 |
A
new addition to the HEART is our
Forum-check
it out
|
Sex, Sexual
Violence and Coercion in Men's Prisons
by
Sasha Gear
http://www.csvr.org.za/papers/papgear1.htm
Paper presented at
AIDS in Context International
Conference, 4-7 April 2001, University of Witwatersrand, South Africa.
This paper is
based on preliminary work done towards a study being conducted by the
CSVR into sex amongst male South African prisoners.
Sasha Gear is a Researcher in
the
Criminal Justice Programme at
the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.
Many correctional
administrations have displayed extreme reluctance to acknowledge that
sex takes place inside their prisons. In many countries sex in prison is
a punishable crime. In some, this is intertwined with an outlawing of
homosexual activity in general. Yet sex and sexual violence are
generally understood to be common practice behind prison walls.
Available material on South African men's prisons confirms that sexual
activity certainly takes place but there is little clarity on its nature
and extent.1
While sex is not directly outlawed in South African prisons, and the
Department of Correctional Services has gone as far as to provide in
policy for prisoners to have access to condoms, the subject still
represents something of an 'uncomfortable truth' around which there is
little real understanding or engagement.
One issue around
which there is not much clarity, for instance, is what proportion of
prisoners are drawn, whether voluntarily or not, into sexual activity.
In a study carried out at a South African juvenile correctional
institution, the findings of a voluntary questionnaire indicated that
roughly 45% of juveniles were engaging in sodomy either with each other,
or when temporarily held with adult prisoners (Carelse in Goyer & Gow,
2000). Whether this figure is representative of South African
correctional institutions more generally is not known.2
It is also likely that levels of sexual activity vary significantly from
one institution to another. This paper is not however concerned with
estimating the level or incidence of sexual activity but rather with
understanding the nature of the circumstances in which sex in South
African prisons occurs. A better understanding of sexual activity in
prisons is important for a number of reasons. These include sexual
violence in prison, the danger of the transmission of HIV, the potential
consequences of sexual involvement for identity and self-image, as well
as the challenges that these might pose for the reintegration of
ex-offenders.
The reportedly
widespread occurrence of sexual violence and sexual coercion in prison
is of particular concern. One assumption that many outsiders may make is
that 'sex' in prisons is often carried out through acts of rape. The
literature suggests that while this is true, sex also takes place in
other types of circumstances, which vary in their level of coerciveness,
from circumstances which directly resemble rape to others which may
appear to be primarily consensual in nature. Drawing on South African
and international literature, the key issue which this paper therefore
explores is what might be the range of circumstances and types of
relationships within which sex in prisons takes place.
In addition to the
concern about violence, a second reason for a focus on sexual activity
in prison is that it is a central contributor to the particularly high
risk of HIV transmission in the prison environment. There are other risk
behaviours which take place in prison,3
but available reports on the HIV/AIDS situation in Malawi (Jolofani &
DeGabriele), Nigeria (Raufu, 1999) and South Africa (Goyer & Gow, 2000)
state that while many prisoners have already contracted HIV before they
enter prison, sexual activity is the key cause of HIV infection during
incarceration.
In addition, both
violent or coercive and non-coercive sexual experiences in prison may
impact on the ability of prison inmates to reintegrate into society once
released from prison. Donaldson (1993) for instance, has suggested that
one potential response to the experience of having been a victim of rape
in prison, is an intensification of violence on the part of the victim
when he is released from jail.
A better
understanding of the nature of the circumstances in which sex in prisons
occurs is therefore crucial both for the welfare of inmates and in
relation to the interests of broader society.
This paper begins
to explore the available evidence on the various ways in which sex and
sexual violence happen between inmates and how these activities function
within dominant prison sub-cultures. At present South African literature
on these issues is generally restricted to that which has emerged
through a small number of investigations into gang practices and the
transmission of HIV/AIDS in prison.4
In this paper these are supplemented, with insights provided from other
countries.5
In particular, Donaldson's work on prisons in the USA, is cited
extensively. While the intention is to focus on South African prisons,
the other literature is used in the belief that it is relevant to an
understanding of the nature of the issue in the local context.
Prison Gangs
One source of
information relevant to the current investigation is that deriving from
studies on the gangs which operate in South Africa's prisons. Much of
the sexual activity which takes place in South African prisons is
reportedly thoroughly intertwined with the functioning of these gangs.
Where sexual
interactions have been reported on in prisons, they have been linked
most explicitly to the specific workings of the '28s'. The '28s' are
also known as 'the Ninevites' or 'Nongoloza'. The connection made
between the '28s' and sexual activity is unsurprising in light of the
fact that the 'Ninevites' consciously adopt homosexuality as a creed:
the stated goal of the '28s' is to pamper, protect and organise
catamites or 'wyfies' and they have a set of laws to govern sexual
relations between men (Haysom, 1981; Achmat, 1995). It should be borne
in mind however that the two key studies on South African prison gangs
(Haysom, 1981; Schurink, 1989) were conducted more than a decade ago.6
According to these
studies, the '28s' are reportedly the most powerful of the prison
'Numbers' gangs. Like the other 'Numbers' gangs in prison, the '28s' are
hierarchically ordered in a quasi-military structure but in the case of
the '28s', this structure reflects its particular construction of its
members' sexuality. Members occupy a position either in the hierarchy of
the Private-Line or the Blood-Line. The specified role of the Blood Line
members is to commit violence, and to protect the camp and their 'wives'
while the Private Line positions are distinctly feminised. This is
especially the case for those situated at the lower rungs of the private
line hierarchy. Members in these positions are known as 'wyfies' and
must provide sex and domestic services to the fighters (Schurink, 1989).7
In theory,
recruitment into the gang is voluntary and gang members reportedly would
never admit to being forced to join a gang. This is crucially qualified
however by the circumstances of prison life. As Haysom (1981) points
out, in the prison context, 'there is no simple dividing line between
self-preservation and self-interest'. Moreover, inmates may be actively
coerced or threatened into joining. Resignation from a prison gang is
not tolerated, and to challenge leadership is to invite death.
From existing
reports, it appears that especially in relation to those targeted to
become the passive sexual partners or 'wyfies' of other gang members,
very direct coercion in, for example, the form of rape is not unusual.
Rape purportedly sees many a new inmate positioned as a 'wyfie'.
