Discussion Prior to Article Re-write:

Really crappy article

This needs a complete re-write with sourced material. This is a lot of BS. Very bad article.

Down-Low

"There appears to be significant variation in the rates of prison rape by race, as documented by Human Rights Watch . Usually in US male prisons, perpetrators seem to be mostly African Americans. ]. Victims tend to be weak or isolated white men."

I don't see what the down-low has to do with prison rape. I see that this statement seems to suggest that only black men are on the down-low so I'm removing the link from this paragraph. While both topics may deal with sexual activity among memebers of the same sex, prison rape is a brutal crime that has to with particpation in sexual activity that is against the will of another, that can be perpetuated by a person of any racial group. Where as being on the down-low merely enatils secretly engaging in sexual activity with memebers of the same sex regardless of racial identity. Even though it is possible that there are prisoners on the down-low who may be involved in prison rape, neither activity precludes, nor requires the other. If anyone diagrees, I'm listening.

Would it be considered inflammaory or advancing the neutrality of this article to include a point of view pertaining to the following:

“prisoners are convinced that prison rape is an integral part of the prison punishment system,” adding that inmates frequently contend that “…prison rape is sanctioned by prison authorities. They view it as the ultimate method of control and punishment” (1974, p. X). It is in this manner that the prison staff essentially serves to perpetuate and exacerbate the labeling process for “homosexuals” within the prison."

Source being: Weiss, C. & Friar, D. J. (1974). Terror in prisons: Homosexual rape and why society condones it. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merril, Inc.

Excerpt obtained from: http://www.shsu.edu/~piic/summer2002/Hanser.htm

Reporduction permission unknown / unstated. Xiaou 23:45, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Garbage

The mother of a rape victim who committed suicide in prison testified in Congress that a prison warden told her before her son’s suicide that, “This happens to everbody. Learn to deal with it. It’s no big deal.”

Proof? Citation? This sounds like B.S. tripe to me.

The fact that there is no citation is troubling (and thus the connection between prison rape and suicide should likely be covered in a different way), but the rates of suicide for survivors of rape are higher in the "free world," so it would come as no surprise to think the same for those in prison as well. As the folks at Human Rights Watch point out in their report below, the statistics for suicide in the context of rape are likely to increase when the victim feels as if there is no chance that the victimization will come to an end, and that his or her safety remains in danger. This is certainly the case for victims of rape that remain incarcerated with their victimizers. Blondlieut 16:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Bias Towards Race

"Black-on-black rape is by far the most common aggressor/victim combination in that State." Citation? Proof? Statistics? 209.195.139.131 16:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC) Actually, my understanding is that this is not in fact the case, that white inmates are more likely to be victims of rape, and that the agressor is far more likely not likely to be white. While there are many whites in prison who likewise are preparators of prison rape, their victims tend to be other whites. The reasons for this are unclear. I'll try to find a reference. Blondlieut 20:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Indeed whites do tend to be victims far more often. Here is a citation to a report by Human Rights Watch: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/prison/report4.html#_1_27 Blondlieut 00:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC) A very thorough, professional report that covers many questions, including those regarding sexual orientation.

On bias as a whole, let's remove most of the uses of the word "gay" from this article. It's true that imates who rape other inmates often call them gay and that this is a projection of their own fear over their actions. It's also true that they feel threatened by new inmates who refuse to rape for similar reasons. That being said, they are in general not gay and the constant use of the word in this article is both questionable and appears foolish. - Kuzain 07:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I tend to disagree with Kuzain's analysis. It may very well be the case that the "gay" in the prison context means something different than in the free world. Then again, "sex" means something different in the prison context than in the free world. To the extent that so many young men, particular young men in the so-called "underclass" are inculcated into the sex mores of anti-female and anti-gay world of prison sex (where gay and female are conflated, and degraded, and thereafter victimized, regardless of the victims' pre-prison sexual identity), talking about sexual orientation is relevant. It's also worth noting that in the context of prison, being (actually) gay, for both prisoners and guards, seems to make the victim of sexual aggression impossible to categorize as a victim of "rape," given the strange and bizarre ways in which prison sex is imagined and categorized. Of course, even to speak of someone who is "actually" gay is somewhat of the mark, as in prison culture, once someone is "turned out" (i.e., forcibly sodomized, and "made" gay), he becomes the virtual equivalent of someone who in the outside world we might otherwise recognized as someone would be otherwise gay. It may be that a more nuanced and a more thorough explanation of the issue is merited, however.Blondlieut 16:03, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Stormfront??

