Under Lock & Key

I just got done reading ULK 61 and I got to say it opened my eyes to a lot of stuff that I did as a gang member of Aryan Brotherhood in Texas to sex offenders coming into the system. When they came in, me and several other dudes would beat them up to "break them" and then would sell them to the butty bandits due to their crime of being labeled a sex offender.

The system would not attempt to protect them either, due to the label they had on them as a sex offender. So we had free reign to punish them as we seen fit. But nowadays I look back on the stuff that I did and can see the big errors of my ways.

I ran into a dude down in the state hospital that was just about dead of AIDS that he got due to the actions of me and some other dudes breaking him. I was going for breaking my hand in a fight and saw the death wagon pull up and unload two AIDS patients, and one dude seen me and called out my name and asked me if I was still breaking in sex offenders and if so to look at him and see what it causes.

I was like "Dude I do not know you or want to know you either." He told me where I beat him up and sold him, and it blew my mind. I had a lot of hate towards sex offenders when I came into this place and it has mellowed out over the last 34 years that I have been in prison. My baby sister was assaulted by her friend's father, so the issue of sex offenders is personal to me.

When I started in the County Jail beating up sex offenders for something to do, the Sheriff would tell the jailers to put anyone that came into the jail on my tan and tell me in front of the dude what he was in the jail for. I look back on it now and I am coming to the realization that they were using me to punish the dudes that were charged with sexual assault.

One dude, I broke his jaw in two places due to his granddaughter saying he touched her in a private spot. Come to find out it was a lie because she was mad at him for grounding her for the weekend.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not attempting to brag about it, just am showing the length of time and intensity that I have been blinded by the system to do their work, and now I'm starting to understand the system. What made me wake up is one of my brothers got charged with sexual assault/harassment for grabbing his croch and telling a chick to suck is dic- as he left school. Since he made a crude gesture towards her she said she felt violated. He was on a ten-year probation so he got violated for the gesture and came to prison for it. And yes he has to register as a level 1 tier offender due to him being mad about getting kicked out of school for a 3-day period.

Each case is different so you got to look at all of the facts. If you go blindly as I did for years upon years you are no better than the ones you are jumping on, due to the fact that you are siding with the oppressors and are holding down your own people. Yes I am fully aware that there are some sexual offenses that are true crimes and they need all that they get and ten fold more heaped on top of it if they are truly guilty of the crime of sexual assault on a woman or child.

But before you lace up the steeltoe boots and put your pistols on gloves to beat up a sex offender, make sure it's a true crime and one that deserve the punishment that you are fixin to hand out. If not you're just working for the system that you are claiming to work against. You cannot pull both ways at once or you go no place at all.

I used to beat up the dudes, now I try to help them with their cases due to the fact that a lot of them are not able to get help in the law library because they have ask a law clerk to help get a case cite and his first question is "what you charged with?" And he will go to the law books and look up your case, and if you do not pass his smell test he will not help you, or he will tell you the case cite you're asking about is not in the law library, or throw your request slip away and say he never got it at all.

Look at it like this, what if you're with a girl and you're going at it and she says "stop"? If you move forward one more time you have just committed sexual assault.

So before you say it will not happen to you, you got to look at it with your eyes open and see the whole picture and not just what the state wants to show you. So think about all the forms that you may have been labeled a sex offender in the past and then you can get over the stink of the name and start to see the person and not the label that the state has put on a person. Most I can work around because I was a dirty dog in the world and could have been charged a few times too. But the main issue is we need to stop letting the state do our thinking for us and take back our minds from the system. You can handcuff my body but I refuse to let you handcuff my mind any longer.

MIM(Prisons) responds: This writer has learned through practice pretty much everything we've been saying about sex crimes. This is an impressive transformation, and we hope ey has also transformed eir thinking about oppressed nations over many years behind bars.

It's true that a lot of people have committed sex crimes but not been caught. Men are taught to be "dirty dogs" as this writer says. That's why the revolutionary movement will need to do a lot of work reforming thinking and rehabilitating. Not just those with sex charges, but everyone raised in this messed up system. As we discuss in the "Punishment vs. Rehabilitation" article, we can do some of this rehabilitating now, but we will focus our energy and time on those who recognize their mistakes and crimes and want to make a change and committ to serving the people.

May 2018 — I read ULK 61 and it is a pretty interesting newsletter on a topic that I have never put much thought into. I have to say I do not agree with the portion about "un-muddling the relationships between comrades (i.e. no dating within the org)" in the Sex-Offenders vs. Anti-People Sex Crimes article. I believe this practice would serve no real interest in the organization. I believe it is a form of dis-unity. To make a method of such effective the org would have to segregate the two (men and women). The reason being men and women form relationships naturally. I believe we need to congregate with our women for relationships, build unity, and if unity is a strong point of this organization a rule like that shall be established in this organization.

I do understand why MIM would decide to take that approach, but I see it as going against the inevitable. I believe it would also create secrecy in the org if people were dating and that would cause dishonesty. I believe a better approach would be to recognize the relationship, as to say if the comrades are to date they should be married. Not only would this relationship be recognized by the org, it would be recognized by the state/U.$., further decreasing such allegations of sex crimes. And at the same time the organization would be helping to build and create unity between men and women.

Another reason I believe this approach/practice would be more effective in the organization is because people seem to be more serious about marriage, meaning there just won't be any fraternizing within the organization. If there has to be an appointed licensed priest/preacher or someone to wed the two it should be done so. It, the ceremony, should be done in front of the org. Now it becomes if someone interferes with the relationship man or woman they should be punished/dealt with. Now that the marriage is consensual the sex is consensual. We should not deharmonize the harmony between man and woman. We are trying to build a United Front!

MIM(Prisons) responds: We need to be clear that marriage does not ensure consensual sex. We can't create a utopia outside of the patriarchal culture right now, and so we know that our relationships (including marriages) will still be strongly influenced by that culture. And under the patriarchy sexual relations are inherently unequal regardless of marital status or level of political activism of the people involved.

This writer is correct that people do have a tendency to become romantically involved with people with whom they spend a lot of time. And having a lot of political unity can encourage this romance. We don't share the view that this is naturally just between men and wimmin. It also happens between men and men and between wimmin and wimmin. So separating the people would only stop some romance. There may be other arguments for separating men and wimmin while we battle the patriarchy, but we shouldn't expect this to end romance or sexual assault. The situation in men's prisons across the United $tates is a clear demonstration of this point.

Our main disagreement with this writer is with the idea that we should use romance to build unity. On the factual front, even with the formality of marriage, most relationships don't stay together. This is just a fact of life under the imperialist patriarchy right now. This is the reality we live in. And we know that when relationships end there is a lot of irrational anger (and often rational anger too) that comes with it. So if we're trying to build unity, encouraging romantic relationships is likely to backfire in the majority of cases where the relationship doesn't last. Perhaps we can do better than the average couple with the support of the political organization, but we're still going to have a lot of relationships end. We just don't have the power or reach right now to reverse this fact of patriarchal culture.