'[M]embers may join gangs either because they are homosexually raped and
reduced to wives, or because they wish to avoid this fate' (Haysom,
1981:30).
The little
available information on how the career path of a new recruit in the 28s
is established, in particular, the gendered and sexual role of 'wyfie',
suggests that physical attributes and age play a role. A young man with
feminine qualities will likely be regarded as a potential 'wyfie'
(Schurink, 1989). According to Schurink the decision as to whether a
recruit will become a 'wyfie' or a 'soldier' lies with the occupant of
the 'Nyangi' (Doctor) position in the 28's structure. Reports suggest,
however, that being positioned within the Blood Line or the Private line
is not solely, nor necessarily, an outcome of this decision. On the
other hand Achmat (1993), in the description of his prison experience,
states that it was the 'General' (and not the Doctor) who was called
upon to resolve a disagreement between two prominent 28 members over who
could take the newly arrived prisoner as his wife.
Once a wife, one
is not necessarily always a wife. 'Officers' in the Private Line, while
having started off as 'wyfies' have apparently worked themselves up from
this rank (Schurink; 1989:63). Once in the Private Line though, always
in the Private Line. Generally it is forbidden for members to move from
the Private Line to the Blood Line (Haysom, 1981).8
In line with the
reported 'wyfie'-recruitment practices (where they have little say in
whose partner they will become, and whether they want to fulfil the role
at all), it seems that generally, 'wyfies' are considered the
possessions of their soldier husbands. Haysom provides a particularly
stark example, where an inmate implicated his 'wyfie' in the crime with
which he was being charged so that he could enjoy his company on death
row. The accused remarked, 'Does not a man take his furniture with him
when he moves house?' (S v Martinissen and 3 others, 1977 in Haysom,
1981:13).
Sex-related
violence within the gangs does not only take the form of rape but is
also linked to other violence due to competition over 'wyfies' and
defending relationships against threats of one kind or another. Haysom
cites a case (S v Moolman) where a warder separated a 'wyfie' from his
soldier. In response to losing his 'wyfie', 'the soldier promptly
murdered the substitute after warning the caretaker of his intentions'
(1981:30). In another case (S v Jacobs; 1979) a 28 had his throat cut by
fellow gang members for allegedly selling 'wyfies' to another gang
(Haysom, 1981).9
In relation to the
functioning of the '28s' it is interesting to note Schurink's (1989)
outline of some of the punishments meted out to members who have
transgressed the gang code. His outline suggests that in cases of
serious violation punishments are, to an extent, differentiated in terms
of the gendered role whether the offender is situated in the Private
Line or the Blood Line. Significantly punishment of 'privates', as he
refers to them, may take the form of gang rape.
'Op die band
gooi/trees are moving (gang rape): In case of a serious violation
committed by a private of the 28 gang, he will be submitted to gang rape
by the division one (officers). If they
dina-madina (persist) with their deviant behaviour they will be
submitted to gang rape by the Number Three's ('soldiers').' (Schurink,
1989:64)
According to this
portrayal then, the more serious the crime, the more 'masculinised' the
exactors of the punishment.10
Male on male sex
is explicitly provided for, and central to the functioning, code and
structures of the '28s'. In this, the '28s' gang is unique. Importantly
however, the practice of taking 'wyfies' is not exclusive to members of
this gang. The second most powerful of the Numbers gangs, the 26s, get
particular mention in this regard. While relationships with 'lighties'
or 'wyfies' are forbidden by the code of the 26 gang, and 'wyfies' may
not be recruited into the gang, explains Haysom (1981), members of the
26s do, in practice, take 'wyfies' for themselves.
Existing studies
provide little information on the practicalities involved in the sex
roles amongst the '28s' or members of other gangs. 'Wyfies', it seems,
are considered the means to their husbands' sexual gratification while
their own is ignored or forbidden. Goyer and Gow's (2000) reference to
the 'passive sex partner' is suggestive of such a scenario. Similarly
Schurink (1989) refers to 'wyfies provid(ing) sexual outlets by means of
klipslaan (sodomy)'.
The gang studies
outlined here provide a glimpse into how sexual relationships and sexual
violence in prisons may be framed within, and structured by, the stated
and formal functioning of the 28's. But they by no means exhaust the
question of how this is so. In relation to the '28s', for example, a
host of additional questions present themselves.11
For instance, to what extent does actual practice match the mythology of
the '28s' the stated codes and practices of the gang? Are there
considerable variations between prisons and/or regions in the workings
of the gangs? While the resilience of the prison gangs and their
structures over time is often noted (and a source of incredulousness to
many), have there been changes to their functioning over time? Moreover,
to what extent are sexual interactions in prison framed by gang
activity? Are 'wyfie'/'husband' scenarios, such as those reported
amongst the '28s', dominant? What of variations within these
relationships, and of the nature of those not accounted for by this set
of relations?
Coercion, Sexual
Exploitation and Rape
In prisons, the
boundaries between consensual and coerced sex are extremely blurred. As
is indicated in the discussion of gangs above, sex in prisons is often
highly coercive in nature even where it falls short of direct rape. But
generally, a more appropriate conceptualisation of many of these sexual
practices would be in terms of a continuum, a graduated range of levels
of coercion. Important to note here though, is that both the problematic
of clearly delineating consent from coercion in many sexual encounters
and the related notion of the exchange value of sex (which is discussed
below) are not restricted to prison environments but are increasingly
noted as characteristic of many sexual interactions outside prison walls
(Jewkes & Abrahams, 2000; Mataure, Scalway, Ray & Foreman, 2000). The
central difference is that outside prison it is women who are
overwhelmingly on the receiving end of these sets of relations with men
'deciding the rate of exchange' (Mataure et al, 2000).
This problem of
delineation of the boundaries between consensual and coercive sex
constitutes one of the methodological shortcomings that has plagued
studies on prison sex (Donaldson, 1993, 1991; Saum et al, 1995).
Donaldson (1993), struck by the inadequacy of the tendency for writers
to divide sex in prison into either 'voluntary' acts or coercive/sexual
assault coined the term 'survival- driven' as an interim category. In
all three of these categories there is potential for further
desegregation.
