#gws340

In Truth’s speech, “Ain’t I a Woman”, she points out that women, herself in particular, are competent and capable enough to do what men can. Men are too fearful to allow women to receive all opportunities, such as education, they receive, she tauntingly states. She then points out that if it were not for women who bore children, men would not even exist.  Not only was Truth a woman of color, but she also had a disability. It is important to note that despite her disability, she would not allow it to impede her from achieving her full potential and also performing tasks to the same degree as a man. Truth was an advocate for not only women of color, but also women of disability – a true intersectional feminist.

Nothing I read in the Elizabeth Cady Stanton “Declaration of Rights” (1894) was surprising to me--I had studied the racist history of the white suffragette movement in high school. I am, however, frustrated that they couldn’t move past these issues in order to build a stronger coalition for the women’s movement. More than that, they actively thought that by focusing on a single issue as a political strategy, their movement would be stronger for it. We still have struggles with this today in regards to how to best classify the categorization of woman (and many other issues). With the struggle of women’s suffrage spanning the greater part of a century, we have to ask ourselves do single issue political strategies work across entire movements? In some ways, perhaps. For instance, what issues categorize our current cycle of feminist activism? Can they be singled down into one cohesive action? Undoubtably. However, is that type of political strategy even necessary? Also questionable. 

One of the most marginalized groups of people in our society is the LGBTQ+ community. Like most topics of discussions, the LGBTQ+ community often faces the same discrimination and oppression today that they faced decades ago. They have been denied basic human rights such as using the bathroom and, up until recently, the right to marry. The STAR Manifesto really showcases that maybe things have not changed or improved all that much since the 70s. This is a result of leaving our LGBTQ+ family out of the conversation for social progress.

As someone who finds myself on the internet defending sex workers all the time, I enjoyed Melinda Chateauvert’s chapter “The Revolution Is Finally Here! Sex Work and Strategic Sex”. I loved how she used the term “whorephobia” because I used that word on twitter a while ago, actually, and someone told me that was not an actual phobia. It is extremely sad that sex work is still looked down on and stigmatized just as it was in the 1960s, just like being anything other than cisgender and heterosexual. I always think it is so interesting that most people in America watch porn and go to strip clubs, but all of a sudden when someone is having actual sex for money, sex work is “so terrible”.

I thought it was interesting that the Gay Liberation Front was intersectional and accepted sex workers, but found it to be yet another capitalist system. Since they were anticapitalists, they rejected sex work. I thought this was interesting because how I think about it is that sex work (in the form of having sex for money) is criminalized and illegal in our government because the profits are not taxed, therefor no part of it benefits the capitalist government of America. It benefits the sex workers themselves. But then again, the government somehow profits off of literally everything in America.

Don’t worry, I won’t hop back on the death penalty abolition soap box here... For this assignment. -wink- 

That being said.........

There is much that needs to be done to begin reforming our correctional system so that it actually is a correctional system. As it exists today, our so-called correctional system has, over time, become a retribution system. I back this assertion up by pointing out the fact that the 13th Amendment preserves slavery (Section 1 says: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction) and subsequent creation of Jim Crow laws, the so-called “war on drugs” fueling mass incarceration, and the rise of the for-profit prison system (among many others). Retribution serves only to punish those who have committed an offense without making any meaningful correction in behavior or situation. 

Without the support of my family, my own life could have been completely ruined by my own time in jail. When I got out I was fortunate enough to still have my job, remain accepted by my family, and maintain a position  where I could dig myself out of the hole I had created for myself. While in jail I reflected on the notion that many of my fellow inmates would not be so fortunate, if any of them. Sure, my climb out of said hole has lasted several years (I’m on year 6 if I’m not mistaken), and will continue in my foreseeable future; but for most people who are touched by the criminal justice system this is not the case. 

It has been asserted that we should abolish prisons. This idea seems absolutely insane at face value, but if we dig a little deeper there may actually be something there. First we must look at one of the more common misconceptions about the correctional system. Many people think that prison and jail can be used interchangeably. A jail is a low security facility designed to house individuals serving sentences for misdemeanor offenses. Misdemeanor offenses are ones whose sentences have less than one year of incarceration. Prisons on the other hand range in levels of security and are designed to house inmates serving sentences for felonies; felonies are crimes whose incarceration sentences are one year or more, and are generally reserved for more severe offenses. This is obviously debatable considering 1oz of marijuana possession is a felony, as is homicide. On a side note, here in Kentucky (and many other states) felons are being housed in jails due to prison overcrowding. The primary drivers behind prisoner overcrowding are things like mandatory minimum sentencing, the for-profit prison industry, elected judges and prosecutors, and legislated morality.

