Walled Women

In Wideman's book, I noticed that he touched on the notion of life going on "on the outside" while incarcerated people seem to stay where they are, removed from the passing of time, but unable to fit back into the world without acknowledging the time that has passed. Wideman measures the first few years of Robby's sentence by his daughter Jamila's growth, seeing that, although she is growing up in a changing world, Robby's world is centered around staying put, where Jamila's growth is a strong, and perhaps the only, reliable measurement of changes in time. This reminds me of the discussion that we had in Barb's class yesterday about time and boredom as a means of punishment. The women in the prison that she is studying have so much time on their hands, so much time to do what relatively few activities that they have, and the rest to be filled with a monotonous boredom. Given both our discussion and Wideman's thoughts, I think the passage of time without activity, motion or change is an effective punishment, but a horribly cruel one, a method by which we, once again, deny the humanity of those who are incarcerated.

            Through the process of research professors are able to enter an academic conversation with goals that range from solving a social problem to giving voice to particular communities. Interviews, surveys and participatory observation serve as channels that seek to deepen and broaden our understanding of certain groups of people. What is done with the results of months of data collection can range from a change in policy, to simply sharing the findings with other academics. What happens when research is conducted, policy does not change and communities are left “damaged”? By using Eve Tuck’s desire-based research, I will explore the ways in which research can either give voice to or silence communities. Are researchers truly giving communities a voice, even if the act of research is simply a representation of their stories? Who is listening to these voices besides the researcher and the academic community? What is the purpose of research if voice and/or change are not outcomes?

Last week, we had an activity, figuring out several polices that explore the problem of female offending problem and address the problem.

It was hard to decide which role at first place because honestly I am not familiar with the system and don’t know anyone in that system. After we finally decided that we will be policy maker, all the policy seems really unrealistic. However, even though the problem seem difficult to deal with. We still need to figure out something to deal with it because we not suppose just wait and do nothing before things get worse. Therefore, we figure we should have a big goal, such as eliminating the poverty.

Ironically, even though this is the goal of generation of human. No one has accomplished nor does anyone have figure out a way to reach that destination. Neither communism nor capitalism had this figured out. However, the direct correlation between the crime rate and poverty is undeniable.  The reality in this society is already very cruel for common people. At the same time, for people with come criminal record, life is even hard. It might sound mean, but the truth is that their lives barely go back to normal again. Also, no matter how feminist claim the progress they made to change the unequal situation for women in society. Women are still in disadvantages place. Therefore, these offending women really got them in an unfortunate place to live. Alliance or Vision both tried, but didn’t succeed in some sense.

There are several problems that attract my attention in this problem.

...that HSBurke referenced in class today, as we were discussing what to "do" with stories of trauma:
Zimbabwe teen leaves anguish behind, starts future at Bryn Mawr (Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 2, 2012)

The section of Offending Women made me really angry. I had been angered before at some of the problematic aspects of both the programs that the author was assessing but this chapter struck me as particularly problematic. Many of the practices that were to get women to “open up” seemed almost like some kind of psychological torture, forcing the inmates into hysteria without any real way to build them back up. I was disturbed by the way in which the social aspects of their traumas/stories were ignored to draw focus on the ways in which their “addictive” personalities led to them being imprisoned… It seemed almost violent to the minds and hearts of these women to force them to relive their stories and then place the blame entirely on them for their situation. I was also really angry when Haney was describing the search through the women’s belongings. There was a complete lack of boundaries and privacy, both of which I think people are entitled to. Especially when they went through the women’s things and threw out what the institution had decided were not “necessities.” One of the women had saved up shampoos and toiletries for when she leaves; probably knowing full well what its like not to have money and no access to those things. The staff member cleaning out her room laughed. She laughed, without even bothering to address why that inmate would’ve felt that she needed to stock up on toiletries in the first place.

When I heard that the Warden was not coming to our class, I was extremely disappointed. Much like the invisibility of prisoners, I feel like the people who work within the system are also invisible. Although I wasn't expecting hirer to share a personal anecdote from her life beyond the prison walls, I did want to see a face and notice the impact it would have on me. When discussing "female offenders" in class, I sometimes forget that the people who must "deal" with them are prisoners as well--they are confined to watching the inmates, confined to possible, and justifiable, fear for their lives every day at work, and, like Tamika from Visions, confined to being an emotionless being.  Although Haney gives voice and insight into the lives of the Vision workers, only on the job of course, I also see that even with visibility, Haney was able to capture reservation from the workers. For instance, Tamika did not believe in being emotional while Margaret distanced herself by taking advantage of the power she had over her employees. So it seems that the issue is two-fold: prison employees are invisible from society but at the same time choose invisibility. I wonder if I would have sensed this with the warden and what kind of questions would have come up as a result.  Like we do with the inmates we read about, I would like to have a conversation about the ethnic/racial/class make-up of the employees.

I light of our recent Silence (and Serendip) conversations about getting to know each other better, I was interested in the expectations that were put upon the Visions women to "share" during group therapy sessions. Haney notes that the aim of these therapy sessions was "to push one another to divulge and reflect [...] quite specific things". I was so troubled by the notion that these women were required by the rules of the facility to share specific parts of their life -- they even didn't get to choose the proper time or avenue. As I mentioned in my last Silence post, although I desperately want to know more about you all (and props to Chandrea's activity today!) stronger still is my desire for us as a class to feel comfortable or inspired to share. In my opinion, everyone should have the choice to pick silence, especially when it comes to revealing very personal experiences. Unfortunately, due to the structure of the program, women at Visions didn't have that choice. And, in regards to the core goal of the program, I feel like being forced into discovering your voice isn't nearly as "therapeutic" as being given a safe space to find it on your own. 

I found much of what I've read about Alliance and Visions in "Offending Women" to be problematic, but, in both cases, I think what has struck me the most is the idea that motherhood is a reward for good behavior, that the women who are part of these "communities" don't deserve to interact with or parent their children until an overseer tells them so. I think what hits me hardest here is the idea that, once you are marked as an "offender" you are then also branded to be an unfit parent, two labels which don't necessarily go hand in hand. Is it not keeping these women from a full recovery to keep them away from their children, or to tell them that they are not fully able to fulfill a responsibility that they have to their child(ren)? It killed me to read that the women went into the bathroom for hours at a time to calm their child down, to have precious few moments where they could be the mothers that they wanted to be, without the intrusion of administrators. They obviously were not perfect parents (but who is?), but to stop these women in a program with "Mothers" in the title from truly filling that role seems cruel to me. 

among HSBurke -- “Showing each other our cracks and admitting that we don’t have it all together is, in my opinion, something our group needed. Thank you for your honesty--

Michaela --I'm grateful that… you all don't "have it all together" in the way I feared--that everyone else had some intstruction manual for getting through life that I just never picked up on--

and Sara --I think most students at Bryn Mawr feel that everyone else around them is doing better then them… I realized last semester that everyone else felt exactly as I did- behind… like everyone else was flourishing but them. I began to wonder, in this environment that is supposed to be so empowering, why so many students felt so helpless and inadequate…maybe …we are constantly measuring ourselves up to impossible standards; grades that we have imagined for the people that seem to be flourishing --->