Sex is currency in
prison and a crucial component of the intricate systems of power. South
African studies (Kola et al, 1997; Community Law Centre [CLC], 1999;
Goyer & Gow, 2000) provide an initial glimpse at the exchange value of
sex in some of this country's institutions. It may be exchanged for
small benefits such as a cigarette, for special favours, or for basic
rights such as food or protection against potentially life-threatening
situations (CLC, 1999; Kola et al, 1997). Often, prisoners are required
to engage in sex 'just to get by' (Kola et al, 1997:13). An inmate of
Johannesburg prison, for example, reported that refusing to have sex
with another inmate meant that he forewent his full ration of food. 'He
wants me to have sex with him and he works in the kitchen. I do not want
to, so he tells others that I must be served with little food. I find
that I also suffer' (awaiting trial prisoner in Kola et al, 1997:11). A
study in Malawian prisons produced similar findings:
These juveniles
agreed to have sex with these men because they had no clothes and no
blanket, and they were hungry. One day these boys started to cry and
refused to have sex. The men took away their blankets and after spending
a night in the cold they agreed to allow the men to have sex with them
again. (prisoner cited in Jolofani & DeGabriele:10)
Moreover very
powerful 'gang regulated sex trades' (Goyer & Gow, 2000) are in
operation. A prisoner may 'agree' to sex in return for gang-related
protection and/or as a means to pre-empt rape or victimisation.
The
gang
regulated sex trade is so far reaching as to be inescapable
. If a
prisoner is poor and does not have any money, he will not be able to buy
influence or protection within the powerful prison gang system. Often
his only option is to agree to be the passive partner of another
prisoner. (Goyer & Gow, 2000:16).
| |
|
|
 |
A
new addition to the HEART is our
Forum-check
it out
|
Or any trace of
'consent' is absent, and sex is directly forced in a violent attack.
Rape is one of the many forms of physical violence feared or experienced
by numerous prison inmates. Although reliable statistics as to the
actual extent of the problem are not available, male rape, at least in
some prisons, is reportedly a common occurrence. As has been mentioned
in relation to the '28s', rape and gang-rape are reportedly sometimes
used both as recruitment and punishment methods. It seems clear though,
that violent sexual attack is not restricted to the explicit workings of
this particular gang. Commentators often refer to the problem of rape as
being intertwined with 'gang' practices or power structures in general
(rather than identifying particular gangs). While available information
suggests that some of the incidents perpetrated are connected to the
'28s', the extent of the gang's involvement in sexual assaults is not
known. Other gangs or individual gang members, on their own initiative,
may partake in similar practices. For instance, a juvenile prisoner told
Community Law Centre researchers that he was raped by members of a gang
called 'the Joint' (CLC, 1999:46).
Alternatively,
incidents of rape may be unrelated to gang activities.12
A prison official in the CASE study (Kola et al, 1997:11), for instance,
alleged that prisoners rape others out of anger at their own
circumstances. 'If you are frustrated with your situation, perhaps the
magistrate remanded you for four months. Just to release my anger at
being locked up, I end up sodomizing people.'
Young prisoners
are generally considered to be at particularly high risk of becoming
rape victims behind bars (Kola et al, 1997). This fact has no doubt
contributed to motivations to separate juveniles from older prisoners.
International guidelines and the South African Constitution require that
those under the age of 18 must be separated from adults. It is normally
considered permissible for juveniles to be brought together with adults
for education and vocational training, but they must be separated at
night (CLC, 1999). The CLC study found that, although in many
institutions substantial measures were taken to keep juveniles from
adults, these were often not sufficient. In other institutions, no
attempts were made to separate inmates according to their age.13
Similarly while some prisons took steps to reduce bullying and abuse by
differentiating age groups within the (large) juvenile category, others
did not. Indeed, rape and other forms of abuse take place amongst
juveniles and in juvenile-only institutions (CLC, 1999; Donaldson,
1993).
Rape and the
construction of masculinity
Importantly,
commentators maintain that the perpetrators of rape in prison are
prisoners who consider themselves heterosexual, and who engage in
heterosexual sex prior to and post their incarcerations (Donaldson,
1993, 1990; Mallory, 1999; Wooden & Parker, 1982 in Saum et al, 1995).
The oft terming of these attacks as 'homosexual rape' is thus a
misnomer.14
Male rape in
prison is often associated (as are other forms of violence) with the
construction of manhood within the prison code and the gendered meanings
with which sex is imbued. Apparently typical in prison subcultures, is
the notion of 'manhood' as reliant on sexually penetrating another while
submitting to sexual penetration loses one this status. The
'classification system draws a rigid distinction between active and
passive roles' (Donaldson, 1993:6) and gender role is allocated
according to the role which one plays in the sex act (Donaldson, 1990,
1993; Mallory, 1999). By raping another, the attacker seeks to validate
his male dominance and superiority. This is achieved by destroying the
victim's own claim to masculinity.
The extent to
which rape may function to genderfy people within the prison code is
particularly evident in Donaldson's (1990) explanation of the
hierarchies operating in American correctional institutions. The prison
is ruled by 'men' who dictate the values and behavioural patterns of the
entire prison population. These 'men' are in the majority, are
considered to be heterosexual and usually exhibit heterosexual patterns
prior and post their incarceration. Being a 'man' means that you are a
sexual penetrator only. To be penetrated results in the loss of this
'man' status. 'Manhood' however is a tenuous condition as it is always
subject to being 'lost' to another, more powerful or aggressive 'man';
hence a 'man' is expected to 'fight for his manhood'.15
Rape, and to be in possession of a sexual receptive or 'catcher', are
considered to validate his masculine status and tend to protect him from
attempts by others to remove this status from him.
The term 'catcher'
refers to a 'man's' sexual receptive, and thus includes both 'queens'
and 'punks'. 'Punks' are situated at the bottom of the hierarchy, are
forced into sexually receptive roles, and are there to service the
'men'. They are often initiated into this role or 'turned out', as it is
termed, by rape, gang rape, convincing threat of rape or intimidation.
Punks tend to be younger, smaller and less experienced in personal
combat or incarceration situations than the 'men'. Young men arriving in
prison, will be tested on their ability to maintain their manhood, 'if a
deficiency is spotted, they will be targeted' (1990:8).
By contrast,
people who consider themselves homosexuals, and especially effeminate
homosexuals, constitute the 'queen' category in prison (also the
smallest category). Other prisoners see them as substitute females and
exert relentless pressure on them to assume this role. They are strictly
sexually receptive and must be submissive to 'men'. The only way
homosexuals can be tolerated, says Donaldson, is if they are substitute
females. 'The more extreme the contrast between the effeminised
homosexual and the super-machismo 'men', the more psychologically safe
distance is placed between the 'men's' behaviour and the notion of
homosexuality' (1990:4).