In the ULK 61 article this writer responds to we wrote:

"How we handle this process now in our cell structure will be different if a cell has 2 members versus 2,000 members. The process will need to be adapted for different stages of the struggle as well, such as when we have dual power, and then again when the Joint Dictatorship of the Proletariat of the Oppressed Nations has power. And on and on, adapting our methods into a stateless communism.

"Even with policies in place, we have limited means of combating chauvinism, assault allegations and other unforeseen organizational problems endemic to the left. Rather than wave off these contradictions, or put them out of sight (or cover them up, like so many First World-based parties and organizations have done), we need to build institutions that protect those who are oppressed by gender violence."

This is something we need to continue discussing, trying various approaches, and working on the best approaches to ensure the longevity of the anti-imperialist movement.

"We stand for active ideological struggle because it is the weapon for ensuring unity within the Party and the revolutionary organizations in the interest of our fight. Every communist and revolutionary should take up this weapon." — Comrade Mao, "Combat Liberalism"

Within every class, gender, and nation, trans women are being oppressed and persecuted because of their trans disposition. This has been so within both capitalist and socialist societies, among revolutionaries as among reactionaries.

Many hallmark social/revolutionary movements in America's history had non-supportive regard for trans people. The consciousness was not there yet; revolutionary consciousness evolves by degrees, through years, decades, the same for such movements (and governments) in other countries.

In century 21, both political and revolutionary consciousness are at a much higher frequency. Trans political resistance is occurring across the country (and the world); trans people have become cognizant of the political aspects of their quality of life existence, and are getting politically involved in a revolutionary manner.

The political and revolutionary consciousness evolution of trans people is taking place in America's prisons. In California, the 36 Movement of trans women is politically active against the anti-trans oppression, persecution, and genocide of the prison system for their lives, livelihood and for political power. There is also the right-wing reaction they must contend with on the yards, and, as well, reactionary behavior towards them by left revolutionaries, and by presumed progressive media outlets on the left. People do not become progressive or revolutionary overnight. Anti-trans sentiment is deep among those so afflicted, because putrid bourgeois opinion predominates in American society, and is infectious.

How are the cadre to address such reactionary or quasi-reactionary tendencies within the revolutionary camp? For one, internal indoctrination can put light on the subject, so that new cadre are aware. But so must elder cadre become aware. For another, ideological discussion on trans issues are worthwhile — trans within society/prison, within the revolutionary ranks — discerning among each other and within oneself traces of reactionary inclination and weeding them out, aligning personal in line with revolutionary principles that guide attitudes towards the people, and propagating the new awareness.

By such ideological debate, properly practiced, broader unity will result. This is revolutionary. This is the revolutionary guidance of Mao Thought.

Across the wider spectrum, included is regard for lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and gender nonconforming people.

MIM(Prisons) responds: The transgender question has come out of the closet in recent years. This is a necessary step towards ending gender-based oppression. The question is what bringing the issue to light under capitalist patriarchy will achieve.

We can look back at the gay/lesbian/queer struggles in this country and see how they led to integration of those once separate communities into mainstream Amerika. While white wimmin have always been allies to white men in national oppression, this relationship has only solidified with increasing power of wimmin in Amerikan society. Both of these examples inform our understanding of nation as principal to our struggle against all oppression.

If we look at nation, we also see integrationism though. Today the integration road is presented as a viable option in the United $tates, rather than something you have to fight for. However, with nation, that integration was not complete. The ghettos became more isolated, even though they have since become more dispersed, and the koncentration kamps of course expanded with oppressed nations filling the cages. With the integration of both the relatively gender and nationally oppressed in this country, we did not see improvements for wimmin or oppressed nations overall in the world. So there is a problem with looking just at U.$. society for measuring progress.

The fact that transgender issues have not been a public discussion for as long as other forms of oppression does create the sense that transgender people are the most oppressed, and need the most attention. And this is the conclusion by many advocates of identity politics. As this comrade says, they have faced oppression in all parts of society. However, with our understanding of society within the framework of dialectical materialism we can talk about why nation is principal under imperialism, look at the historical examples of gender struggles in this country, and predict that the transgender struggle is not going to move us toward ending oppression the fastest.

None of that discounts what the comrade says about struggling for the inclusion and acceptance of transgender prisoners, and people in general, in the revolutionary movement. In some ways the prison population was ahead of the curve on this one as the prominence of transgender wimmin in male prisons has made this issue part of daily life for prisoners before many Amerikans began grappling with it. Still, this has not led to an overall overall progressive attitude among male prisoners, in part due to the hyper masculinity that the prison environment engenders.

This is an example of how communists must try to address all issues holding back the revolution, while focusing on the principal contradiction. We join this comrade in calling for ideological discussions around trans issues in mass work. This will foster greater unity within the oppressed nations and among the revolutionary movement of prisoners overall.

July 2018 — In ULK 61 the contentious topic of sex offenders was discussed with great objectivity (even in certain subjective analyses) and openness. The following will attempt to clarify, expound and expand on some of these positions from my perspective.

I wrote, "Excluding all non-sexual depredations (public urination and such), SOs constitute a dangerous element; more so than murderers because SOs often have more victims, and many of those victims become sexual predators, creating one long line of victimization." As a rejoinder to this comparison, MIM(Prisons) stated: "When someone is murdered in lumpen-criminal violence, often there is retaliatory murder, and subsequent prison time."

While this may prove accurate among lumpen organizations (LOs) and loosely associated persons, this is very far from the truth in society, generally speaking. A majority of people, even a majority of lumpen class, do not resort to such literal "eye-for-an-eye" justice. While there are many (mostly males between 14-22 years old) who do seek retaliatory murders, on the whole they produce a minority to be certain. Just as murderers constitute a noticeable minority of the 2.3-million-plus currently incarcerated through the United States.

Contrarily, sexual predators affect the entire societal composition. They perpetrate crimes against males and females, provoking deep-burrowing psychological problems, and turn many victims into victimizers (not all turn to outright sexual depredation). There is no question murder is irrespective of class, gender, nation, and provokes intense psychological trauma. The difference is not in the severity of the anti-proletariat crime — taking a life or ruining a life — but in the after-effects. To make the argument that murder creates murder in the same, or even similar, manner as sexual victimization creates future victimizers is beyond stretching. It is a patently false premise. Were it even close to the reality of present society, there would be anywhere from 10-50 times more murders and murderers in this country and its prisons.

