Required Reading for Convicts, Part Two

Last January 19th, a fellow prisoner looked at my shaven head, my pale skin, and my blue eyes and said, “Where I come from, we like to call this holiday James Earl Ray Day.”  As fascinating and lovely as this (rather common) sentiment is, I declined to answer so as to avoid an argument.  (Although as someone close to me pointed out, it might have interested this gentleman to know that James Earl Ray begged the King family for forgiveness.)

Being white in prison is often synonymous with two other adjectives: dumb and racist.  In my opinion, the latter springs from the former.  It’s impossible to justify racism unless you’re stupid.  A belief that someone’s ethnicity (or more specifically, the amount of melanin in their skin) can make them prone to crime, gangbanging, smoking crack, etc., is pure stupidity.

Of course, most racists never get that far into the intellectual realm to even warrant being called stupid.  They utter (almost always under their breath) racial slurs and leave it at that.  But there is a mindset among some white prisoners that the Caucasian race (an utterly meaningless word, by the way) is superior to all others.  Look, they say, at the way Australian, South American, and African natives were still using Stone-Age tools while white Europeans were sending people to the moon.  White Europeans, they claim, gained technological superiority, colonized the world, and created the most prosperous nations on earth because they’re smarter.

After all, why didn’t Aztec fleets show up on the shores of Britain to conquer whites and infect them with Native American germs?  Why didn’t armies of African horsemen swarm through Europe and spread superior technology across the lands?  Why didn’t ships carrying Australian aborigine colonists set up shop around the Mediterranean?

For these sad souls who think white people have a monopoly on intelligence and ingenuity, I suggest they read Guns, Germs and Steel, by Jared Diamond.  This book is one of the clearest examples I’ve seen of how the scientific method can wash away irrational beliefs with a deluge of reason and evidence.  Alas for racists, Diamond points out that the answer to questions like the three above is broadly this: because of historical and geographical flukes.

To try to put the book in a nutshell, the historical advance of white Europeans is at its base due to the worth of the land they happened to inhabit, land that enabled them to progress from a hunter-gatherer society to a food-producing society.  Eurasia had a wealth of prime plants (such as wheat and barley) and animals (such as cows, goats, and horses) to be domesticated, as well as a great deal of fertile land to support them.  Since the last ice age, the Americas, Australia, and Africa did not.

The excellent book is a must-read for everyone (I also hear it’s on Bill Gates’s bedstand).  But I’d particularly love to hear racist prisoners, most of whom are racist only because they want to fit in with one white group or another, try to defeat Diamond’s arguments.

Why Convicts Should Lose Jesus, Part Five

Because the whole notion of anyone needing Christianity is based on an ephemeral assumption.  That being, the notion that there’s a “spiritual void” within us that faith in Jesus can fill.  Honestly, I don’t know how many times I’ve smiled in amusement when a Christian has tried to convince me that I’m incomplete.  That they can read my mind and know that I’m “missing” something in my life, that loving Jesus is the one key ingredient that every human being needs to be truly happy and fulfilled.

If they simply say that it works for them, that’s fine.  But when they start in with some pop psychology nonsense, making assertions about my thoughts and feelings, pretending that they know the first thing about me or how I view the world, acting like they have some sort of special revealed knowledge to impart, I always wonder something: Why is your entire argument based on the false premise that I’m weak and in need of help?

What about people who don’t have a “hole” inside?  What about people who (like me) once had that love for Jesus and believed that it was reciprocated, but who decided that it was a waste of intellect and time?  What about those of us who have absolutely no need for the Christian brand of love and morality to be happy?  What about those of us who have completely turned our lives around by embracing reason and skepticism?

Sitting in prison, I’ve heard different arguments from different Christians.  Some are sincerely trying to help (without realizing that I don’t need it and certainly didn’t ask for it).  It’s funny to see their reaction when I tell them that I just don’t need their faith, that I’m doing well, that I’m much more fulfilled in thinking that this material existence may be “all” that I have.