Haysom (1981)
argues, that the construction of manhood in prison is a magnified form
of relations which contribute to violence outside the prison walls. It
is intensified with the prison experience characterised by deprivation,
loss of autonomy and any sense of power over one's life. The resultant
high levels of frustration and sense of powerlessness can lead to
apparently meaningless acts of violence and aggression, especially in an
all-male institution where physical strength and aggressive conduct
become the only basis for respect.
Other Aspects in
Prison Rapes
These reported
consequences of power deprivation and the construction of gender roles
are unsurprisingly presented as the primary roots of rape in prison.
However, departing from dominant analyses of rape outside the prison,
the sexual component is also cited by some as central to the rape
dynamic in prisons (Donaldson, 1990, 1993; Haysom, 1981; Mallory, 1999).
Donaldson (1990:9), for example, cautions that although power is the
defining factor, the role of sexual deprivation 'should not be
underestimated'. Mallory (1999) refers to the 'ineliminable sexual
component to prison rape'. These claims are not substantiated in any
detail but rather hinted at. For Donaldson, it seems that the sexual
aspect is suggested by the role that physical attributes purportedly
play in separating victims from non-victims. Mallory's argument is based
on how male prisoners view coercive sex which, he says, is 'as a means
to exert one's aggressive dominance in the hierarchy of power as well as
a sexual outlet.' Most agree (the cited writers included) that rape is
concerned with issues of power. Therefore arguing for the inclusion of a
sexual component is potentially controversial. But a sexual component is
perhaps useful in thinking about situations of sexual enslavement, for
example. In these cases the 'partner' or victim may well be considered
merely a means to the perpetrator's sexual gratification. This is
perhaps comparable to rape within partnerships outside prison which may
occur when some men force sex because they feel like it, believe they
are entitled to it, and expect their partner to oblige. Crucial to such
scenarios is a denial of, or inability to recognise the other person's
feelings or needs relative to his own. Thus power may be the motive but
it may also provide the opportunity for rape. In the latter, the sexual
component might indeed constitute the initial motive but it is power
that enables the act to be carried out. Furthermore, as will be outlined
below, rape in prison may represent the beginning of a longer-term
series of sexual interactions between perpetrator and victim. Thus it
may function, for the perpetrator, as the selection process in securing
a future 'partner' or 'sex-slave'.
Partially as a
result of links drawn between sexual deprivation and violence in prison,
some argue for the implementation of conjugal visits - where prisoners
are permitted to have sexual relations with wives and girlfriends. In
addition to the potential for this to reduce the incidence of rape,
Haysom (1981) maintains that they would also reduce violence, which
while not necessarily constituting sexual violence, often emanates from
the competition for sexual partners. The impact of conjugal visits on
violence levels, in the few countries where they have been implemented,
is not however evaluated in these discussions.16
Other contributing
or exascerbating factors such as boredom (Haysom, 1981; CLC, 1999) have
also been seen to explain the occurrence of rape in prisons. Often
though, these factors are not restricted to explanations of forced sex.
Situations of overcrowding, for example, are often considered to
contribute to higher levels of sexual activity in general, including
rape amongst prisoners (Carelse in Goyer & Gow, 2000). According to
Thomas (1994 in Goyer & Gow, 2000:16), '
the more crowded is the
prison, the greater is the likelihood of acts of rape and
homosexuality'. Malawian prisoners perceived sexual activity to be
directly related to overcrowding (Jolofani & DeGabriele).17
The length of the
sentence that the prisoner is serving is also believed to be a
contributing factor to rape. The longer the sentence, the more risks
(potential) perpetrators will be willing to take (Donaldson, 1993). It
is possible however that this observation is less applicable in contexts
such as those reported from Malawi and South Africa, where being
disciplined or having ones' sentence extended for sexual assault
would appear to be the exception rather than the rule.
Rape can represent
the point after which an inmate begins to participate in regular sexual
activity, or to, with possibly more 'consent', employ its exchange
potential. Rape as an initiation into frequent sexual activity is
reflected, for instance, in the practice of rape as a gang-recruitment
tool (see section on gangs above). The available information suggests
that the sequence takes place in other interactions as well. In a
similar vein, Donaldson (1990:7), states of the situation in US prisons
that both once-off and continuing 'liaisons originate in gang rape, or
in the ever present threat of gang rape. Prison officials can label such
behaviour as 'consensual', but fear on the part of the passive partner
is certainly a prime stimulus
. Usually, a gang rape or two is
sufficient to persuade an unattached catcher to pair off as soon as
possible'.
The following
extract illustrates a graduation from extreme coercion (though not
actually rape) to a form of consent.18
The first night he
resisted and got stabbed with a broken bottle as punishment. He was
regarded not as 'butch' (the macho, dominant sexual partner), but
'femme' (the more feminine, passive partner). He soon learnt that
performing sexual favours earned him special points in the underworld
grading system: chocolates, extra cigarettes and an ever-accessible
supply of drugs.' (story from former inmate of Cape reform school in
Friedman, 2000)
Here, following
violent attack for refusing sex, the target began to exchange sex for
what could be termed 'luxuries' as opposed to the means to survival. His
ongoing sexual activity could then be perceived as occurring closer to
the 'voluntary' than the 'survival-driven' point on the continuum of
sexual decision making. An important question however is what would have
transpired had he refused to participate in further sexual acts?
On the other hand,
while young men especially, are primarily represented as sexual victims
within prison hierarchies, relatively free choice may conceivably
operate in some of these relations. Sex may indeed be consciously
exploited for benefits unrelated to 'getting by'.
A study on HIV in
Malawian prisons (Jolofani & DeGabriele) is interesting in this regard
as it is the young prisoners who are presented as the instigating actors
(by virtue of their larger victimness). In describing the nature of
'homosexual activity' it refers to the two main categories of
participants in sex as delineated by respondents: those who are 'that
way inclined' and those that are 'very needy'. The latter category is
explained as being constituted of prisoners who 'are usually recently
detained, either juveniles or young adults
. They are in physical need
and confused by their recent detention and they turn to somebody to care
for them
. The relationship between them (and the ones they turn to)
was described as similar to that between a poor prostitute and a rich
client' (8). The study does go on to detail cases of distinct coercion
where, for example, juveniles are abducted for sex, but also describes
juveniles taking opportunities for instance, during outside work or
while being escorted to the clinic - to 'make their way to the adults'
(10).