When I think of prison abolition, I tend to take that at face value, meaning prisons not prisons and jails. This however is not comprehensive enough for true, meaningful, lasting, and stable reform. It requires a top to bottom reassessment and restructuring of our laws and legal process in addition to correctional reform. In truth the most important reform we could possibly make is an economic one. Instead of a war on drugs (and a war on terror) we should be conducting a full scale war on poverty. Now, there is even less support for an effective war on poverty due to necessary monetary redistribution and sever cuts to military spending. I imagine we could eliminate poverty in the United States if we spent half of the military’s annual budget supporting people’s basic needs so that money is not something they fret about, but I digress. I do agree with the groups in Thuma’s piece that assert that “the prison and mental hospitals [are] irredeemable institutions designed to confine and subordinate racial and economic ‘others’”. For this reason, their irredeemable qualities, I believe in the necessity of reform. 

Assuming that a full scale war on poverty is not a viable option, what would prison abolitionist reform look like on the whole in my eyes? Well, simply put (yes, simply) it would require a full review of every law on every book at every level, from the municipal to the federal and back down. Every single law should be scrutinized through the lens of historical context for its creation. By this I mean has this particular law been historically or disproportionately against anyone who is not a straight, cisgendered white male? Does it serve a moral purpose with religious roots? Ultimately the only crimes that should be left on the books are crimes with inherent power dynamics (homicide, sexual assault, stalking, etc.), crimes against public safety (traffic laws and public health laws/regulations), and white collar offenses (the corporate world will always need criminal liability as punishment so long as capitalism runs wild). With significantly fewer laws on the books our justice system can operate more efficiently, fairly, and in accordance with the Constitution (see Amendments 4, 5, 6, 8, and 14 - if you only choose one, make it the 8th Amendment). Jails will continue to serve a purpose while society adjusts to a different enforcement of laws. Jails would be compelled to provide treatments and personnel to deal with any underlying issues that may be behind the actions one took to land themselves in a jail. This of course requires a massive expansion in the number of counselors, therapists, social workers, and other health professionals. Only then can we begin to see a true correctional system emerge. What about the worst of the worst, though? What about those who commit crimes of power or white collar crime? 

For crimes of power, every single ounce of effort must be put in to correction. Here is where “prisons” come in to play. Advanced intensive treatment facilities with immense governmental oversight are required. I am a firm believer in the inherent good of humanity and believe that almost everyone can be reformed. Compassion in treatment (at all levels) is essential, but at the most challenging level, compassion and humanity must be part of the solution. What about those who cannot be reformed? Though it may be an unpopular sentiment, they must be treated with dignity, humanity, and compassion. A life sentence without the possibility of parole is the harshest sentence that can be imposed, and it must be done in the most humane way possible. Academic and or artistic pursuits in life-long correction are possible ways to add humanity to an otherwise abhorrent system. What about white collar crime? The only punishment that affects the capitalist is a punishment to their bottom line. Sure many fraudsters, inside traders, and monstrous CEOs and boards of directors may DESERVE jail time, but fines of both companies and individuals are the only real solution. Yes, the Constitution’s 8th Amendment protects against “excessive bail... [and] excessive fines”, however the Constitution only protects people. Obviously Citizens United v. FEC would need to be revisited as that case cracked the door open for corporate citizenship (basically in some instances corporations have the right to free speech AND campaign spending amounts to free speech) in order to maintain cohesion with the Constitution. The 8th does protect guilty parties from excessive fines, but rationally companies will avoid hiring managers and executive officers with a track record of white collar crime, due to the harsh financial penalties levied on companies for breaking the law. Hitting companies in the wallet is not without consequences for workers toward the bottom of the corporate ladder. These hefty fines will pay laid off workers significant compensation for any consequences related to crimes their bosses commit, and any excess goes to municipal coffers first, then state, then federal. 

I promise I will wrap this up soon... ish. The next prong of the approach is tweaking some of the less noticeable parts of the judicial system. No member of the judicial process shall ever (EVER) be elected. No sheriff, no judge, no prosecutor, no Supreme Court Justice (most states elect state Supreme Court justices), no person involved at any level (other than the President and Governors) should be elected. These people should be public servants who attend very specific educational institutions designed to train individuals in the specific aspects required for these jobs. Standardization of training ensures that while we are waiting for automation (yeah there’s my automation plug - haven’t seen that one in a while) to replace the legal system, there is uniform fairness by carried out by persons who are beyond outside influence.

