are often used to incarcerate people with mental illness, but this has the opposite effect and worsens their conditions. Mental illness is prevalent in this region, it is generally underdiagnosed and untreated, and there is also a tendency to misdiagnose mental illness, which has a serious impact on inmates. But this applies to the health care system, to medical malpractice that sometimes leads to preventable deaths, and to reproductive rights,which are not adequately addressed even in prisons.

    As well, we must address the issue of sexual harassment and abuse, which is prevalent in women’s prisons and is further reinforced by oppressive prison environments and the employment of male prison staff. The criminalization of sex often results in prison sentences, especially for women who engage in sex work. Laws against sex work disproportionately affect poor women and perpetuate the cycle of incarceration. In addition, as a result of racial and gender bias, increasing numbers of girls, particularly girls of color, are being referred to the juvenile justice system for minor acts. In addition, immigrant women face various forms of surveillance and punishment in the United States, exacerbated by campaigns targeting immigrant communities, including the forced deportation of women with criminal convictions. Finally, legal challenges to women’s incarceration are becoming increasingly difficult due to the erosion of legal protections and the obstacles created by the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

    • Mar, something that stood out to me in both your post and in the reading was the part about mental illness in prisons. I agree with your point about how inmates are extremely impacted by the misdiagnosing of mental illness. The reading states additionally that prisoners, especially long-term prisoners, may develop mental and psychic disturbances from imprisonment and being cut off from their families. If the goal of imprisonment is rehabilitation, then why are we subjecting them to conditions that can further worsen mental illness and permanently affect them in their lives after being released from prison. Overcrowding and few activities, constant isolation and enclosure in jail cells, these can be extremely harmful to inmates and especially inmates with mental illness. What I thought was interesting was how you mentioned medical malpractice. While doing the reading, I was surprised with the legality of this “medicalization model” in prisons. When inmates, historically female inmates in particular, have asked for counseling, they are offered psychotropic medications instead. Outside of prison, if you or I sought out counseling, we would have the option of talking with a therapist or a psychiatrist before seeing if medication is the proper avenue or what modes of treatment would work best. But offering psychotropic medications and continuous isolation to those with mental illnesses who seek help is clearly a human rights violation. Using your example in your post, you stated that the United Nations World Conference on Women and their Rights recognizes that violence against women in the public and private spheres are a direct violation of human rights. I agree with your point about the requirements for this not being met in American prisons. There have been numerous cases where prisoners died due to medical neglect and poor health care conditions in our prison systems. Illnesses and conditions that could have been treated easily and were easily preventable and diagnosed, were completely missed due to the lack of access to basic human health care. It is stated that these deaths and suffering of female prisoners were a direct consequence of the government’s lack of responsibility for people deprived of their liberty and fully dependent on state authority. We need to hold our prison systems and our governments, both on the state and federal levels, accountable for the inhumane treatment of our prisoners and the lack of basic human rights they are afforded.