Official Responses
and Complicity
It appears that
inefficacy, indifference and corruption on the part of prison officials
contribute to the reportedly high incidents of sexual violence and
coercion. On the one hand prisons are under-resourced. This is most
blatantly evident in, for example, the widespread problem of
overcrowding and understaffing in South Africa's prisons, both of which
hinder efficient and responsive management. Prisoners spend lengthy
periods out of the sight of warders (Kola et al, 1997). On the other
hand, some prison warders are alleged to be actively involved in
promoting sexual exploitation and violence (and other forms of violence)
amongst inmates, as well as in obstructing victims' attempts to seek
assistance. The CASE study (Kola et al,1997) received reports of warders
at Johannesburg prison taking bribes to turn a blind eye to sexual
abuse. In addition, a common allegation was that warders sold prisoners,
especially awaiting trial juveniles, to older inmates for sex, and got
paid in return.
Prisoner
respondents in the study considered it pointless to lodge rape
complaints because nothing would be done, they said. Respondents in the
prison official category, on the other hand, felt that complaints do get
taken seriously, but pointed to fear preventing victims from coming
forward with complaints. Corruption was also alleged in relation to
officials' handling of complaints of sexual abuse. For example some
respondents said that complainants were paid by prison officials to drop
their charges, and that officials accepted money from perpetrators to
lay their case 'to rest' (Kola et al, 1997:12).
Similar
allegations of warder involvement and corruption are reported in
Malawian Prisons (Jolofani and DeGabriele). As one prisoner explained,
Two of my cell
mates have juveniles as 'wives'. They got them by bribing the POs at the
main gate
. These boys have been in our cells for over six months, but
the POs never seem to find them
. Some juveniles have grown up in our
block. (Jolofani & DeGabriele:11)
From her
experiences with awaiting trial prisoners, Van Huyssteen (1996) has
argued that rape victims in prison experience a type of secondary
victimisation which is the cumulative effect of: an attitude on the part
of officials that awaiting trial prisoners were not infact their
responsibility and the reported lack of police interest in following up
on 'sodomy' cases; the extent to which male rape was an off limits
subject and perceived as a potential public relations embarrassment; a
difficulty in believing that men can be raped; wardens having become
'desensitised' to the daily occurrence of sexual violence; their sense
of being overwhelmed by the enormity of the problem; fear for their own
safety should they attempt to help a victim of a gang-related rape; and
the lack of acknowledgement of the problem in their broader society. The
combination of these factors, Van Huyssteen argues, means that when a
prisoner does have the courage to lodge a complaint, he receives no or
little assistance from the authorities beyond possibly alternative
sleeping arrangements.19
Reporting of
Sexual Abuse
Fear on the part
of prisoners is an oft cited reason for the severe under-reporting of
sexual violence cases. Victims fear violent reprisal or additional
victimisation. Generally amongst prison inmates (Donaldson, 1990), and
for most South African prison gangs, 'informing' constitutes a heinous
offence. When assault is reported, victims may take measures to protect
their identity. Social workers at Pollsmoor prison, for example, said
that sometimes incidents were reported via anonymous letters. In the few
cases where complaints were lodged, this was usually done by a third
party (CLC, 1999). Alternatively, victims may refuse to name the
assailant. Warder participants in the CASE study said that prisoners
often waited for their release before taking up the matter because they
were too frightened to pursue it while still in prison.
Reluctance to
report is not restricted to cases of sexual violence. But, commentators
(Haysom, 1981; Van Huyssteen, Mallory, 1999) suggest, there are
additional factors at play in the silence around sexual violence.
Dominant notions of masculinity, and especially as constructed in the
prison context, militate against reporting. As Donaldson (in Van
Huyssteen: 4), writing on the American prison context has put it, 'the
rape of males by males is a practice protected by the silence observed
by its victims responding to a set of popular beliefs centring around
the notion that a 'real man' cannot be raped'. The stigma associated
with being raped by a man, or even engaging in consensual sex with a man
(Saum et al, 1995) is a key reason for underreporting. Considerations of
masculinity are therefore, it is suggested, both a motivation for rape
and cause for underreporting.
Sexual
Relationships
On the basis of
studies from a variety of different contexts including the USA, Malawi,
Swaziland and South Africa, the nature of long-term sexual relationships
in prisons appears quite similar in a number of respects.
Seemingly most
prevalent are sexual relationships that take place between older
prisoners who wield relative power in inmate subcultures and younger
prisoners who are vulnerable within these hierarchies. The older party
provides the younger with resources such as protection and food in
exchange for sex.20
Often the younger party is also expected to fulfil 'wifely' chores. This
scenario is reportedly typical of relationships taking place within the
structures of South Africa's prison gangs most notably, the '28s'
(outlined above) but is also apparent in reports from other countries.
In Malawian prisons, like in South Africa, relationships between
prisoners frequently take this form, with the junior partner referred to
as a 'wife' (Jolofani & DeGabriele).21
The gendered nature of these roles is often noted, as are the
resemblances the relationships bear to dominant heterosexual models.
A more in-depth
analysis on relationship patterns broadly categorised along these lines,
is provided by Donaldson (1990) in relation to prisons in the USA. He
argues that, structured in this way, the relationships serve to validate
the masculinity of 'men' and to distance the relationship from broader
notions of homosexuality.22
The junior partners, 'wives' or 'catchers' as they are named in
prisons in the USA are constructed within this order as surrogate
women. These pairings between sexually active 'men' and their sexually
passive 'catchers' are the only form of relationship sanctioned, and
indeed endorsed, by dominant prison subcultures. Sexual reciprocation is
rare and when it does take place, it is kept very secret. For a 'man' to
take a catcher is a signal of status and it is the more powerful men in
the prison hierarchy who succeed in gaining a 'catcher', the latter of
whom are in short supply. His 'catcher' may or may not have 'consented'
to the pairing which often comes about through a show of the 'man's'
aggression and/or gang rape or the fear of gang rape. However, some men
apparently employ persuasion more than aggression in their attempt to
find someone with whom to 'do time'. And if a 'catcher' acts quickly,
the situations can allow him to choose from a range of suitors.