Not to be crass, but murder is more of a one-two punch knock out. Where sexual depredation is twelve rounds of abuse by Robert Duran with your hands behind your back. Most murderers are not serial killers, which means their victims are family and known associates. Sexual predators habitually prey on strangers who fit their desired victim profile, in addition to relatives, friends, or associates. Murderers are normally incarcerated once arrested. Sexual predators are often times released.

Also it is much more stigmatizing to be a victim of sexual violence — shame, feelings of inferiority, desire to vengeance, self-deprecation — than a murderer's victim. Desire for justice, feelings of powerlessness, and greater stigmatization arises from the criminal injustice system's treatment of sex crime victims. Many are left feeling as if they are the perpetrator instead of the victim. This is why so many sex crimes go unreported. Such is not the case with murders, unless persons decide to seek vigilante justice. Considering the above, it is clear why a more negative perspective is attached to SOs than to murderers. Logically, a murder is traumatic but almost all overcome the event without becoming killers. In the case of sexual victimization, a slim minority overcome the stigma, and more than half become victimizers; whether emotionally, physically, or continue to harm themselves, reliving the victimizations perpetrated upon them.

"Lumpen criminal violence (created and encouraged by selective intervention and neglect by the state) is one of the reasons why 1 in 3 New African men will go to prison at some point in their lifetime." This is undoubtedly true. Although to state such a statistic to disprove the "logic" behind SOs being viewed as pariahs more than murderers is slightly disingenuous. Capitalism is formed in a manner destined to exclude great numbers of people. Mass incarceration is capitalism's answer to this exclusion. This is the manner in which capitalism addresses the lumpen class it creates in order to maintain a steady course on the capitalists' globalization/exploitation road. Crime and violence are incidental to the system that created a mass lumpen class. So, while this does "represent a long line of victimization," it is inherent to capitalism, but sexual depredation is not.

As it relates to imminent or immediate efforts at rehabilitating sexual predators, my meaning was that efforts can be made on an individual basis by revolutionaries who are able to see past label prejudice. Through their efforts, if conducted scientifically, a systematic method can emerge for once the revolution is successful. Practice directs theory and theory is validated in practice, of course. But my overall meaning was and remains that sex crimes will be a problem for capitalism, socialism, or communism. Sexual depredation is a social contagion which transcends borders of politics, gender, economy, class, nationhood and age. Revolutionaries will need to address the problem sooner or later. For those who can be ahead of the curve, they should be. Revolutions need innovative trail blazers as does every department of humynity.

MIM(Prisons) responds: We appreciate this clarification on this writer's article in ULK 61, and find some compelling points here for distinctions between the impact of murders and sexual assaults. Though we still maintain that we will need to reform all who can be reformed, regardless of crimes (conviction or not).

We need to address a few factual questions. The author claims that "SOs habitually prey on strangers who fit their desired victim profile; in addition to relatives, friends, or associates". The reality is that studies of sexual assault have found that around 70%-75% of survivors know their rapist. It is a myth that sexual assault is mostly perpetrated on strangers. This myth serves the racist idea that New Afrikan men are raping white wimmin. And this falsehood has been used to target and persecute New Afrikan men going back to the time of slavery, specifically targeting ones seen as a threat by those in power. So although this is a minor point in the author's essay, we want to clarify the facts.

We want to also address this writer's comment that "sexual depredation is a social contagion which transcends...gender." Sexual assault is one of the most blatant symptoms of a system of gender oppression. It is the exercise of gender power. Sexual assault is a product of the patriarchal system that sets up gender power differences in our society.

And so, we disagree with the author that crime and violence are inherent to capitalism but sexual depredation is not. In the abstract this makes sense: sexual depredation is a result of the patriarchy, a system of gender oppression. Capitalism is a system of class oppression. The two are distinct systems of oppression.

But society has evolved to intertwine class, gender and national oppression so intimately that it is not practical to think we can eliminate one without eliminating the others. Seeing gender oppression as something outside of capitalism suggests we can eliminate gender oppression entirely under capitalism. While we can certainly target aspects of gender inequality and oppression for reform under capitalism, this is similar to enacting reforms to the systems of national oppression. We might improve conditions for individuals within the capitalist system, but the underlying system of oppression will remain.

This doesn't mean we ignore gender oppression right now. We must expose it, and we should demand that it be stopped wherever possible. For instance, fighting against rape in prison is a battle that could reduce the suffering of many prisoners. But we can also see the outcome of state responses to prison rape in the ineffectual and sometimes counter-productive PREA regulations.

With that said, we do agree with this writer that we can work now towards a systematic method to deal with sex offenders and sexual predators. But we will have fewer resources and less power to help these individuals reform now, before we have state power.

We won't reach the stage of communism until we eliminate sex crimes. We disagree with the author's assessment that sex crimes will exist in all systems. Communism is a society without oppression, where all people are equal. We will have to eliminate class, nation and gender oppression before we can achieve a communist society. And so this writer is correct that revolutionaries must address the problem of sex crimes, both sooner and later. As we discuss in the article "On Punishment vs. Rehabilitation," the stage of our struggle will help determine how we deal with those who commit crimes against the people.

Enclosed is a clipping from the Austin American-Statesman (2018 May 3) I thought pertinent and might be of interest.

Not having first-hand knowledge of the University of Texas (UT) course "MasculinUT," I found it interesting that the reactionary philistines again attacked academia for addressing patriarchal oppression. As far as I'm concerned, conventional notions of masculinity are a societal conditioning of the psyche, ergo, much like a Black persyn ensnared in a eurocentric society, a mind fuck. So, yeah, maybe the yahoos are correct that traditional concepts of what masculinity entails (e.g., violence against wimmin) is a mental health issue, and as such, men need to be subjected to re-conditioning via communist transition. Maybe, like the bourgeoisie under socialism, men will be repressed. Maybe, hell!

MIM(Prisons) responds: The article enclosed, from the Statesman, talks about the UT masculinity education program, which is an awareness campaign formerly run by the University's Counseling and Mental Health Center. Conservatives attacked the program, claiming it treats masculinity as a mental health problem.

In response, the MasculinUT program was moved to Dean of Students, and, in a statement from its website, "the program's original steering committee was reconvened and expanded to provide recommendations and feedback to ensure that the program's mission is clearly defined and fully aligned with its original intent of reducing sexual assault and interpersonal violence."

We're with this comrade in thinking it might not be so bad to think about masculinity as a mental health issue. As long as we're clear that this and many other mental health issues are a product of the capitalist patriarchy. People aren't born being sexist idiots. They are trained to believe that wimmin don't know what they want, to see wimmin as objects, and to view maleness as a sign of superiority. People will need a lot of retraining to overcome a lifetime of patriarchal education.