    • I was also similarly intrigued yet disturbed by the prevalence of medical neglect in the prison system. Personally, I was struck by the specific ways that convicts have to address their medical concerns out of fear of retaliation. The reading discussed the process by which women can not only address the medical neglect they suffer but improve their treatment; it is emphasized that in order to complain, women who face medical maltreatment have to file their complaints with the individual they are complaining about. This makes for a situation where women fear retaliation from their providers and, therefore, rarely complain or air the serious grievances they have with medical staff. These women are forced to accept their inadequate medical care out of fear that addressing the problem will merely make matters worse.
      In addition, prison officials even further criminalize convicts upon their deaths. These prison officials claim that individuals who die in prison—namely the women who have died from medical mistreatment (or lack of care)— have died as a result of their illicit drug use. Despite a lack of evidence, prison officials are successful in demonizing the women who die in prison and, subsequently, further concealing the medical neglect truly responsible for their demise.
      In addition, Mar discusses both the salience of mental health in discussions about the abuses of the prison system and the use of improper mental illness diagnoses. Women who face serious physical conditions are often labeled mentally ill and treated with psychotic drugs, instead of the medications they truly need. This reminds me of the trend in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s where women were placed in mental institutions for merely behaving in ways and exemplifying qualities that men did not like or agree with. This idea also relates to Angela Davis’ discussion of the origins of the penitentiary and its conceptualization for women. In her book, Are Prisons Obsolete?, Davis highlighted that women convicts have always been treated differently than male convicts because, unlike male criminality, female criminality is considered “unnatural” and a sign of insanity.
      However, even outside of medical mistreatment lies, what I would consider, medical abuse. Prisons appear to create and exacerbate public health crises— such as Hepatitis C. Despite inmates not only living in close quarters with one another but living in a closed-off unleavable space, the prison systems both fail to test inmates for these diseases and to provide information about illness prevention. To me, this treatment seems incredibly purposeful; it seems to me like a way to further inflict “hidden” punishments upon prisoners who are beholden to the system.
      Finally, the last aspect of medical neglect that particularly struck me was the discussion of women’s lack of reproductive rights. The reading emphasizes that women are often forced to give labor while shackled and lack access to proper prenatal care. In addition, women—pregnant or otherwise— lack access to adequate OBGYNs who perform necessary yearly examinations to monitor women’s health. However, while I was aware of these mistreatments…I was not aware of the use of sterilization in prisons as a solution to women’s gynecological problems. The reading emphasizes the obviously gendered lens of this practice as well as the historically racial history it alludes to; women of color have historically experienced involuntary sterilization post-slavery and throughout the twentieth century (at approx. 3 times the rate of white women). This is clearly another example of how the prison system’s racial motivations mimic past systems.

    • Hi Mar, I thought your summary of the reading on race, gender, and the prison industrial complex was comprehensive and insightful. I think you touched on all the main points I found interesting in the reading as well.
      I think the point you made about how corporations benefit from the expansion of the prison system at the expense of marginalized communities highlights the need for systemic change in the US and I think this angle of the issue could use some further development hopefully coming in more of our readings.
      Another important point of the reading was the issues with mental health and its treatment in prison. As Professor Simpson mentioned in class there used to be many specific institutions for the mentally ill but they were mostly closed resulting in many people with mental health issues struggling on the streets and ending up in regular prisons. This reading touches back to that issue by referencing the big problem of mental health in the regular jails that are not equipped to handle it. It leads me to once again question why these institutions were closed and why don’t we have them any more? I think a mental hospital would be more beneficial for many of the prisoners that struggle in the regular jails. As Mar and the reading suggests prisons have the opposite effect and worsens the conditions of people who really need help.
      I think misdiagnosis is another problem in the prisons. The reading explained that prisoners, especially long-term prisoners, may develop mental disturbances from imprisonment and being cut off from their families. The reading states that when inmates request mental health support they are often prescribed medications which is not always the answer and doesn’t really solve the feelings that caused the mental health decline. It seems like on many fronts the mental health treatment in prisons needs a lot of work. Whether one came in with mental illness or likely developed it while incarcerated they aren’t receiving adequate care and this needs to be addressed.
      Furthermore, the reading cites extreme medical malpractice even resulting in death, especially against women in the prison system that they do not take responsibility for. This reading outlined very clearly many ways it seems like the prison system is violating inmates rights. It seems shocking that in America— a country that speaks so often of rights and freedom— we would have a prison system with such blatant disregard for these rights.