Some of them attempt to prey on the convicts who are depressed, confused, and in need of authority.  I’ve been in that position, so I can understand the appeal.  However, any problems I have now – any problems I’ve ever had – are material in nature.  If I’m at all unhappy, it’s because I’m alone, I’m in prison, and because I know that I deserve it.

But there’s nothing wrong that I didn’t do to myself.  There’s nothing wrong that can be fixed by tossing out my sense of reason and embracing a fairy tale.  There’s no spiritual longing.  Faith in Jesus is not going to make me feel better about my crime or “accept” it.  And I would never want it to.  I should never “get over” what I did.

I expect that it’s the same in most people.  Filling in the gaps by reading the Bible is just one unimaginative method for dealing with the issues in your life.  From what I’ve seen, most of the guys in here don’t need to be told that Jesus can fix their lives; they need to be told that they can fix their lives.  They need to be told that there’s nothing wrong with them that isn’t self-inflicted.  And if it’s self-inflicted, it’s self-repairable.

Prison Story, Part Fourteen

I sometimes wonder how cynical being in prison can make a person.  This place is full of vultures and bullies just looking for signs of weakness.  To use a cliched metaphor, sharks are constantly on patrol, sniffing for blood.  They’re used to preying on weaker people, and when they come to prison, it’s no different.  Whether they decide to strong-arm a guy’s shoes or food or just stiff him for something; it’s like they can’t exist without trying to victimize others.

As a rule, I despise these people.  I think anyone who subscribes to that philosophy (take whatever you can get away with) are lazy good-for-nothings who can’t earn their own living or exhibit any sense of responsibility.  To me they’re not men, they’re not adults, and they’re not someone I would ever confide in or be friendly with.

But at the same time, I find it hard to feel much sympathy for their victims.  Everyone has a right to be left alone.  I think it would be great if no one had to be victimized, but in reality (especially the reality of prison), that just isn’t going to happen.

Here’s the point: Ninety-nine percent of the victims in prison don’t have to be victims.  They choose that designation for themselves.  I’m not blaming them, I’m not saying they were asking for it, and I’m definitely not agreeing with the knuckle-dragging morons who decide to jack them.  What I’m saying is that those knuckle-dragging morons would never mess with them if they just stood up for themselves.  Worst-case scenario, they’d have to get in a fistfight.  In many cases, win or lose, that would end it.

Even that is going too far ahead.  Nine times out of ten, it will never get that far.  If these victims put forth the notion that they won’t tolerate that from the get-go, the sharks would move on to someone else.  But they have to do it immediately, no exceptions.  They can’t allow the tiniest bit of victimization, or it will escalate and invite more sharks to the feeding frenzy (more cliched metaphors).

There are guys who project a certain weakness.  They’re timid, or they’re unsure, or they won’t look you in the eye, or they let some loud-mouth walk all over them.  You can’t present yourself like that in prison; it’s absolutely going to cause you problems.  To be clear, I’m not saying people should walk around acting like they’re tough – that will get you in trouble even quicker than being a victim.  But you have to decide where to draw the line.  The closer to “I’m ready and willing to fight” you can draw that line, the better off you’ll be in this place.

There was a terrible prison movie from the eighties called “An Innocent Man,” with Tom Selleck.  The only redeeming feature is a quote that I think is pretty eloquent.  It was from a convict to the new guy: “You don’t have to stand tall in here, but you have to stand up.”

Required Reading for Convicts

If you think it’s hard to get kids to read, imagine how it is when it’s convicts we’re talking about.  Even when they do actually read, it’s generally chaff like a John Grisham novel, which in my view is exactly the same as watching Boston Legal or a random sitcom.  Don’t get me wrong; I watch my own share of mindless entertainment on television – and that’s why pretty much every book I read is either nonfiction or at least a bit more substantive than the latest Dean Koontz thriller.