Law enforcement (I promise this is my [second to] last paragraph) reform is next. This one is comparatively simple. The simplest way to begin healing the wounds law enforcement has created is to first eliminate armed patrols. Armed patrol officers are inherently threatening. In many other countries, armed patrol officers do not exist. When a need (NEED) arises for lethal force, specially trained armed officers are dispatched; these armed officers stay at police stations and do not patrol (kinda like the fire department). The other half of this is Community Oriented Policing, a concept that is taught at Eastern Kentucky University among other schools. COP takes law enforcement to its mission, to serve and protect. Police who use COP are community servants, active in the daily lives of those they are charged with serving and protecting. COP officers get to know the people in their patrol sectors. How many police officers can you say you know personally? Do you know ANY of the officers who patrol your neighborhood? COP believes that putting a face on policing’s mission (serve and protect) makes officers more trustworthy and ESPECIALLY accountable not just to their department, but to the neighbors and community members they are tasked with getting to know. 

Finally (mercifully?) all of this would collapse without a true dedication to ensuring that everyone has their basic needs met. No person should worry where their next meal will come from, whether they’ll have a roof over their head, water to drink, a safe and educational place for their children to go while they work; no person should worry about whether or not they can pay to keep their lights on, the heat going, the air conditioned, maintain their connection to the world via phone and Internet, nor worry about how they will get to and from work, family, and friends. This may sound Utopian, idealistic, and crazy but it is far from impossible. Reigning in capitalism’s excess and working towards an equitable civilization allows us to continue moving forward as a species in to the coming ages as we find our way through the universe and indeed existence itself. Imagine humanity taking its next great leap because its current hegemon decided to evolve the concept of justice itself to a higher and truly moral stage. 

           The prison system in the United States is one of the most problematic systems that we have in place. It may be seen as a place to right your wrongs but in reality, it is a place that oppresses you even more and usually sets you up for failure in the future (not always the case but most times it is). One main example of the prison system oppressing already oppressed people is stated in Women Behind Bars, where the author states that “Not everyone who commits crimes goes to prison. White collar embezzlers, middle-class shoplifters, young lawbreakers whose parents are ‘substantial citizens’, those who can afford bail and good lawyers...” (pg. 4). I think this statement is still very prevalent today. I think we still see this issue today because it is easier to put someone who is from the lower class in prison because they can’t afford a way out usually. This sets up an individual for further problems because when they leave prison, they have to state they are a criminal when applying for jobs, so it would make it harder to get a job thus making it hard to obtain a steady income for themselves and/or their family thus making them remain in a lower income household. Another way the prison system has oppressed people was by opening the Center for Violent Women at Worcester State Hospital (Against the ‘Prison/Psychiatric State’pgs. 26-27). This was and still is an issue today because adding the word “violent” in the title of the institution gives it many negative connotations. It gives a negative view because if you had left this institution and tried to get some of work that required you to say where you had gone, it would give your possible future employer that you are a violent person. I think that adding these unnecessary adjectives into the titles of institutions is just another way for society to see you as less of a human.

Sources:

“Introduction.” Women Behind Bars, Resources for Community Change, 1975, pp. 4–6.

Thuma, Emily. “Against the ‘Prison/Psychiatric State’: Anti-Violence Feminisms and the Politics of Confinement in the 1970s.”

Oral History Review

Something I learned from this weeks readings is that people actually consider getting rid of prisons. This is a very difficult issue to talk about because on one hand it doesn't make any sense at all to let murderers and rapists run free and the other hand it makes sense that prisons don't actually do any corrections or rehabilitation. Most people who are jailed turn around and get put back in jail within three years of being released. Like I mentioned in our facilitation, Taystee from Netflix original series "Orange Is The New Black" got placed back in prison three months after she was released because what she didn't realize is that her parole officer was going to be "up her ass like the KGB" and pretty much watch every move that she makes. First time she fucks up, BAM. Right back into prison. It's like they want them back in prison and not let them have a life. Being in prison, correctional officers don't care about anyone but themselves according to Jeff Smith, a real former inmate. You can also see this in OITNB. All they care about is themselves and not getting in the paper. Prisons offer nothing to help these people actually turn around.

I also learned that prison justice is also a feminist issue because women are not treated the same way as men. In the Women Behind Bars book that we read, the article "Problems With Women In Prison" mentions that women are usually locked up 75-100% of the time in county jails and co-ed prisons because prisons are built for men and when a women is placed in jail, the prison just simply has to "make do" for them (Velimesis, 6). Also what you hear about a lot is women getting raped in these prisons (even just women prisons) by their correctional officers (which is also seen as OITNB). Women are treated just as bad on the inside (if not worse) than the outside making this a feminist issue as well.