These
relationships serve to demarcate a small arena of power and control for
the 'man' and are a signal of masculine status (and as such protect the
'man' from attempts to deprive him of this status). At the same time,
Donaldson (1990:6) comments, that the impetus for the pairings which
also bring with them considerable disadvantages - is testimony to the
thesis that they meet basic needs other than those concerned with
identity, 'which are related to, but not identical to, the sexual one,
such as a need for affection or bonding'. Emotionally, they can provide
the 'man' with a sanctuary removed from the constant masculinity
competition that characterises interactions with his fellow 'men'.
Confident in his
male role, the 'man' can allow himself to drop the hard mask which he
wears outside the relationship and express with his catcher the
otherwise suppressed aspects of his humanity, such as caring tenderness,
anxiety, and loneliness
(Donaldson, 1990: 7).
As far as the
catcher is concerned the psychological dependence sometimes bred from
total reliance on his 'man' for protection and social interaction can in
turn facilitate emotional involvement (Donaldson, 1993:10).
Although these
relationships are generally perceived to be adaptations of the dominant
heterosexual models there are a number of respects, Donaldson remarks,
in which they depart from these. For example, 'men' tend to allow other
'men' access to their 'catchers' more so than they would with females.
Although the 'man' must maintain control of his 'catcher', he may loan
or prostitute him out to other men. A catcher may also belong to a group
of men, or a gang, rather than an individual.
Donaldson (1993)
emphasises that exceptions to this pattern of relationship do exist, and
that considerable differences are evident between institutions.
Nevertheless, he argues that the pattern or paradigm within which sex
occurs is generalisable, with the differences constituting, for
instance, higher or lower levels of coercive pressure, sexual activity
or gang influence.
Prostitution
While many of the
scenarios of exploitative and 'survival-driven' sexual interaction
already outlined could validly be considered forms of prostitution,
action constituting a narrower notion of prostitution is also reported.
Again, such actions may involve varying levels of consent on the part of
the 'prostitute'.
Prostitution, it
appears, accounts for much of the 'short-time'23
sexual interaction as distinct from longer term 'man' and 'wife'
interaction. For example, prostitution rings and 'brothel runners' were
found to be present in Malawian prisons and offer 'short-time' sex
(Jolofani & DeGabriele: 9). However, it seems these are usually
intertwined with 'man'/'wife' relations, and the protagonists defined
along corresponding lines. It is 'boys' or 'wives' that are rented out
and often a 'man' will secure extra income for himself through renting a
'wife' (or wives) to other 'men'.
Other transactions
springing from the ownership the 'man' exercises over his 'wife' or
'catcher' are also reported. They are not only rented but also sold,
traded and loaned (Jolofani & DeGabriele; Donaldson, 1993). As a
Malawian prisoner explained, 'Some prisoners even sell their 'wives' to
other prisoners when they are discharged' (Jolofani & DeGabriele:11).
The extent to
which prisoners engage in prostitution on an individual basis - without
an intermediate party - is unclear from the available information.
Donaldson (1993) maintains however, that 'freelance' catchers are rare
in USA prisons since they are usually unable to protect themselves.
Consensual Sex
Sexual
relationships in prison appear to be generally exploitative, but not
always. 'A wide range of relationships ranging from ruthless
exploitation to love are encountered,' states Donaldson (1990:7).
Relationships may also change over time from initially being primarily
coercive to comprising greater levels of consent.
More attention has
been given to the nature of coerced sex in prison than to consensual
sex. Saum et al (1995) highlight the absence of attempts to investigate
consensual sexual relations as a substantial gap in research. The
absence, they claim, is likely because these interactions are thought to
involve little violence. Furthermore, it is no doubt related to the
fundamental difficulties that come with attempts to clearly delineate
consensual from coerced sex especially within prison environments. Often
what is officially termed consensual would better be described as sexual
exploitation.
With these
qualifications in mind though, sexual relationships or liaisons situated
closer to - or firmly at - the consensual end of the consensual/coercive
continuum within the prison environment do take place. Some studies in
North American prisons have found consensual sex to be more frequent
than coerced sexual activity (though here again the definition employed
of 'consensual' sex is often problematic) (Saum et al,1995:2). The
existence of consensual relationships is suggested, for example, by an
inmate of Johannesburg Prison, 'Others do it because of gangs and for
others it is nice because they are in love' (long-term prisoner in Kola
et al, 1997:12).
CLC researchers,
in their study on children in South African prisons, posited that
because juveniles in one prison were locked up for hours on end with
nothing to do they, engaged each other in both consensual and forced
sex. Donaldson (1990), on the situation in the USA, indicates that
'punks' the sex slaves/partners of the 'men' sometimes reciprocate
with one another (taking turns to play the active 'male' role) to
satisfy their own sexual desires which are negated in their
relationships with their 'men'.
Achmat's (1993)
account of sex in a South African prison is also pertinent here. On the
one hand, it cautions against generalisation. Although it relays a
gang-framed sexual experience between a new young inmate and a powerful
gang member, it tells of a mutually pleasurable and exploratory
encounter in which the supposedly dominant and strictly defined roles in
the sex act fell away. On the other, it is part of broader argument on
the importance of acknowledging the role of bodily pleasure, the
potential for dynamic renegotiations of sexuality and the discovery of
new pleasures, in our attempts to explore sex between men within
carceral institutions.
| |
|
|
 |
A
new addition to the HEART is our
Forum-check
it out
|
Conclusion
Sex acts and
sexual relationships can be conceived of as occurring on a continuum.
The blurring of the traditionally held boundaries between consensual and
coercive sexual activity is highlighted in accounts of prison sex where
it may be exchanged for a cigarette, for instance, or protection from
possible violent death. The available evidence suggests that while
thoroughly consensual sexual relationships and liaisons do take place,
rape, gang rape and sex as the result of varying levels of coercion or
exploitation, are more common. In large part this is the consequence of
the intense relationship of sex and power in prison cultures.
The purported
prevalence of sexual violence and coercion in prison raises important
questions that reach beyond the welfare of prisoners during their
incarceration. The significant additional challenges that such
experiences may pose for the successful reintegration of ex-offenders
are only hinted at in the literature, but constitute an important area
for further investigation. Donaldson has stated for instance that,
Psychologists and
rape counsellors believe that the pent-up rage caused by these assaults
can cause victims, especially if they don't receive psychological
treatment, to erupt in violence once they return to their communities.