In prison, though, there’s one sure way to get an inmate to consume books like crazy: Throw him in the Hole.  In segregation, there’s literally nothing to do.  If you want to experience what it’s like to have your leg muscles atrophy without getting paralyzed or going into a coma, spend some time in the Hole.  But you can get books eventually, and further, every cell comes equipped with a Bible.  You’d be surprised how even all the “begats” and other mind-numbing nonsense in the Old Testament becomes an interesting read in this situation.

But honestly, is this really the best we can do to help inmates?  The Bible is long on fortune-cookie platitudes, but it doesn’t teach you how to think for yourself, how to reason, or how to look at a situation critically.  Every single one of us in here knows the difference between good behavior and bad behavior.  We don’t need the Bible to tell us what’s right and wrong; we already know.  The problem is that most of us can’t think about ourselves and our actions rationally.  The Bible – and reliance on any faith-based morality – is part of the problem in this case.

Not only that, but most inmates simply don’t give a shit about the Bible, Jesus, or Christianity.  They think it’s weak.  They think the Christian services are a haven for sissies and child molesters.  I’m not saying this to be spiteful; it’s the truth.  Do you think inmates really join Wicca and Asatru groups because they find spiritual fulfillment?  On the same token, why do you think a radical form of Islam has such popularity in prison?

So here’s what we need.  Give inmates some serious reading that’s three things: entertaining, not sissified, and exceedingly instructive in morality and reason.  Give them Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.  Seriously, put a copy in every cell in the Hole, and I swear you’ll have guys coming out of seg saying, “That book changed my lie.”  I’m told there’s an Ayn Rand Foundation, or a Center for the Advancement of Objectivism…I wonder if they could fund something like this?  Try it out in the prisons of one state.  Advance objectivism in the prison population – we need help more than anyone.

I’m not going to get mushy about how much reading that book meant to me, how much it helped this convicted murderer.  I suppose the best I can say is that Atlas Shruggedis necessary.  That’s the most descriptive word for it.  Everyone must experience this book for themselves, period.  And that way, rather than inmates walking around asking what Jesus would do, they’d be asking, “Who is John Galt?”

Prison Story, Part Thirteen

I recently came across a perfect example of a certain mindset in prison.  I was sitting down with a few guys, and one of them (a guy I’ve known for a year or more) was eating something that he’d just bought.  A few minutes later, another guy I know came up to me and said quietly of the guy eating: “If I were you I’d slap him in the face.”  He said it seriously, as if the guy had done something wrong.

I was confused, so I asked him why.  This was his dead-serious answer: “He’s eating in front of you without giving you any.”

Number one, this guy had offered some to me, and I’d said no thanks.  Number two, he’s offered to share various things with me before.  Number three - and this is the most important part – who the fuck cares whether he’s eating in front of me or not?  Certainly I didn’t.  The thought hadn’t even crossed my mind.

It was implied that he was obligated to share what he has with his friends and acquaintances.  And if not, he was obligated to not eat it in front of us.  I was so surprised I could barely speak.  I wanted to say that this guy owes me nothing, that he has no duty to share and especially no duty to hide his food (as if eating it in front of me would be torture or something).

So you’re doing something wrong if you decide to consume something you own.  How selfish of you, to eat food that you’ve purchased with money you’ve earned.  This is ludicrous.  This is communism, brought on by warped jailhouse rules.  Obviously this belief is fostered by those who don’t want to earn their own money, those who think they’re owed something, those who think a friend is obligated to share what he earns.

I don’t care if the guy is my best friend in the world; I never think that he’s obligatedto give me a portion of what he has.  I find this to be morally repulsive and no indicator of friendship.  To put it in Randian terms: If it’s selfish for you to keep the food, why isn’t it also selfish for them to accept it?  Believing that your owed something is bad enough, but applying that principle to your friends is sinking to a new low.