We don't know what's involved in the UT program so we can't comment on it. But we can say that after the imperialist patriarchy is overthrown we'll have a long period of cultural revolution where we need to re-invent humyn culture and re-educate everyone to see all people as equal. This is about the patriarchy, but also about the oppression of all groups of people over other groups, across the strands of oppression of nation, class and gender. This involve forcibly repressing patriarchal culture and institutions. We hope that forcible repression of half the population (men) will not be necessary, but there will need to be active promotion of feminists into positions of power, and a careful re-consideration of the appropriate interactions between all humyns.

We received a lot of thoughtful responses to Under Lock & Key 61 debating sex offenders. This is a tough topic. It’s easy to recognize that our culture encourages abuse of wimmin. And there are many problems with how the criminal injustice system defines sex crimes and selectively prosecutes this crime. But people don’t want to condone rape, and many of us have a persynal reaction of horror to sexual predators that makes it hard to think about this objectively.

Regardless of the societal influences, and the unfair definitions and prosecutions, there are a lot of people who have committed sex crimes, and these should not just be ignored or forgiven. This topic got a lot of people thinking about whether or not sex offenders (SOs) can be part of the movement, and if they committed sex crimes, if they can be reformed.

Defining sex crimes

We have all been raised in a culture that promotes sexism and condones gender oppression. We call this system the patriarchy. It’s a system where sexy young teen models sell clothes, and TV and movies glorify powerful men and violence against wimmin. This culture colors every relationship we have. We’re taught that being a good man means acting manly and strong and never letting a womyn tell you what to do. And we’re taught that being a good womyn means submitting to the needs and desires of your man. With this training, we can’t expect equality in relationships. And without equality, we can’t expect free consent. Not everyone has a gun to their heads when they are asked to consent to sex, but there are a lot of different forms of power and persuasion.

So we’re starting out with a messed up system of gender oppression, and then we’re trying to define which acts of sexual violation count as coerced (rape) and which are just “normal.” One California prisoner wrote:

"I want to comment on the sex offender topic. Yeah it’s rough because like the Nevada 17 1/2 yr old dude it’s just that easy to get caught up. As adults we’re able to date 18-19 year olds as a 40-50 year old.

"I mean if people are going to argue 15 year old and an 18 is different, the question is why/how? If their answer isn’t ‘I just want my baby girl to be my baby girl a few more years’ then their answer is B.S., because that’s what it really boils down to.

“Moving on, the sex offender umbrella is too big. Like it was mentioned, a person taking a leak in public is considered a sex offender? We haven’t always had toilets, let’s get real and go after the real sex offenders – fully adult male/female taking advantage of a child. That’s a sex offender! 20, 30, 40 year old trying to sleep with a 13 year old – sex offender! Possession of child pornography – sex offender!”

This writer raises the question of age to define sex crimes. We ask, why is a 20 year old sleeping with a 13 year old rape, but a 20 year old with a 15 year old isn’t? Probably because this writer believes a 15 year old is capable of consent but a 13 year old isn’t. That’s the key question: who has the ability to give consent?

Truly free consent isn’t possible from within a system that promotes gender oppression from birth. But that’s not a useful answer when trying to define crimes from the revolutionary perspective. And if we’re going to attempting to rehab/punish people who have committed sex crimes, we have to decide what is a reasonable level of consent.

For now, we maintain that we should judge people for their actions, not the label they’re given by the criminal injustice system. As this comrade from Maryland explains, society creates sexual predators who act in many different ways, but their actions all show us they are counter-revolutionary.

"I was reading one article on sex offenders in ULK 61, and it was talking about how to determine whether they did the crime or not. The thought came to me of judge of character, their interactions with males & females, whether prisoners or C.O.s, and the traces of conversations when they feel comfortable. Even those who don’t have sexual offense charges sometimes make you wonder by the way they jerk-off to female C.O.s & female nurses or what they say to them that have you think if they are undercover sex offenders.

"One prisoner went as far as getting the female nurse information off the internet and called them on the jail phone and got (admin) (Administration Segregation). This is the same person that comes back and forth for jerking off to multiple disciplinary segregation terms, but is locked up for a totally different charge. He’s a future sex offender, that can’t be trusted for help in the revolution not due to a label, but due to his character and interactions when he sees females.

"Then you have the ones that have been locked-up in their teenage years and they’re currently in their 30s, and like to chase boys who are easy to manipulate or who want sexual activity. One is big on being a victimizer, but knows and talks a lot of Revolutionary preferences. He has a lot of knowledge but can’t be trusted to prevail due to lack of discipline and wanting to continue in his prison rapes & prison sex crimes that he rejoiced in. But he is another one that is not locked up for any sex offenses. Both were juveniles when incarcerated and have been psychologically damaged and lack change & further rehabilitation. Everyone still embraces them in general population and looks past their sexual activities.

“How can people that exploit sexual habits right in clear view of the prisoners be embraced and not looked upon as potential threats to society, families, and fellow prisoners, when you have someone labeled as a sex offender through childhood friendships and has to be sectioned off & outcasted by other prisoners due to the label of sex offender and not background information, the character of the man, their interactions with same sex and opposite sex, and the signs & symbols through their conversation?”

This writer’s view is echoed by a comrade in Texas who has come to realize we need to judge people for their actions:

“UFPP is a must! Regardless of what you did to get in prison (rape, rob, murder), I (also a prisoner) only judge you or anyone on how they go forward from this day in prison. I used to work in food service and I would break a serving into fifths for women in prison for killing or abusing children. Then I grew up and got over myself. How do I know they were rightfully convicted and how do I know how they got in this prison life? I don’t. We’re all in the same spot starting out. What you do from this time forward is your description for me. And people can change. I have.”

When we look objectively at how many people, both in prison and in society in general, commit sex crimes, it’s pretty depressing. The recent #MeToo movement helped expose just how many sexual predators are in the entertainment industry in particular. And writers like the one above expose individual cases of predators behind bars. This is so common because of a culture that promotes gender inequality. As long as we see wimmin/girls as objects for sexual pleasure we will have a problem with sex crimes. Another prisoner described this pervasive problem in California:

“This letter is in regards to the sex offenders articles in ULK 61. We cannot”always" trust a state to tell us what crimes someone has committed - but most of the time we can. It might not always be so clear, but the majority of the time the person convicted of a sex crime did indeed do it.

"Of the thousands of people I’ve come across in the SNY prisons I’ve been in, absolutely nobody has claimed his pc 290 case is for urinating in public. The most common is sex with a minor as there is absolutely no thing in the state of California as consensual sex with anyone under age 18. I know this all too well because sex with a teen put me where I’m at.

