'Are Prisons Obsolete?'
Feb. 9th, 2026 11:34 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
disappointed_lesbianToday was this month's second out-of-town shopping trip. On the outgoing bus trip, I started reading the fourth chapter of 'Are Prisons Obsolete?,' which is about the gendered nature of the prison system. The author made more under-supported claims about connections between the penal system and racism, slavery, etc., plus there was some disturbing content about strip searches of female inmates. I felt like it was just a matter of time before I got to something about sexual assault, to which I don't need more exposure, plus the author is not a convincing writer and the book is mostly a lot of history, which I generally find boring, so I decided to stop wasting my time with it. Plus there were only two chapters left, and there's no reason for me to believe that the arguments, if the writing could be said to contain any, would get any better.
The book basically says 'horrible stuff happens in prison and the prison system resembles other horrible stuff.' That's not enough of a reason to abolish prison.
I'm tired of people arguing that some policy or institution is problematic because it resembles something else or is "rooted in" something else, as they sometimes phrase it.
No promotion of prison abolition would be complete without a discussion of what to do with criminal offenders. Maybe that's covered in the last chapter, but the remaining chapter titles suggest that it isn't. Before I started this book, I'd seen a quote from the author, Angela Davis, and she basically said that bringing up violent criminals is a distraction. Ridiculous. I cannot be sure that she actually said that, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if she did.
The book basically says 'horrible stuff happens in prison and the prison system resembles other horrible stuff.' That's not enough of a reason to abolish prison.
I'm tired of people arguing that some policy or institution is problematic because it resembles something else or is "rooted in" something else, as they sometimes phrase it.
No promotion of prison abolition would be complete without a discussion of what to do with criminal offenders. Maybe that's covered in the last chapter, but the remaining chapter titles suggest that it isn't. Before I started this book, I'd seen a quote from the author, Angela Davis, and she basically said that bringing up violent criminals is a distraction. Ridiculous. I cannot be sure that she actually said that, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if she did.