To be clear:  This is not about being stingy.  I give a percentage of my income to charity.  I have no problem sharing with my friends.  It’s the sense of self-entitlement that pisses me off.  If they think I’m obligated to share with them, they’re not getting anything from me.  Ever.

And what’s funny is they think they’re the ones who are morally correct!  They espouse a view that essentially says (use a high-pitched voice here for effect): “I’m a sniveling little non-producing weasel who thinks the world owes me a living, so I’m going to either guilt-trip or strong-arm productive people out of what they’ve earned.”

No wonder they’re in prison.

Prison Story, Part Twelve

The other day I was talking to a guy who felt wronged.  His type are the most common in prison, I would have to say.  (In fact, I would imagine they’re pretty far from rare out there on the streets, as well.)  His type not only exists in a perpetual state of being wronged, they also must let everyone else around them know that they’ve been wronged.  This is how they seek acceptance and validation.

This particular guy has done a whopping six months in prison so far, and he has a whopping two more months to go.  Apparently he feels that missing good food is the most terrible aspect of prison life, because he was telling me about how “fucked up” it is for the correction officers to bring food in and eat in front of us prisoners.

My first thought (and the first thing I said) was: “Why should they care what you think about them eating in front of you?”

His point was that it was like teasing, or deliberately tormenting prisoners by waving the food in front of their faces.  “They should only be able to eat it in a break room,” he said.

The childishness of the complaint was my second though.  This guy is in his late twenties, but I started to picture in my mind a little toddler pouting and demanding, “I want some!” to the officer.  How fucked up in the head do you have to be to think that it’s unfair for someone to eat something tasty in front of you?  How needy, how full of self-entitlement?

The whole thing is absurd:  We can order ordinary food from the commissary, as well as during periodic fund-raisers for charities.  No one in here is suffering for lack of access to good food, and even if they were, so what?  Are the staff who work here supposed to keep in mind that it’s “cruel” to eat their lunch in front of a prisoner?  You’ve got to be kidding me.  This guy was acting like he was tied down and dying of thirst, and the officer was dangling a cup of water over his face.

I think guys in here really have to get rid of this whining sense of victimhood.  Better yet, just don’t come to prison.  Then you won’t have to worry about being subjected to the inhumane treatement of a correction officer eating a candy bar in front of you.

Prison Story, Part Eleven

The other day, two guys got in an argument about prisoners judging one another for their crimes.  The culmination was one of them telling the other that his crime (dealing drugs) was just as low as rape.  The guy who said that was invited to a private place to deal with the matter physically, but realizing he had went too far and was not prepared to fight, he backed down.  The other slapped him in full view of dozens of people, and still he backed down.  That was the end of it.

I listened to the guy rationalize why he allowed that to happen to him.  He said that it wasn’t worth it, that getting into a fight would have perhaps delayed his release date, that he doesn’t care what others think about him.  He was lying.  The real reason – the only reason – he backed down from the challenge and did nothing when he was slapped was fear.  I’ve seen it a thousand times in this place.  I’m not a mind-reader, but it’s easy to see when someone’s trying to hide their fear.

I look at it like this:  If you truly believe that fighting in the wrong answer and you don’t want to get in trouble, then that’s your decision.  By all means, make it and stick to it.  I have nothing against that stance.  But if fear is the only reason, and you’re lying to yourself and others, then you need to sstop being a whining baby and man up.  There are worse things than a black eye.  There are even worse things than having to do thirty more days in prison because you throw down with a guy in the cell.

Perhaps the reason for fighting was frivolous.  Perhaps in this case, the guy brought it on himself by opening his mouth about such a touchy topic.  Perhaps out there on the streets, a real man always walks away from a fight.

In prison, it’s a matter of whether you want to allow yourself ot be victimized.  I fyou allow a man to slap you and do nothing about it, you’re almost certainly causing yourself more trouble than a simple fight (which most likely would have neatly resolved the issue, win or lose).  This place is full of vultures and bullies:  They’re all going to see you as a victim.  They’re going to think they can do anything to you and get away with it.  After all, if you didn’t put your hands up when someone slapped you, you’re not going to do it when someone steals from you, for example.

