Prison Society: Socialization, Gender, and Inmate Culture

The Historical Evolution of Punishment

French philosopher Michel Foucault, in his book Discipline and Punish, extensively detailed the evolution of punishment in Western culture. Foucault asserted that during the Middle Ages, when monarchies were the dominant form of government, the ruler was responsible for dispensing justice. As crime came to be seen as an offense against the ruler, it was the ruler who assumed the responsibility of punishment. Torture and execution were the most common forms of punishment at this time, but because they were dispensed unevenly and ineffectively, executions became more of a form of political statement than a state-sponsored form of social punishment. As Foucault stated, "The public execution is to be understood not only as judicial, but also as a political ritual" (Foucault, 1995, p. 47).

This later evolved into a period in which individual communities assumed the responsibility for dispensing justice, and the idea that public punishment was an effective form of justice became embedded in Western thought.

The Emergence of the Modern Prison System

During the 17th and 18th centuries, great social changes made their way into Western culture. The idea of organizing large numbers of people toward a specific goal became central to the Western way of life. Discipline, as this concept was called, also influenced ideas about punishment and justice. Through the concept of discipline, it became possible to organize and control large numbers of criminals within a system — one that not only managed inmates in a disciplined manner, but also developed the support structures necessary for the entire justice system. Prisons required builders, guards, doctors, supplies, probation officers, and more. An entire system was formed, grounded in scientific principles.

Prisonization and the Psychology of Incarceration

Once a system of prisons is in place, the question of what happens to a person when they enter that system becomes critically important. Donald Clemmer introduced the concept of "prisonization" as a sociological and psychological process by which individuals become acclimated to the environment inside the prison system. Clemmer was careful to point out that prisonization is not the same as assimilation, which involves the merging of individuals and groups. Prisonization, according to Clemmer, begins when the individual enters the system and is "swallowed by the system." The individual must adapt to conditions inside the prison, learning the ropes as quickly as possible and accepting that they are now in an inferior position relative to the rest of society — most particularly to the guards and other prison personnel. New inmates must learn the daily routine they will be forced to endure, as well as the values and language of prison society. How thoroughly they become prisonized depends greatly on the nature of the individual and the amount of contact and support they receive from the outside world.

As Foucault asserted, those who were punished in the past usually received physical pain or death. The modern world, however, views this type of punishment as inhumane, and so the idea that an inmate should be physically harmed is no longer considered a sound punitive measure. Gresham Sykes argued that simply being incarcerated in a prison system can inflict pain on an individual — albeit psychological and emotional pain. As Sykes asserts, "the depredations or frustrations of prison life today might be viewed as punishments which the free community deliberately inflicts on the offender for violating the law" (Sykes, 1971, p. 285). The deprivation of liberty, ordinary goods and services, heterosexual relations, autonomy, and security all constitute a form of pain that can be inflicted on a person in prison, according to Sykes.

The Inmate Social Code in Male Prisons

Once inside a prison, inmates form a type of society unlike anything on the outside. Sykes, along with Sheldon Messinger, in their 1960 work Theoretical Studies in the Social Organization of the Prison, examined the inmate social system: "This value system commonly takes the form of an explicit code, in which brief normative imperatives are held forth as guides for the behavior of the inmate in his relations with fellow prisoners and custodians" (Sykes and Messinger, 1960, pp. 5–11).

The authors identify five main rules that inmates must accept as part of the social norms in prison. First, do not interfere in the interests of other inmates — keep to yourself. Second, do not lose your head and get into trouble. Third, do not exploit other inmates. Fourth, never weaken or lose your resolve; if you do, you will be destroyed. And finally, don't be a sucker — always remember that it is inmates against all others, and inmates should not allow themselves to be used by the system against fellow inmates.

Conclusion

When it comes to an analysis of the prison system, it is difficult to argue with the positions of the authors discussed here, as their studies were primarily observational in nature. Their observations nonetheless shed important light on the changes in social structures that inmates must face when entering prison society. With the advent of the modern prison system, inmates have created a new type of society, separate from society at large, developing independent values, attitudes, language, and relationships. This prison society affects not only the inmates, but the guards and staff as well.

What these authors have identified is a process by which inmates become "prisonized," and the effects of this process on both inmates and guards. The society that has developed in prisons, especially male prisons, is very different from that of ordinary society. While women in prison do attempt to simulate outside relationships within prison walls, there are still major differences between male and female prison societies. For the most part, the gender-specific nature of prisons makes it virtually impossible to fully recreate the social structures of the outside world. It is nonetheless revealing to observe the types of societies that large groups of the same gender create when forced to live together — and the scholarship reviewed here offers society that insight.

References

Clemmer, Donald. (1958). The Prison Community. New York: Rinehart.

Foucault, Michel. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.

Giollombardo, Rose. (1966). "Social Roles in a Prison for Women." Social Problems, 13(3).

Giollombardo, Rose. (1966). Society of Women: A Study of a Women's Prison. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Sykes, Gresham. (1971). The Pain of Imprisonment. In The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Sykes, Gresham, and Sheldon Messinger. (1960). The Inmate Social System. In Theoretical Studies in Social Organization of the Prison. New York: Social Science Research Council.

Zimbardo, Philip. (1973). "Stanford Prison Experiment." Retrieved from http://www.prisonexp.org/