"There are probably as many different variables that create sex offenders as there are types of sex offenders themselves. The overwhelming factor with the sex offenders I’ve met in prison (and there’s a lot of sex offenders in prison) is drug abuse, especially methamphetamine. It’s safe to say that most sex offenders (at least 60-70%) were driven by the effects of meth. There are many in prison who will admit to sex with underage females. Growing up in the housing project of San Francisco’s Mission District I knew a lot of adults (mostly men) that had sexual relationships (and even marriages) with teens. It was very common also that the girls my age as a teen carried on with grown men.

"Go to a Latina’s traditional 15th birthday celebration and count the amount of males over 20 yrs old. Yes, that is what many are there for: the girls. Do younger girls’ parents know about this? Yes, most do. Cinco de Mayo has become another reason for America to party. Latin foods, beers, music, piñatas, etc. We’ve welcomed with open arms. Are we going to pretend that these ‘other’ traditions from Latin America don’t exist and just continue to tag and store sex offenders or will something be done to address this issue?

This writer makes a good point: lots of sex crime charges are real. Many men have committed these crimes. But there’s no need to rely on what the state tells us. In fact this writer demonstrates that people are being honest with em about eir past crimes. We don’t gain anything by trusting the criminal injustice system, and we don’t need to.

This comrade helps demonstrate our point that sex with teens is condoned by capitalist culture. These cultural influences encourage men to see their behavior taking advantage of wimmin, and pursuing teens, as normal and acceptable. We won’t stop this completely until we get rid of the patriarchy and have the power to create a proletarian culture.

Can criminals be reformed?

An important organizing question of today regarding sex offenders is whether or not they can be part of the revolutionary movement. This inspires a lot of debate behind bars. A comrade from Maryland provides some good examples of people becoming revolutionaries in spite of history of anti-people crimes. We agree with eir analysis that everyone who has committed crimes against the people (sex offenders, drug dealers, murderers, etc.) has the potential to reform and be a part of the revolutionary movement. Whether or not we have the resources to help make this happen is discussed in “On Punishment vs Rehabilitation.”

"Eldridge Cleaver was incarcerated for rape upon little white girls and was not on Protective Custody, nor was he a victim, but the victimizer. [Cleaver was actually incarcerated for assault, but was open that he had raped wimmin and even attempted to justify it politically. - ULK Editor] Though upon his parole release he worked for a newspaper company until his run-in with Huey Newton at this newspaper company and joined the Black Panther Party to become later down the line a leader within the BPP political organization. James Carr was another that participated in prison rapes even though he grew to become a instrument for the BPP, a body-guard for Huey Newton upon his release, and a prison vanguard alongside George L. Jackson. Basically, saying that in their era they were not faulted by the political group for their past, but were looked upon what they could do in the present and future.

"With what the United States set as standards are only accountable for those who are out of their class and who they don’t care about, while their class gets away with such crimes or slapped on the wrist with the least time as possible. They have messed us up psychologically mass media. So even if the people don’t know if the crime is true, what the state places upon us as fraud charges, our mindset is automatically it’s true cause America says it’s true. Just like when we see people on the news wanted for questioning about a crime, we automatically say he did it without knowing.

“Did the Revolutionaries of the 60s, 70s, and 80s not participate in the Anti-People Crimes as modern day even though they were Vanguards for the people and just as conscious as we are. Did they not sell illegal drugs to raise money for court fees & bail fees? Did they not drink alcohol and smoke weed & cigarettes? Did they not graduate to hard drugs? Did they not shoot or stab people in their lifetime? Did they not commit sexual assaults? That’s why we are able to learn from their mistake, while also cherishing their great stands of Revolution. So within criticism, criticize all through all eras and let those who want to prove their self do it. If sex offenders, whether guilty or not, started their own organization that was aligned with the same goals, principles, and practices as MIM(Prisons), would you support them or acknowledge their efforts? Do you feel that if a sex offender, guilty or not, got conscious and changed for the better is capable of being a positive tribute to a Revolution?”

On this same topic a Wisconsin prisoner disagrees and sees the example of Eldridge Cleaver as a detriment to the movement overall.

"I personally do not believe there is a place in the movement for sex offenders, and when I say sex offenders I’m referring to those who are in prison for committing sex crimes, not statutory rape, where he’s 17 and she’s 16 or even if he’s 20 and she’s 16. I’m, talking about un-consentual, outright rape of women, men and children. I don’t have any affinity for those who rape prisoners or prison female officers and staff.

“A lot of people bring up Eldridge Cleaver to support the argument of reform for rapists, where to me Eldridge was not a true revolutionary, he helped bring down the BPP and his mistreatment of Kathleen Cleaver, Elaine Brown and others was egregious at best and outright barbaric at worst. I don’t knock those who have compassion and believe in reform for sex offenders, I’m just not one of them.”

While we disagree with this writer’s statement that SOs can’t be reformed, we agree that embracing those who promote gender oppression because of their correct line on national oppression can be very dangerous for a revolutionary movement. The Black Panther Party struggled with gender oppression, but in many ways was ahead of other movements and organizations of their day. This doesn’t mean they got it all right, but we have to judge people and movements in the context of their struggle.

Finally, Legion writes compellingly about the potential for rehabilitation of SOs and also offers a framework for undertaking this work.

"So I’m sitting here eating a bowl of cereal and digesting ULK 61 and comrade El Independista made some valid points and MIM(Prisons) dissented. See when we sparked this debate we were struggling with starting a NLO consisting of comrades who have fucked up jackets who are willing to put pride, ego, individualistic patriarchal thoughts and practices to the wayside forming a column of revolutionaries who are given a chance to show and prove that the state was wrong and that U-C-U works for all instead of some. Answering El Independista’s questions of possible solutions isolation, ostracization, extermination may I build?

"First and foremost as a revolutionary raised in the game I’d rather deal with a SO than a snitch or a jailhouse thief. Why? Because in most cases the SO can be re-educated if given the ability to perform. If a potential comrade has been framed by the state who will hear him out. He’s isolated like the sex offender island in Washington State off of puget sound. Ostracization is another word for shun if the SO shuns his/her anti-people conviction and uses unity-criticism-unity to combat the patriarchy and upholds the merits of a drafted constitution along with personal U-C-U known as self-criticism you can begin to mold revolutionaries who ostracize themselves. Then there is extermination, another word for ending re-education self-critique and revolutionary bent will cause an ill (as in sick) blow to the injustice system. It’s all or none. And no, I’m not harboring cho-mos and rapos, just willing to do the work to see us free all of us. For example, if a column of reformed SOs took up a revolutionary mindset and put said mindset into practice one would exterminate a whole under represented class of people.