Some will become rapists, seeking to 'regain their manhood' through the
same violent means by which they believe it was lost. (Donaldson, 1993.
The Rape Crisis Behind Bars)
Of sexual activity
in prison more generally, there are clearly a wide range of role players
who engage in a large variety of activities. The potential influence of
these activities on prisoners' negotiations of identity is of course
vast and cannot be predicted. If however actual practices24
match commentators' analyses of the dominant nature of sexual
interactions, then it looks likely that many of these interactions
constitute one channel through which particularly destructive notions of
masculinity gain momentum.
The transmission
of HIV25
in prison is not just a prison health issue but a public health issue.
Questions of safe sex require not only the provision of condoms, but the
creation of an environment within prisons where, if sex is to take
place, this is not in circumstances which are essentially coercive or
violent in nature.
Order and control
in prison are central to the issue. Sex is intensely intertwined with
the informal systems of power which appear (at least in respect of the
issue under investigation) more formidable than their formal
counterparts, the authorities. While the authorities do, on occasion,
take steps to prevent abuses, it seems they are more frequently either
ill-equipped to assist victims and potential victims, or they are
complicit. An alarming picture emerges of systematic violence and abuse,
the victims of which have nowhere to turn, and where, as Goyer & Gow
(2000) have argued, any prison stay (even in the awaiting trial section)
is a potential death sentence. What is abundantly clear is that
strategies attempting to combat transmission of HIV and abuse in prisons
have to come to grips with the complex social circumstances and meanings
attached to sex in prison if they are to have an impact.
Notes:
1
The SAIRR 1999-2000 annual survey indicates that on the last day of
1997, 82% of prisoners were adult men and 15% were juvenile men (under
the age of 21). Roughly 2% were adult women and 1% juvenile women. In
December 2000 there were approximately 163 500 prisoners incarcerated in
South Africa in South Africa's 236 prisons which have a formal
accommodation capacity of 102 000 (Magoro, 2001). Uneven distribution of
prisoners amongst institutions saw a few prisons under 100% full and
many with occupancy rates of over 200% (IPV Newsletter; Dec 2000).
Figures supplied by the Department of Correctional Services indicate
that on average at month-end during 2000, there were approximately 44
500 prisoners awaiting trial. Of sentenced prisoners during the period
January to September 2000, there were on average, 6870 prisoners serving
sentences of 20 years and longer, 16 370 serving sentences of 10 20
years, 32 729 serving sentences of 5 10 years, 31 513 serving
sentences of 2 5 years, 19 603 serving sentences of 0-2 years, and 2
722 'other sentenced' prisoners (written communication).
2
By contrast a survey of prisons in Malawi and Zambia showed that at
least one in eight men has sex in prison (Mataure, Scalway, Ray &
Foreman, 2000). A 1998 Nigerian study by Life Link revealed that 15% of
200 male prisoners surveyed in Kano Prison and 8% of another 200 in
Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison admitted sexual relations with other
male inmates (Raufu, 1999)
3
Other high risk behaviours which often take place in prison include
tattooing and blood pacts (associated with gang practices), violence
where the skin may be pierced and intravenous drug use (the latter
however is purportedly not extensive in SA and the region, primarily due
to expense).
4
Interest in the area is on the increase though and, primarily in
response to the AIDS crisis, a number of studies are due to commence
shortly.
5
Internationally the subject of sex in prison has received more
attention, but is still in short supply. Much of the available
information emanates from anecdotal accounts of prison life and personal
testimonies. When studies have been done, it has usually been in attempt
to ascertain the incidence of sexual activity in prison, and they have
produced vastly different pictures (Saum et al, 1995). While different
contexts structure different experiences, and conditions between prisons
vary considerably, a host of methodological difficulties accompany these
investigations and complicate the findings. As Saum et al (1995) point
out, when low incidences of sexual activity are found, actual activity
is thought to be far higher, the discrepancy being the result of
underreporting. On the other hand, they argue, even when the reported
incidence is low, a perception of pervasive sexual activity may be
widespread amongst the inmates themselves.
6
Haysom's study (1981) on prison gangs is based on Supreme Court trial
records and supplemented with some interviews with ex-offenders.
Schurink's paper (1989) summarises the findings of a study on prison
gangs commissioned by the Department of Correctional Services. For this
study, in depth interviews were conducted with sixty prisoners, mainly
coloured men serving in St Albans and Brandvlei prisons. Prisoners were
also encouraged to write about their prison experiences providing a
number of personal manuscripts.
7
Not all members in the Private Line are required to provide sexual and
domestic services. 'Officers', who have worked themselves out of the
'wyfie' rank are exempt from this role for example (Schurink, 1989).
Rather, they may preside over minor charges, or participate in the
'Kring' (Circle) which deliberate over major matters (Haysom, 1981).
8
Haysom(1981) however provides one reported attempt to break this rule.
He cites a trial that took place in 1975 where the accused, a 'wyfie',
committed murder in an attempt to graduate from the Private Line to a
fighter in the Blood Line.
9
The court found that the allegation against the deceased was false. His
executioners were sentenced to death (Haysom, 1981).
10
It is not clear from Schurink's brief outline which ranks in the Private
Line may be subjected to punishment by gang rape. It may be that this is
restricted to wyfies; the outline goes on to explain that persistent
wrongdoing from an officer can incur an instruction to stab an enemy
gang member. 'Officer' appears to be a Private Line Rank.
11
Other questions based on an assumption that gang practices are
consistent, include: is one's access to sex structured by the line
(Blood versus Private) in which a member is situated? Is the gang rape
punishment restricted to use for members of certain ranks. Are all
'soldiers' entitled to 'wyfies'?
12
It is acknowledged that differentiating gang-related assaults from
others may be complicated. Fear of particular gang members, for example,
may mean that they are free to simply do as they wish, whether this is
related to explicit gang codes or not.
13
In the majority of facilities, the CLC (1999) study found, 21 (rather
than 18) was used as the separating age.
14
It is also pertinent to note Donaldson's (1993:9) comments on the
attitudes which, he says, typically pervade correctional institutions,
'There is no niche in the prisoner structure for a sexually reciprocal
or masculine-identified gay man
'.
15
Moreover rape or the threat of rape may increase fear about masculinity
and lead to compensatory aggressive displays of manhood (Irwin, 1980 in
Saum et al, 1995).
