~ archived since 2018 ~

"Prison clearly does not work"... for women

[deleted]

October 30, 2013

123 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/29/vicky-pryce-prison-does-not-work-prisonomics-economist

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	"Prison clearly does not work"... for women
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	123
Comments	35
Date	October 30, 2013 10:08 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1pj3g3/prison_clearly_does_not_work_for_women/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/prison-clearly-does-not-work-for-women.1160073 https://theredarchive.com/post/1160073

Comments

[–]cody_au49 points 12 years ago* [recovered] (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]amphetaminesfailure 19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerpaNerb 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone22 points 12 years ago [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link

[+]chavelah -15 points-14 points-13 points 12 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]silentthinker 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]silentthinker 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

This is no different than any other form of discrimination or preferential treatment. Let's take gender out of the equation for a moment. Why should someone with a child receive a reduced sentence compared to someone without a child? All other things being equal, both sentences should be the same. This is no different than not hiring a woman because she may become pregnant. People without children are already discriminated against in a variety of ways and already paying more than their fair share to society, I don't think they should also be burdened with longer prison sentences as well.

To bring gender back into it for a moment, a huge percentage of children living with a single parent have a second parent in jail (in the U.S). The overwhelming majority of these parents, mostly men, are serving time for non-violent drug offenses, specifically possession. Now we know conclusively that this takes a toll on these children and leads to difficulties in adulthood. Basically these children are far more likely to be involved in crime, live in poverty and not graduate high school. How is this not society failing a family, and why is it only important when those in jail are women, despite that being a tiny percentage of the available examples?

This can't possibly be made into a gendered issue unless you're willing to concede that it's an issue predominently faced by men. I however would concede that if it's going to be tackled, there is no sense in tackling it for only half the population.

[–]chavelah 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I hear you. I'm being pragmatic here - if you can get traction on the mothers-in-prison issue now, and society isn't ready for the fathers-in-prison issue YET, it can make sense to focus on the mothers. Kids go into foster care when moms go to jail, not dads (because the dads were not married to the moms and not residing in the family household when they got busted). Foster care is a shithole. Activism to keep nonviolent women out of a cage is good activism.

Activism for nonviolent men in cages is also needed. Do some. If you already are, this mother of sons says "thanks."

[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]chavelah 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for this response. I found it really useful.

Here is the difference that I see in the two scenarios: the women who are getting smacked with alimony payments are rich, white, educated and articulate people who play well on the national stage. Their "dose of a few women being treated like men" does seem to be functioning to draw attention to the fact that lifetime alimony is generally absurd. But the problem is not being addressed just for women. The laws being passed are gender-neutral. Will they be applied in court in a gender neutral manner? Probably not, unless men's rights activists do the grassroots work necessary to change social attitudes. And that's OK. This social movement exists for a reason. It has battles to fight and win.

But with prison, woman (and children! actual human children, not rhetorical anythings!) are ALREADY getting horribly mistreated by the system and have been for years - and most people just don't care because they generally aren't well-spoken white women like Vicky Pryce and Piper Kerman. The suffering of women is not drawing attention to the plight of their male peers in this case. I wish to heck it were. I wish a lot of things - I wish the children of incarcerated women generally had fit fathers to take over their care when they were imprisoned for nonviolent offenses. I wish those same women had chosen the fathers of their children more carefully. I wish that men were not imprisoned for nonviolent offenses. But I look at the facts on the ground, I think about the needs of the families involved, and I conclude that if you can get political traction to stop the unnecessary jailing of women, then you had better go for it. That is an honorable choice. Focusing exclusively on the problems of imprisoned men and their children is also an honorable choice.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

In theory I don't disagree with you, but the feminist movement isn't interested in that in practice, and society in general doesn't much care about the plight of criminals, particularly if they're male. I can't imagine that the organizations that are funded and willing to tackle this issue for women, would have much interest in the issues of men in the same situation. It's not something they can sell, and in some cases not something they would want to if they could. If I felt it was likely that using women as the starting point would ultimately result in solving the problem for everyone, I would be right there with you on this. However I think you're a little too optimistic.

The thing that I think many of the people here are frustrated by is that there is this glaring problem that is experienced primarily by men, black men, that can only get any sort of attention when it effects an upper-middle class white woman.

Furthermore, if we continue to bring only women's issues (that really affect both genders) to the forefront because people are more sympathetic, it doesn't help anyone. It will only continue to be that way. Not only that, but to use victimhood and martyrdom as a tool, albeit and effective one, is weak and pitiful, hardly the message of women's liberation.

Edit: I'm not downvoting you.

[–]Grubnar 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

This kind of emotional appeal makes feminists look like a bunch of man-hating terrorists who want to use children as human shields to help women get away with murder. There are feminists who literally want this and make no bones about it - and you're coming awfully close to it.

the women's prison system causes needless damage to children

This wouldn't happen if the family court system didn't award custody to unfit mothers. The MRM has been advocating reform to this broken system which rewards reprobrates for having babies at the expense of men and society. Feminist oppose that, but want to let criminals out of jail purely on the basis of sex. This is feminism creating the disease and offering the cure. Thanks, but no thanks.

I invite you to stop bitching on the Internet

Stop projecting.

[+]chavelah -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Ah, once more with the cliched "not a real activist yet" ad hominem attack. I'm shivering in my boots, let me just tell you, ready to concede all logic and facts and bow down to the feminist princess!

And once again you're making this emotional appeal towards the symptoms while denying the disease. Once again, using children as human shields to defend female criminals, and once again, you are special pleading. So if unfit parents come in both genders, how come it's only the females who deserve to get a "get out of jail free" card for being a breeder? You can't answer that in a coherent manner.

Tell you what - you shift your all-powerful righteous feminist activism towards all the instances of fit fathers getting pushed out in favor of rewarding reprobate mothers - and then we'll talk. Recognize the compounding effect that sexist family laws have over numerous generations as they systematically push good parents out of children's lives just on the basis of their sex - and then we'll talk. You do your research and admit that feminist demagoguery about unfit fathers is generally based on a pack of lies and myths - and then we'll talk. You go and do your research and recognize that even when there are unfit fathers, they were virtually all raised by unfit mothers who had been aided and abetted by feminist institutions to push out a far more capable father - and then we'll talk.

[–]chavelah -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]silentthinker 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]guywithaccount12 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]germaneuser 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]hierophage 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]silentthinker 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]junoguten 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]StuntPotato 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 19 points20 points21 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]StuntPotato 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlamingFreedom 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nessfalco 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MRB2012 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link