Do we really need an external link to a well-known hate group? Keep in mind that having it casts a different light on the race section in the article.

This article blows

That and it's incredibly biased (the part where the article states that comedians who joke about homosexuals enjoying rape are bigoted). Also, there are no citations and the entire artice seems to be based on original research/one persons opinion.

No pun intended.

Start of a gutted rewrite

I took at stab at gutting out the unsubstantiatable or non-encyclopedic stuff from this article and re-ordering it a bit so that information falls under the heading it belongs. I actually ripped out all the race stuff because I figured it could be added back in more deliberately if references or anything like that were found. Eh, I dunno, revert me if you want. Or, use this as a starting block. What is there now and unreferenced I'm pretty sure could easily be, and I'll probably come back and do that tomorrow! --joeOnSunset 06:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I took off the disputed tag since I took out the, I think superfluous, race section. --joeOnSunset 06:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

- I've come back and added end references (not numbered inline, someone else might want to do that though) and done a litle more cleaning. I've taken off the "complete rewrite" template since I think this is a starting block to build on now. Along those lines, I've added the "expand" template. There's a lot more info in the cited references that could be added, and also to be gleaned from the 'see also' articles. --joeOnSunset 18:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Donaldson

Should there be a mention of Stephen Donaldson, since he spearheaded so much of the group? Rsm99833 06:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Are you talking about SPR? If so, mention of him would belong (in my mind) in the Stop Prisoner Rape article. --joeOnSunset 18:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Whoops. My bad. I thought I was on the SPR article. Rsm99833 19:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Prison sexuality?

It seems to me there is alot of overlap between prison sexuality and prison rape. They essentially are talking about the same thing. Shouldn't a merger be in order? Justinmeister 19:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

No, and the idea is so absurd as to be almost offensive. Deleuze 00:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

whoooooaaa. Let's not get upset. I'm not saying that prison rape is synonymous with sex in prison, but the majority of the prision sexuality article IS talking about non-consensual sex. I'm just proposing having just one article called prison sexuality, with different sections about consensual and non-consensual relationships. cheers. Justinmeister 01:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Not upset, I just think the idea is more trouble than it could possibly be worth. Centralization is a minor benefit compared to the problems of conflating consensual and non-consensual sexual activity especially when the two are already popularly perceived as one. Deleuze 09:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

It's just that one article is talking about non-consual sexual activity specifically while the other is just about general prison sexuality. My problem is that the prison rape article mostly repeats the prison sexuality article. if two articles are in order, then they should be called Consensual prison sexuality and non-consensual prison sexuality. If it's deemed through consensus that only one is neccesary, the article should make it clear that the difference between the two types of sexual activity. At the present, the prison sexuality article gives the impression that prison sexuality and rape ARE synonymous. Just a thought. Justinmeister 00:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I second Deleuze above when he says merging would be a "minor benefit compared to the problems of conflating consensual and non-consensual sexual activity." Imagine searching for prison rape, only to find a page that discusses consensual acts in prison... it just confuses the discussion. --chodges 06:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

So logically, the article named prison sexuality should be renamed consensual prison sexuality (or whatever) and the content that belongs in the prison rape article should be removed. Justinmeister 19:38, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages

Talk:Prison rape