“In California the Penal Code 226(a) is any sex crime. 266(h-j) have to do with pimping and pandering, 288 is a molester, 290 is the required registration code. Most kidnappers have to register for life. If you’re a John you have to register and if you’re a prostitute you have to register. If you opt into a shoot out and a child was involved you have to register, and child endangerment is a sex crime. As well as rape, peeing on the side walk, flashing. In prison all these cases get ‘P’ coded which prohibits the captive from ever being level 1 where there is minimal politics, and forces one to live in enclosed structures with secure doors AKA cell living. This leaves level”P" coded prisoners in 3 and 4 yards. These yards are political, whether GP or SNY there are politics. And on these yards you have folks with a knack for praying on the weak, creating a pattern of sexual abuse. Just look at any day room wall you’ll see the # for the PREA hot-line and a slogan that says ‘no means no and yes is not allowed.’

“People, we have to prepare for the white wolf invasion. You can’t bully the SO problem away. You have to be a social scientist and commentator and build institutions that collapse the structure. And to answer MIM(prison), most SOs are on SNY yards and you have these snitch gangs who look to isolate, ostracize and eliminate”threats." Most SOs aren’t rats, hell most aren’t even criminals, no rap sheet only accusations. But these “gangsters” need a common enemy, and an easy target is the SO. As a ‘do what’s best-ist’ I would, if given the platform to do so, launch the wolf collective and invite all who read ULK to join, not as a member but as a witness to the scientific display of revolutionary conduct. I do this to sacrifice self for the masses.

"Start with self-critique and a solid understanding of your errors.
Make serious revolutionary action your priority
Honor and respect all human beings’ dignity
Never go backwards in thought walk and push
Stand all the way up for what is righteous and do what’s leftover
You will be judged by your political work and political line.

“You might think I’m crazy or nuts but I have 36 nuts and bolts that say otherwise. The mathematics makes sense to turn nuts to plugs you plug in nuts meaning you become the change you want to see, and if I have to build the collective brick by brick stone by stone I will. I’m a convict first for all the would-be haters, but I think the time has come to form an infection on the skin of the beast.”

I don't agree with the idea of Jackson being a homophobe by stating that unmarried white women are left to become prostitutes, nuns, and/or lesbians; I don't find it derogatory either. I don't agree or disagree with his statement. I actually have no judgement on that idea. I don't understand why MIM says it's homophobic and derogatory.

MIM(Prisons) responds: The MIM review of Soledad Brother we sent this comrade with a copy of the book includes this critique:

"The first part of the book, mostly letters to his mother and father, is not very political. Jackson uses many sexist stereotypes in this section, often to criticize his mother for failing in his brother's and his own education. He says, for example, that unmarried white women are left to become prostitutes, nuns and lesbians (p. 45). While it is true that economic forces put more pressure on unmarried women (the fastest growing population in poverty are women and children), Jackson's stereotype is homophobic and derogatory.

"Much of what could be criticized as sexist in Jackson's writing is left as ambiguous. He says that 'The white theory of 'the emancipated woman' is a false idea' (p. 46), which is an economic reality of Amerikan capitalism, but no context is given. To his credit he does explain that Black women are the backbone of the family (p. 74)."

The George Jackson reference is as follows:

"In the society of our fathers and in the civilized world today, women feel it their obligation to be ever yielding and obedient to their men. Life is purposely made simple for them because of their nature, and they are happy. When the women outnumber the men in the black societies, the men take as many wives as they can afford, and care for them all equally. In the white for some nebulous reason the men can take only one... the rest are left to become prostitutes, nuns, or lesbians."

The beginning of the quote is perhaps the more damning part, positing that wimmin have a simpler nature than men and therefore are happy serving them. We hope you don't agree with that part. The homophobia is perhaps more subtle, but Jackson is clearly pointing to these three options as being not good, and praising Black men for saving Black wimmin from such fates — having sex in exchange for money/things, not being able to have sex, or having to have sex with wimmin instead.

The grain of righteous truth in the Jackson quote is that white society had more fully succumbed to capitalist individualism, so that wimmin are more often left to fend for themselves in situations that are not conducive to meeting their needs. But Jackson contrasts this with the paternalist assumption that wimmin need to be taken care of by husbands in order to survive, suggesting that polagamy is a selfless sacrifice by men. The unique struggle of wimmin under capitalism is a result of the intersection of the patriarchy and capitalism, not about wimmin needing husbands to survive.

Echándole un vistazo al código penal para ver lo que se ha descrito como asalto sexual por el sistema criminal de injusticias, revela una variedad de ofensas, desde varias faltas menores hasta violaciones graves. En los E$tados Unido$, aquellos que cometen dichos actos atroces son considerados como lo más bajo de lo bajo y las prisiones no son diferentes. Este ensayo intenta abordar el tema de los delincuentes sexuales dentro de las sociedades en prisión y su importancia para el movimiento en prisiones.

En el intento de escribir algo con respecto de este asunto, me vi obligado a regresar a dos puntos principales de debate: (1) la contradicción de la unidad vs las separaciones dentro del mismo movimiento en prisión, como la hizo popular el Movimiento Internacionalista Maoísta. La fuerza de mi argumento proviene de ambos puntos. ¿Qué es el Movimiento en Prisión?

Antes de continuar, es necesario para mí explicar lo que alrededor de qué intentamos construir unidad. El movimiento en prisión se define por varios movimientos, organizaciones e individuos que en este momento luchan contra las muchas caras del sistema de injusticia Amerikkkano. Sea que estos movimientos se den en Georgia, California, Texas, Pennsylvania o cualquier otro rincón del imperio de los EE.UU., no es de mucha importancia. Lo que es importante, sin embargo, es el hecho de que aquellas organizaciones e individuos se encuentran actualmente desempeñando un papel progresivo y potencialmente revolucionario al atacar al sistema opresivo en las prisiones amerikkkanas.

En las prisiones o cárceles de un estado la lucha puede tomar la forma de una campaña de reclamo, o de acciones de otro grupo dirigidas a abolir el trabajo forzado de los prisioneros. Estos movimientos tiene que ser dirigidos por una variedad de organizaciones lumpen. Algunas son revolucionarias, otras no. algunas son estrechamente reformistas por naturaleza y no irán más allá del ganar concesiones. Otras permanecen estancadas en la mentalidad burguesa del individualismo, mientras siguen engañosamente usando una retórica revolucionaria para conseguir sus metas.

Sin embargo, a pesar de sus objetivos separados, cada una en su propia forma, están tomando acciones colectivas cuando es posible para desafiar sus condiciones opresoras. Además, estos movimientos, organizaciones e individuos, cuando se toman como un todo, representan el despertar de la consciencia política y revolucionaria de los prisioneros, que no se ha visto desde la ronda más reciente de luchas nacionales de liberación de las semi- colonias internas. Esas son las cualidades progresivas del nuevo movimiento en prisiones.