  11. Brewer and Heitzeg’s article “The Racialization of Crime and Punishment” (2008) focuses on the era of color-blind racism that we have entered into. Racism is no longer explicitly codified into law, but these colorblind policies have reproduced the same effects as these former policies had on Black Americans. Using the theories of Critical Race Theory (CRT), Brewer and Heitzeg demonstrate how our criminal justice system continues to be a legacy of plantations, Slave Codes, and lynchings.
    They begin their article by providing the current reality of our criminal justice system. For every 100,000 Americans, 699 of them are in prison (Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2004). Of our prison population, an overwhelming majority are poor and people of color, specifically Black Americans. Using more recent statistics, Black Americans make up only 13% of the American population, but 38% of our prison population (Prison Policy Initiative 2022). This gross overrepresentation is directly connected to the overpolicing of Black communities. Brewer and Heitzeg also shed light on the collateral consequences that accompany the expansion of criminal and mass incarceration laws. Many states still disenfranchise felons–stripping them of the right to participate in American democracy. Additionally, former felons are permanently barred from accessing public assistance such as TANF, Medicaid, food stamps, and public housing. These collateral consequences create a cycle of incarceration. As incarcerated citizens are released from prison, the circumstances of their release are the same ones that will facilitate their reentry into prison.
    Brewer and Heitzeg then go into the historical details that we are familiar with. Drawing on Angela Davis’ Are Prisons Obsolete?, they demonstrate how our prison system is rooted in the horrors of slavery and the peonage system that followed the abolishment of slavery. Following the civil rights movement, colorblind practices replaced the explicitly racial-coded laws. And the criminal justice system presented a convenient institution to continue the oppression and imprisonment of Black Americans. Rather than talk about race, public discourse surrounded issues of “crime, criminals, gangs, and drug-infested neighborhoods.”
    Black activists warned of the dangerous connections between race, crime, and law. The Black Panther Party drafted the 10 Point Program that detailed the connection between capitalism, the Black community, and the criminal justice system. This was also an issue that would be debated in the courts. The most significant of these cases was McCleskey v. Kemp (1987). In this case, McCleskey argued that the death penalty in Georgia was unconstitutional because it violated the equal protection clause. Using statistics from the Baldus study, McCleskey demonstrated that Black defendants were most likely to be sentenced to the death penalty when their victims were White. The courts did not disagree with the statistics, but concerns were raised about how the equal protection clause would apply to other structural inequalities if they agreed with McCleskey’s claims. The courts denied McCleskey’s claims. The case would effectively close off any possibility of using the courts to remedy structural inequalities.
    Brewer and Heitzeg end their article by providing their steps towards social justice. They argue that we cano longer rely on “civil justice or macro-level remedies alone” (Brewer and Heitzeg 2008). They believe justice to be born of grassroot efforts and at the microlevel. Citing Davis, they identify three critical dimensions to the abolition movement: public policy, community organizing, and academic research. They end by noting that the issue of racialized crime has broader implications in the context of the law and the global economy in neoliberal capitalism. And that to achieve justice, these small coalitions tackling these different institutions must somehow come together.

    • I also thought the connection between Angela Davis’ discussion of the racialization of the PIC and “The Racialization of Crime and Punishment” was particularly important. However, I was most drawn to the reading’s discussion of the “invisible” punishments of incarceration. Incarcerated individuals and formerly incarcerated individuals’ “punishments” neither begin nor end with the time they spend behind bars. The loss of voting rights, medicaid, food stamps, federal housing, federal aid for education, and the imposition of occupational bans and the termination of parental rights are among these “invisible” punishments. As both Cheryl and Emma highlight, these laws carry no rehabilitative value. In fact, they actually impose strict and oftentimes unmoveable barriers to rehabilitation, for they limit an ex-offender’s ability to obtain employment or housing, further their education, or strengthen family life. Once again, the existence of these punishments and their “invisible” nature is by design. The prison system functions cyclically so that individuals who become engrossed in the prison system remain engrossed and incapable of separating themselves from it. Although it is entirely understandable why the State and Federal Government would not advertise these consequences, it is also entirely unethical. When a defendant is sentenced to prison, they are read the consequences and details of this sentencing. However, these consequences never include the “invisible punishments”— the punishments an individual would fail to know. I believe that it is the ethical and judicial responsibility of the judges who inform the defendant of their sentencing to also inform them of the consequences attached to a finding of guilt or a plea of guilty. However, expecting the system to provide this clarity would prove to be a self-destructing process. As Cheryl alludes, the PIC is a self-perpetuating machine where large profits yield policies and behaviors that are additionally designed to ensure an endless “supply of clients” for the criminal justice system. Thus, they would never implement policy that might suddenly treat their “supply” as human.

      I also found the reading’s discussion of the need for micro level social justice projects particularly interesting. I believe that these suggestions directly relate to both Angela Davis’ recommendations—stronger educational systems and mental health and drug rehabilitation facilities, specifically free facilities where individuals of all socioeconomic statuses can seek treatment— and “Race, Gender, and the Prison Industrial Complex”’s discussion of the pervasiveness and influence of mental health. It appears to be a trend that scholars do not believe that macro-level policies can truly mitigate the negative effects of imprisonment nor the corrupt nature of the prison system. Scholars appear to favor actions such as the construction of community-based rehabilitation centers and funding schools. However, while I understand the short-term and long-term value of these policies, I do not understand how micro level policies can truly address systemic issues in the way that macro policies could. I am wondering…do scholars favor these methods because they build community and focus on youth or do they suggest these methods out of consideration for feasibility; do they know that macro level solutions are far fetched and merely recommend methods that they believe are more likely to be implemented?