16
Interestingly though, a study conducted in a California prison found
that married heterosexuals who received conjugal visits were more, not
less, likely to participate in sex with other prisoners (Wooden &
Parker, 1982 cited in Donaldson, 1993).
17
In cells where sexual activity was reported to be most prevalent, there
is less than 30cm space between blankets, and inmates sleep with their
toes touching.
18
Whether the attack was gang-related is not known, however the article
makes clear that the perpetrators wielded considerable power over other
inmates.
19
Juveniles at Leeukop prison said that if a rape is reported, the victim
is moved from the cell, but that this may only be for a very short time
(CLC, 1999:51)
20
A possible difference suggested in the literature deriving from the USA
under review here is that necessities such as food, bedding etc.
prominent in descriptions of the exchanges in Malawi and South Africa -
are not mentioned.
21
The study found that while some men have one 'wife', others have several
'wives'.
22
This pattern of same-sex relationship, Donaldson points out, is not
limited to carceral environments. Often, for example, it is practiced
among working classes of the general population.
23
This is the terminology Malawian respondents used in their descriptions
of prison sex (Jolofani & DeGabriele)
24
While anal sex is clearly a frequent activity; what of other forms of
sexual engagement? Historical studies on the practice of 'mine
marriages' are potentially pertinent here. In these marriages which took
place between male residents of the mine compounds, 'thigh sex' was
reportedly the dominant practice. (Moodie et al; Epprecht, 2000)
25
According to the Department of Correctional Services, there were 1087
deaths in prison from 'natural' causes in 2000 which represents a 584%
increase in the last five years. Members of the Judicial Inspectorate
hold that over 80% of these deaths are HIV/AIDS related. In August 2000
the Department of Correctional Services had 3427 prisoners known to be
HIV positive on its records. But the actual incidence of infection is
undoubtedly much higher. The figure represents only those prisoners that
have either disclosed their status, or have had it determined through
medical investigation. In the latter cases prisoners would have had to
have sought medical attention as well as succeeded in securing it (which
in many prisons is by no means a given).
References
Achmat, Z. (1993)
'Apostles of Civilised Vice': 'Immoral Practices' and 'Unnatural Vice'
in South African Prisons and Compounds, 1890-1920. Social Dynamics
19.2: Centre of African Studies, University of Cape Town.
Achmat, Z. (1995).
Sex in prisons. Exit: Southern Africa's gay and lesbian newspaper.
Issue 72
Community Law
Centre. (1999). Children in prison: a situational analysis.
University of the Western Cape.
Donaldson, S.
(1990). Prisons, Jails, and Reformatories IN Dynes (Ed) Encyclopedia
of Homosexuality. NY: Garland Public. Sourced at
http://www.igc.apc.org/spr/docs/prison-sex.html.
Donaldson, S.
(1993, February 4) A Million Jockers, Punks, and Queens: Sex among
American Male Prisoners and its Implications for Concepts of Sexual
Orientation. Lecture delivered at Columbia University Seminar on
Homosexualities. Sourced at
http://www.igc.apc.org/spr/docs/prison-sex-lecture.html.
Donaldson, S.
(1993, December 29). The Rape Crisis Behind Bars. The New York Times.
Epprecht, M.
(2000, September 17). Commission of Enquiry into 'Unnatural Vice' in
South Africa: A neglected Source for Understanding Tolerance For
Homosexual Behaviour in Comtemporary Southern African Studies. Paper
presented to the Future of the Queer Past Conference. University of
Chicago.
Friedman, H.
(2000, October 3). Selling themselves on the strip. The Teacher, Mail &
Guardian.
Goyer, K. C. &
Gow, J. (2000)
Capital Punishment? The risk of HIV/AIDS
in prison. Crime & Conflict 21. 14 18.
Haysom, N. (1981).
Towards an understanding of prison gangs. Institute of
Criminology, University of Cape Town.
Jewkes, R. &
Abrahams, N. (2000) Violence against women in South Africa: Rape and
Sexual Coercion. Women's Health Research Unit: Medical Research
Council. Pretoria.
Jolofani, D. &
DeGabriele, J. (no date provided). HIV/AIDS in Malawi Prisons.
Paris: Penal Reform International.
Kerr, (1992)
HIV/AIDS: Management of HIV Antibody Positive Offenders IN (Ed) Fortuin,
J. Issues in HIV/AIDS in the Australian Prison System, Canberra:
Australian Institute of Criminology. Pp 45-64
Kola, S; Gulati,
A; Everatt, D. & Rule, S. (1997). Prisoners and AIDS: Research to
explore the implications for the development of policy on condom
distribution in prison. Braamfontein: Community Agency for Social
Enquiry (CASE)
Magoro, M. (2001)
Health services in prisons. Paper presented at seminar 'Health in
Prisons' hosted by Lawyers for Human Rights & Penal Reform
International. 28 February 2001.
Mataure, P;
Scalway, T; Ray, S; Foreman, M. (2000). Men and HIV in Swaziland:
booklet published by FLAS, Panos, SAfAIDS and UNAIDS: Informing the
Response to HIV.
Moodie, D. with
Ndatshe, V. & Sibuyi, B. Migrancy and Male Sexuality on the South
African Gold Mines. In Duberman, M Vicinus, M & Chauncey, G. (Eds)
Hidden from History: Reclaiming the gay and lesbian past. Penguin Books
Raufu, A.
Prisoners Face 'Death Sentence' as Government ignores AIDS Study.
June 30, 1999. PANOS:News and Features. Sourced at
http://www.panos.org.uk/news/33june99.htm
Saum, C., Hilary
et al, (1995) Sex in prison: Exploring the myths and realities,
Prison Journal, Vol. 75. p 413. SAGE Publications Inc. Sourced at
http://www.taasa.org/library/male_issues/male_sex_in_prison.htm
Schurink, W. J.
(1989). The world of the Wetslaners: an analysis of some organisational
features in South African prisons. Acta Criminologica 2:2, 60
70.
South African
Institute of Race Relations (1999). South African Survey 1999/2000
mllennium edition. Braamfontein: SAIIR
Van Huyssteen, M.
(1996). Secondary victimisation of male rape victims in Awaiting
Trial prisons. Unpublished paper. NICRO.
© Centre for the
Study of Violence and Reconciliation
|
|
|