If a prisoner wants to truly rationalize his decision of whether or not to fight, he must take this into account.  Maybe you have to fight over something that would normally be silly.  Maybe you just catch someone in a bad mood and get into an argument of whether Mary Kay LeTourneau is a child molester or not (I once saw a fistfight over that).  But whether the original reason is stupid or not, once you’re in that far, you may have to suck it up and start fighting anyway, if only because it’s the smartest move in the long run.

Prison Story, Part Nine

I’ve been locked up for eleven years, and I’ve never even heard of a single case of rape among prisoners in the State of Washington.  Though the story may be different in other states, with “tougher” prisons, I doubt it.  The reason is something most people on the outside don’t consider.  Everyone knows how rapists and other sex offenders are viewed in prison, but they rarely realize that most prisoners have a similar attitude regardless of gender.  Rape is rape, whether the victim is a man or a woman.

I’ve heard critics of feminism try to use the male rape in prison as an argument, I’ve heard the jokes, I’ve seen the movies and television shows.  I’m reminded of one absurdity in pop culture: the Fox show Prison Break, in which a serial rapist (T-Bag) was supposedly the head honcho and “hardened con” that the others respected.  No way.  A serial rapist or child molester in prison will never be given social respect, no matter how tough he is, how many fights he wins, or even if he kills someone.

But it’s ironic that while most prisoners claim to despise sex offenders, many will unwittingly – sometimes in the same breath – state that women who dress in a certain way are “asking for it,” that it’s impossible for a man to rape his wife, or that women need to be “taught a lesson” with violent sex.  The last is by far the most common sentiment.

The abhorrence for rape is often relaxed when the woman in question is disliked because of her disposition.  One term I believe comes from prison vernacular is used when a woman’s attitude is not up to par; she is said to be in need of a “hate-fuck.”  A few prisoners can readily and quite seriously explain the “difference” between a hate-fuck and a rape.  I would go so far as to say the consensus among many male prisoners – even those who are very vocal against rapes – is that the cure for any undesirable attitude in a woman is for her to be humiliated sexually, to be shown her place.

You see the hypocrisy again in the discrimination against homosexuals.  A prisoner’s opinion in this matter often depends dramatically on whether the homosexual is dominant or submissive.  The submissive “punk” in a relationship between amle prisoners is always seen as weak and contemptible.  The “dad” may still be subject to homophobia, but in general, as long as he is acceptably masculine and willing to defend himself, he’ll do okay socially.  (That the term “dad” is commonly used to refer to a dominant sexual partner is rather a rather disturbing indication of the patriarchal roots of this attitude.  For the record, punks are also commonly referred to as the “kids” of their dominant partners.)

This type of hypocrisy is indicative of the lack of reason that I’m always talking about.  Many prisoners literally can’t see the contradiction in their words and actions, because they can’t look at the situation objectively.  They’re hampered by tradition, peer pressure, social acceptance, and pure ignorance.  They allow “common knowledge” and knee-jerk responses to overrride their reasoning.  This type of nonsense can be traced back to one thing: a deficiency in critical thinking skills.  This is the problem that must be addressed.  This is the root of faulty, destructive, and just plain stupid behavior and beliefs – and I dare say that it is not solely limited to convicted felons.

Why Convicts Should Lose Jesus, Part Three

The questions I continue to ask every day is:  Why do prisoners need Jesus?  I think this is an important question because of the commonly accepted idea that prisoners need to find Jesus to learn about morality and become better people.  It’s a cliche.  You see it on news interviews with prisoners, and it’s what any smart prisoner says to the parole board.  I heard even Paris Hilton found Jesus during her lengthy stay in County Jail.