    • Cheryl did a great job summarizing what I thought were the important aspects of Brewer and Heitzeg’s article “The Racialization of Crime and Punishment.” They touched on many of the things we have been discussing in class, when they argue that despite the end of explicitly racist laws, color-blind policies continue to disproportionately affect Black Americans, echoing the historical legacy of slavery, Slave Codes, and lynchings. They reitterated the overrepresentation of Black Americans in the prison population. The statistics presented are once again alarming; Black Americans constitute only 13% of the population but make up 38% of the prison population, calling into question the fairness and equity of our criminal justice system. Also explained is former felons lack of resources and assistance as well as disenfranchisment that perpetuates a cycle of disadvantage. I’m particularly struck by the authors’ call for grassroots efforts, community organizing, and academic research as essential components of the abolition movement. It makes me want to question what we could be doing? What policy changes or reforms could help to disrupt the cycle of disadvantage and promote true equity in the criminal justice system? Potentially police reform, because as the article stated part of the overrepresentation of black Americans in the prison system is due to over-policing of black communities. Drug policy and sentencing reform could also help. It seems hard for regular people to make much of a difference in these ways but I think in regards to job opportunities and reentry programs people could make a difference. I am thinking that it would help the enfranchisement of former felons if the stigma around incarceration in our society was changed. If we became committed to hiring former felons, helping them get an education, and furthering their lives after rehabilitation a lot of improvement to their lives could come out of it.

  12. Cheryl, I really like how you were able to connect both your reading and our textbook reading of Angela Davis’ “Are Prisons Obsolete?”. I particularly agreed with your point about Brewer and Heitzeg emphasizing this cycle of incarceration: how we don’t set up former felons with the tools to succeed outside the four walls of our prisons. By disenfranchising them and taking away their vote, we strip them of the rights guaranteed to them as citizens of the United States. They aren’t able to vote for lawmakers who quite literally have the power to enact policies that continue this cycle of incarceration. I noted in my reading that a felony conviction by anyone in the household is grounds for eviction from public housing and that convicted felons are denied federal housing assistance and are constantly turned away from private rental properties. Our system is set up to house and hold onto felons, regardless of their crime. If we were truly serious about rehabilitating and helping people learn from their mistakes, we would make it easier for them to start over after serving time and that begins with a place to live. You also noted a key aspect from page 629, that drug felons are barred from receiving public assistance including but not limited to Medicaid and food stamps. This coupled with the occupation bans on convicted felons, makes it extremely hard to survive after being released. This reminded me of the Marvel movie Ant Man, where the only job Scott Lang, a former felon, could get was at a Baskin Robbins. Due to his status as a convicted felon, it was extremely hard for him to get a job or find a place to live. Add in the possibility of him being a black male and his chances of getting hired are even slimmer. The racially motivated mass drug and incarnation laws continue to perpetuate this corrupt and injury system of once a felon, always a felon. Lastly what I thought was interesting was when you mentioned the Black Panther Party, the 10 Point Program, and McCleskey v. Kemp. When I first did the reading, I didn’t particularly pay too much attention to that part on page 633. However, I thought it was incredibly important after reading your post, especially the fact about Black defendants being more likely to be sentenced to the death penalty when their victims are white. The former statistic shows the implicit biases and perception of blacks as “dangerous criminals” in the public eye. As such, the Black Panther party demanded that black people be tried in court by a jury of their peer group or from their black communities. I wonder now if that was implemented, if it would solve our structural inequalities or perhaps increase the divide between white and black.

  13. Dear Students:

    I’m enjoying these posts, but watch your use of AI in your assignments. Once again, it is an honor code violation to use it outside of the parameters outlined in your class syllabus. When you are posting originally, please designate the title and author of the piece. You are all posting under “This is Where We Post.” You should post under “Discussion” by clicking on the link and the plus sign at the top of the page. From there you can give your post a title. If you find this is difficult, let’s go over it in class. Let me know.
    Thank you,
    ProfSi

Comments are closed.