Los aspectos negativos y reaccionarios del movimiento en prisiones se caracterizan por el hecho de que muchas de estas organizaciones lumpen todavía funcionan dentro de líneas tradicionales. La mayoría sigue participando en una economía parasitaria y llevan a cabo actividades en contra de personas, que afectan a las personas mismas a quienes dicen representar. Con respecto al ensayo, la mayoría de estos movimientos y organizaciones también tienen políticas que excluyen a aquellos a quienes el estado imperialista ha etiquetado como “delincuentes sexuales”. No obstante, ¿pueden estos movimientos y organizaciones realmente adherirse a dichas separaciones iniciadas por el estado? ¿Cuáles son las ramificaciones de todo esto?

De acuerdo con el Centro Nacional para Niños Explotados y Extraviados, el número de delincuentes sexuales registrados en los E$tados Unido$ para el 2012 fue de 747,408, con los números más grandes en California, Texas y Florida.(1) Por consiguiente, también son tres de los estados con prisiones más grandes. ¡Todo sexo es violación!

En 1990s, el Movimiento Internacionalista Maoísta (MIM) se volvió poco popular entre los amerikanos de izquierda por dos razones. La primera fue su análisis de clase, que decía que los trabajadores amerikkkanos no eran explotados, pero que en vez, formaban una aristocracia laboral debido al hecho de que les pagaban más del valor de su trabajo. Los amerikkkanos fueron por lo tanto, considerados como parásitos en el proletariado y campesino del Tercer Mundo, así como enemigos de los movimientos tercermundistas.

La segunda razón fue el sostener la línea política de la pseudo-feminista del Primer Mundo, Catherine MacKinnon, que dijo que no había una verdadera diferencia entre lo que hace el violador acusado y lo que la mayoría de hombres llama sexo, pero que nunca van a la cárcel por ello. MacKinnon expuso la teoría de que bajo un sistema de patriarcado (bajo el cual vivimos), todas las relaciones sexuales giran en torno a relaciones desiguales de poder entre aquellos hombres sexistas y aquellas mujeres sexistas. Así, las personas nunca pueden realmente consentir a tener sexo. De esto, MIM trazó la conclusión lógica: todo sexo es violación.(2)

Esta línea no sólo es radical, sino, revolucionaria por su acusación al patriarcado y a su implicación en el sistema de injusticia. MIM desarrolló aún más la frase de todo sexo es violación, cuando explicó la importancia de las acusaciones de violación provenientes de mujeres amerikkanas contra hombres afroamerikanos y la relación histórica con el linchamiento de afroamerikanos por parte de chusmas amerikkkanas durante Jim Crow. Incluso en la década de los 90, cuando MIM observó las estadísticas para las acusaciones de violación y condenas, pudo deducir que los afroamerikanos aún seguían estando oprimidos a nivel nacional por las mujeres blancas, en alianza con sus hermanos blancos.(3)

Dicho eso, esto no significa que los actos violentos y penetrantes no se comenten contra gente que son oprimidas por su género en nuestra sociedad. En vez de eso, dirijo la atención al hecho de que la sociedad amerikana erotiza las diferenciales de poder, y los medios sexualizan a los niños, no obstante, ambos pretenden abominar ambos. Sin importar quien haya hecho qué, lo que no debemos perder de vista es nuestro enfoque principal: la unión contra el estado imperialista, el enemigo número uno de las naciones oprimidas.

No es secreto que el llamar a alguien “delincuente sexual” en prisión es someter a dicha persona a la violencia y posiblemente muerte. Así mismo, es un hecho histórico que los cerdos han usado las acusaciones de ser delincuente sexual como una forma de desacreditar las voces líderes entre los oprimidos o, simplemente, hacer que los prisioneros tengan en su mira a alguien contra quien ellos tienen un asunto personal. Tenemos que resistir estas tácticas COINTELPRO y seguir uniendo y consolidando nuestras fuerzas, puesto que el participar en estos linchamientos autoinfligidos es sólo otra forma en que los cerdos logran que hagamos su trabajo sucio por ellos.

Comparaciones históricas

Mao Zedong dijo, al hacer una auto-crítica, que habían habido demasiadas ejecuciones durante la Revolución Cultural China. En particular, declaró que, aunque podía justificarse el ejecutar a un asesino o a alguien que hace explotar una fábrica, también podía justificarse el no ejecutar a algunas de las mismas personas. Mao sugirió que aquellos que estén dispuestos, deberían ir a hacer algún trabajo productivo, de forma que la sociedad pueda ganar algo positivo y la persona en cuestión, puede ser reformada (4).

Los Maoists creen que los problemas entre la gente se deberían manejar de forma pacífica entre la gente, y por medio de métodos de discusión y debate. La mayoría de prisioneros están encerrados precisamente porque estuvieron involucrados en algún tipo de actividad contra personas, en algún punto u otros de sus vidas. ¿Estas acciones deberían definir a los prisioneros? De acuerdo con el pensamiento de MIM, todos los ciudadanos de los U$ serán vistos como criminales reformistas por parte del movimiento socialista del Tercer Mundo, bajo la Dictadura Conjunta del Proletariado de las Naciones Oprimidas (JDPON). El lumpen del Primer Mundo no será la excepción independientemente del tipo de crimen.

Looking at the penal code for what has been codified as sexual assault by the criminal injustice system reveals a variety of different offenses, from various misdemeanors to serious felony violations. In the United $tates those accused of committing such heinous acts are considered to be the lowest of the low and prisons are no different. This essay attempts to address the topics of sex offenders within prison society and their relevance to the prison movement.

In attempting to write something on these topics I was forced to keep coming back to two main points of discussion: (1) the contradiction of unity vs. divisions within the prison movement itself, and (2) the all sex is rape line as popularized by the Maoist Internationalist Movement. The strength of my argument stems from both of these points.

What is the Prison Movement?

Before moving forward it is necessary for me to explain what we are trying to build unity around. The prison movement is defined by the various movements, organizations and individuals who are at this time struggling against the very many different faces of the Amerikkkan injustice system. Whether these struggles take place in Georgia, California, Texas, Pennsylvania or any other corner of the U.$. empire is not of much importance. What is important, however, is the fact that those organizations and individuals are currently playing a progressive and potentially revolutionary role in attacking Amerikkka's oppressive prison system.

In one state's prisons or jails the struggle might take the shape of a grievance campaign, or other group actions aimed to abolish the forced labor of prisoners. These movements tend to be led by an array of lumpen organizations. Some are revolutionary, some are not. Some are narrowly reformist in nature and will go no further than the winning of concessions. Others remain stuck in the bourgeois mindset of individualism while deceptively using a revolutionary rhetoric to attain their goals.

However, despite their separate objectives they are each in their own way taking collective action when possible to challenge their oppressive conditions. Furthermore, these movements, organizations and individuals, when taken as a whole, represent an awakening in the political and revolutionary consciousness of prisoners not seen since the last round of national liberation struggles of the internal semi-colonies. Those are the progressive qualities of the new prison movement.