I’ve said before that I see it as a needless crutch.  Making yourself a better person is about using reason.  It’s about getting rid of faulty thinking methods.  You don’t need the Bible to know that victimizing a human being is wrong.  Every single one of us sitting in prison knows the difference between right and wrong.  We were one-hundred-percent aware that the crime we committed to get here was wrong; the problem was that we were thinking irrationally enough to ignore that fact.

The Bible has some good moral lessons for prisoners, but it can teach you absolutely nothing about thinking rationally.  Indeed, blind faith in mythology and moral obedience is contrary to rationality.  It’s just one more faulty thinking method for inmates to add to their already impressive catalogue.

I’m not lashing out against Christianity here.  I honestly want to help.  If someone like me can completely turn my life (that is to say, my thought processes; the way I view the world and the people in it) around simply by learning how to think more rationally, then any of my peers in here can do it.  Every single day, without fail, several times a day even, I hear them falling victim to irrational thinking methods.  You name it, we got it: conspiracy theories, denial of responsibility, prejudice, stereotyping, perpetual victimhood, and so on.

I might even go so far as to say that the issue is not so much a moral one, but an intellectual one.  In other words, to rehabilitate prisoners, the focus should be more on teaching them how to think than teaching them how to be good.  I believe this starts with childhood; children should be taught how to think logically from their earliest years in school.  It is without a doubt the most important skill human beings can ever learn, how to think, an dyou won’t find any instruction for it in the Bible.

Prison Story, Part Eight

The other day I was talking to someone I know vaguely.  It was pointless small talk, since neither of us had anything important to say, and we weren’t very familiar with one another.  What I suddenly realized, though, is that small talk in prison is radically different than ordinary small talk that people out there on the streets experience.

Small talk in prison consists almost entirely of complaint.  In this case, the guy complained that the water in the shower wasn’t hot enough, the pressure wasn’t great enough, and how the “State” never does anything about it.  In the chow hall, the comments would be about the quantity and/or quality of the food.  In the dayroom, it’s the way the officers are acting.  In the gym, it’s the lack of equipment or recreation time.

Prisoners can always bond over their common complaints about prison life, sentences, judges, officers, and fellow prisoners.  Among people meeting for the first time, it just goes without saying.  It’s how you’re acceptted into a certain mold: a typical prisoner with an us-against-them mentality.  Even a white supremacist and a black separatist can share common ground in their criticism of the way this is or that is.  I’ve seen it repeatedly; I still see it everyday.

More than just a male bonding exercise, it’s also a way for the guys to find validation.  People generally don’t want to be around those who argue with them and disagree with things that they find important.  Most of us would rather surround ourselves with enablers and yes-men than with critical thinkers.  It gets so common and accepted among prisoners that the complaints don’t have to be valid or even logical.  For example, I remember a prisoner once complaining about a power outage during the time he wanted to watch a football game.  With a straight face, he complained that the “State” had purposefully turned off the power so that we would be punished by not being able to catch a football game.  His immediate companions either nodded along and agreed or simply didn’t say anything.

The way I see it, this is indicative of a much more serious problem among prisoners than simple whining.  Everything in your environment is “out to get you.”  You deserve more than you’re getting.  Someone is always screwing you just for the hell of it, just because they can.  I won’t take this as far as paranoia and conspiracy theories, because the main issue is that a sense of self-entitlement becomes normalized.  These prisoners begin to think that they’re “owed” something.  A common argument I hear is this: “Well, the ‘State’ took away my freedom and that’s the price I pay for my crime, so now they have to treat me well, give me everything I want, and answer all my complaints.”

No, actually they don’t.  You victimized someone, and now you’re sitting in prison (possibly for years or decades) costing the taxpayers money and doing nothing but whining.  You’re the one who owes, not the other way around.

This sickening notion of self-entitlement must be dispelled among prisoners because we need a strong sense of responsibility more than anyone.  And we’re never going to get it if our social discourse consists disproportionately of meaningless complaint.