The negative and reactionary aspects of the prison movement are characterized by the fact that many of these lumpen organizations still operate along traditional lines. Most continue to participate in a parasitic economy and carry out anti-people activity that is detrimental to the very people they claim to represent. In relation to the essay, most of these movements and organizations also have policies that exclude those the imperialist state has labelled "sex offenders," But can these movements and organizations really afford to adhere to these state-initiated divisions? What are the ramifications to all this?

According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, the number of registered sex offenders in the United $tates for 2012 was 747,408, with the largest numbers in California, Texas and Florida.(1) Consequently, these are also three of the biggest prison states.

All Sex is Rape!

In the 1990s, the Maoist Internationalist Movement (MIM) became infamous amongst the Amerikan left for two reasons. The first was its class analysis, which said that Amerikkkan workers were not exploited, but instead formed a labor aristocracy due to the fact that they were being paid more than the value of their labor. Amerikkkans were therefore to be considered parasites on the Third World proletariat & peasantry, as well as enemies of Third World socialist movements.

The second reason was upholding the political line of First World pseudo-feminist Catherine MacKinnon, who said that there was no real difference between what the accused rapist does and what most men call sex, but never go to jail for. MacKinnon put forth the theory that under a system of patriarchy (which we live under) all sexual relations revolve around unequal power relations between those gendered men and those gendered wimmin. As such, people can never truly consent to sex. From this MIM drew the logical conclusion: all sex is rape.(2)

This line is not just radical, but revolutionary for its indictment of patriarchy and implication of the injustice system. MIM developed the all sex is rape line even further when it explained the relevance of rape accusations from Amerikkan wimmin against New Afrikan men and the hystorical relation between the lynching of New Afrikans by Amerikkkan lynch mobs during Jim Crow. Even in the 1990s when MIM looked at the statistics for rape accusations and convictions, it was able to deduce that New Afrikans were still being nationally oppressed by white wimmin in alliance with their white brethren.(3)

That said, this doesn't mean that violent and pervasive acts aren't committed against people who are gender oppressed in our society. Rather, I am drawing attention to the fact that Amerikan society eroticizes power differentials, and the media sexualizes children, yet they both pretend to abhor both. Regardless of who has done what we must not lose sight of what should be our main focus: uniting against the imperialist state, the number one enemy of the oppressed nations.

It is no secret that to call someone a "sex offender" in prison is to subject that persyn to violence and possibly death. Furthermore, it is a hystorical fact that pigs have used sex offender accusations as a way to discredit leading voices amongst the oppressed or simply to have prisoners target someone they have a persynal vendetta against. We must resist these COINTELPRO tactics and continue to unite and consolidate our forces, as to participate in these self-inflicted lynchings is just another way the pigs get us to do their dirty work for them.

Hystorical Comparisons

In carrying out self-criticism, Mao Zedong said that there had been too many executions during China's Cultural Revolution. In particular, ey stated that while it may be justified to execute a murderer or someone who blows up a factory, it may also be justified not to execute some of these same people. Mao suggested that those who were willing should go and perform some productive labor so that both society could gain something positive and the persyn in question could be reformed.(4)

Maoists believe that problems amongst the people should be handled peacefully among the people and thru the methods of discussion and debate. Most prisoners are locked up exactly because they engaged in some type of anti-people activity at one point or another of their lives. Should these actions define prisoners? According to MIM Thought, all U.$. citizens will be viewed as reforming criminals by the Third World socialist movement under the Joint Dictatorship of the Proletariat of the Oppressed Nations (JDPON). The First World lumpen will be no exception regardless of crime of choice.

Summertime mid-July 2017 — Oklahoma's worst prison in the country Cimarron Correctional Facility in Cushing, Oklahoma. I got the chance to be moved off a security threat group unit (STG) where four gang members was killed in one single day all stabbed to death on one unit in one single incident in 2015. I got to move to the honor dorm where you are required to have a job either on the unit or on the yard, somewhere like the kitchen, laundry, or the library. All of the jobs was said to be full, but this facility had just lost its contract for its maximum security units. Most of the max inmates was moved to other max facilities and some put back in population on this facility, and after the max was empty it needed painting. I was chosen to help, I had experience in painting.

To move unit to unit you are subject to be pat-searched or strip-searched. These searches are routine by any officer, and are documented supposedly. On arriving to the entrance of the units that was to be painted my group of about 8 prisoners was stopped and told to line up for a strip-search. We formed a line and went one by one in a tiny bathroom where one officer had I thought one of the worst jobs that day seeing other men's nuts and butts, but I guess I was wrong.

When it was my turn I was already reluctant because a few of the guys came out the bathroom complaining about how weird it was. I get in the bathroom everybody knows the routine, take off all your clothes hand them to the officer he hand searches them and puts them to the side or holds them in his hands. You are to lift your nuts, turn around bend over squat and cough at the same time. I did all of those things but the officer had this lustful look on his face. He told me to let him see my dick again he then bends at the waist where he is very close to my piece and told me to pull back on it. I was beyond horrified.

You know how your back goes straight when you're either scared or mad? I asked him what type of shit he was on and told him I don't get down with that shit give me my fuckin clothes back. He smiled and handed me back my clothes. I dressed so fast I forgot to put on a sock.

The following day I thought surely the same officer would not be doing searches. WRONG. He was waiting on us by the bathroom with one hand on the wall the other hand on his hip tappin his foot. Once again when it was my turn I was somewhat scared and regretful for going back. Scared because I can act out of control sometimes, but I was somewhat confused and caught off guard. When I entered the bathroom I told the officer I'm not strippin out he could send me back if I have to. He said OK put your hands on the wall and starts a pat-down search he gets to my dick and grabs it and holds it and ask what it was. I yank away and tell him my dick weirdo let me out of here and push past him.

I was embarrassed and afraid to tell anyone at the time but when I did, what I thought was going to happen did. He denied it, the facility heads believed him and not me the prisoner and to this day I'm being retaliated against, threatened and punished by this facility's staff.

MIM(Prisons) responds: As this writer knows, it can be embarrassing, upsetting, and terrifying to come forward and talk about sexual harassment and assault. And it's an added challenge when it's not the gender norm that we're comfortable with, like when male guards molest male prisoners. This comrade is exposing something that goes on regularly behind bars. And the idea that reporting to the prison this, or any other type of abuse, will help the individual's situation is largely a myth. Congress even passed the Prison Rape Elimination Act to supposedly address this problem. But even that is just resulting in retaliation for many. Gender oppression and sexual assault of male prisoners is a big problem that is all too often ignored. It doesn't matter if the harasser is male or female, it's an abuse of power.