Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Prison

Category Archives: Prison

Reflecting on my viva experience

I reflect one week after one of the most important examinations in academia, the viva. Like any examination you never know what is going to come up and therefore you have to be prepared for anything. This makes preparation tricky, uncertain and at times perplexing. There were areas I thought might come up, and in those cases I had a response ready.

On the day, despite all the preparation there were questions that required pause, thought, navigation and discussion. Upon reflection, there were times where I would have liked to provide a more polished and articulate answer, but I am not a robot and therefore my answers are human, with stutters and pauses, passion and dedication; they are unpolished and there is a beauty to that.

What made the difference was having two very supportive examiners that were approachable, interested in my research and wanting me to fulfil my potential. Their additional years in the field/academia over mine were not used to demonstrate their superiority, but instead to guide me in the final process of completing my thesis.

The process acted as a reminder to me that how you approach a situation is so important. In academia, whilst we may be trying to highlight the flaws in a potential project or correcting errors or misconceptions in student’s writing so they can improve, we also ought to put the effort into seeing the good in someone’s work where possible. Think about whether your approach is constructive, how can that individual be supported to the finish line. It pays to maybe think back to the time when your work was being dissected, analysed, with the outcome affecting your academic career in front of you, what type of examiner would you have wanted, maybe that is the one you need to strive to be to others.

I passed with minor corrections that they stressed would only take a few days work. I hope this is acts a testament to what is possible. As a first-generation Black woman that tentatively stepped into academia, achieved a first-class honours degree, navigated a masters at Oxford University, was successful in achieving a funded PhD to then pass with minor corrections, challenge yourself and dare to dream!

Meet the Team: Angela Charles, Senior Lecturer in Criminology

I would like to take this opportunity to say a warm hello to my colleagues and to the students at the University of Northampton.  

I am Angela Charles, a senior lecturer in criminology. I have a passion and deep interest in this discipline for a number of reasons. Firstly, criminology is such a fascinating and thought-provoking subject that is constantly evolving and expanding. Secondly, criminology is a subject where I believe social justice can be fought for and in many cases achieved, through researching and gaining evidence to push for change, and through perseverance. Thirdly, criminology requires us to discuss, debate, analyse and build on what has been previously argued and discussed; thereby strengthening, tweaking or dismantling and rebuilding previous theoretical knowledge and criminological concepts.  

My research interests are within prisons and penology, and race and gender. My most recent research explored and analysed the experiences of Black women in English prisons, paying particular attention to the intersections of race, class and gender. Black women are at the margins of society and face multiple intersecting oppressions. The prison is arguably a microcosm of society and perpetuates the same oppressive structural inequalities. It is often these racialised and gendered pains of imprisonment that are rarely discussed or mentioned both within scholarly literature and the public realm more widely. I hope to disseminate my research in the coming years and amplify some of the voices of Black women in UK prisons. 

I’m also keen to explore research methods that arguably move away from traditional research methods and instead aim to decolonise research methods. Criminologists need to adapt the methods they use to suit the differing backgrounds and cultures of the participants that we research, and we need to incorporate different cultural aspects into the research process. I believe this not only will create richer data, but will also increase participant engagement as they become co-producers of knowledge. 

Lastly, I look forward to working closely with my colleagues to learn about their research interests, passions and to collaborate on ensuring that studying criminology is enjoyable, rewarding and insightful at the University of Northampton!

A visual walk around a panopticon prison in the city of “Brotherly Love”

Conferences…people even within academia have views on them. This year the American Society of Criminology hosted its annual meeting in Philadelphia. In the conference we had the opportunity to talk about course development and the pedagogies in criminology. Outside the conference we visited Eastern State Penitentiary one of the original panopticon prisons…now a decaying museum on penal philosophy and policy.

The bleak corridors of a panopticon prison

the walls are closing in and there is only light from above

these cells smell of decay; they were the last residence of those condemned to death

the old greenhouse; now a glass/concrete structure…then a place to plant flowers. Even in the darkest places life finds a way to persevere

isolation: a torture within an institution of violence. The people coming out will be forever scared as time leaves the harshest wounds

a place of worship: for some the only companion to abject desperation; for those who did not lose their minds or try to end their lives; faith kept them at least alive.

the yard is monitored by the guards at the core; the chained prisoners will walk outside or get some exercise but only if they behave. To be outside in here is a privilege

the corridors look identical; you become disoriented and disillusioned

everything here conjures images of pain

an ostentatious building, build back in the 19th century to lock in criminals. It housed a new principled idea, a new system on penal reform. the first penitentiary of its kind. Nonetheless it never stopped being an institution of oppression…it closed in 1970.

The role of the criminologist (among others) is to explain, analyse and discuss our responses to crime, the systems we use and the strategies employed. So before a friendly neighbour tells you that sending people to an island or arming the police with guns or giving juveniles harsher penalties, they better talk to a criminologist first.

As a final thought, I leave you with this…there are people who left the prison broken but there are those who died in this prison. Eleven people tried to escape but were recaptured. Once you are sent down, the prison owns you.

What cost justice? What crisis?

The case of Andrew Malkinson represents yet another in the long list of miscarriages of justice in the United Kingdom.  Those that study criminology and those practitioners involved in the criminal justice system have a reasonable grasp of how such cases come about.  More often than not it is a result of police malpractice, negligence, culture and error. Occasionally it is as a result of poor direction in court by the trial judge or failures by the CPS, the prosecution team or even the defence team.  The tragic case of Stefan Kiszko is a good example of multiple failures by different bodies including the defence.  Previous attempts at addressing the issues have seen the introduction of new laws such as the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996.  The former dealing in part with the treatment of suspects in custody and the latter with the disclosure of documents in criminal proceedings.  Undoubtedly there have been significant improvements in the way suspects are dealt with and the way that cases are handled. Other interventions have been the introduction of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), removing in part, charging decisions from the police and the introduction of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to review cases where an appeal has been lost but fresh evidence or information has come to light. 

And yet, despite better police training regarding interviews and the treatment of suspects, better training in investigations as a whole, new restrictive laws and procedures, the independence of the CPS, the court appeal system and oversight by a body such as the CCRC, miscarriages of justice still occur.  What sets the Malkinson case aside from the others appears to be the failure of the CCRC to take action on new information.  The suggestion being that the decision was a financial one, with little to do with justice.  If the latter is proved to be true, we will of course have to wait for the results of the inquiry, then how can anyone have any confidence in the justice system?

Over the years we have already seen swingeing cuts in budgets in the criminal justice system such that the system is overloaded.  Try to pop into the local police station to make a complaint of a crime, you won’t find a station open to the public. Should you have been unfortunate enough to have been caught for some minor misdemeanour and need to go to magistrates’ court for a hearing, you’ll be lucky if you don’t have to travel some considerable distance to get there, good luck with that if you rely on public transport. Should you be the victim of a more serious crime or indeed charged with a more serious offence, triable in crown court, then you’ll probably wait a couple of years before the trial. Unfortunate if you are the alleged offender and on remand, and if you are the victim, you could be forgiven for deciding that you’d rather put it all behind you and disengage with the system.  But even to get to that stage, there has to be sufficient evidence to secure a prosecution and it has to be in the public interest to do so. Your day in court as a victim is likely to be hang on the vagaries of the CPS decision making process.  A process that has one eye on the court backlog and another on performance targets.  Little wonder the attrition rate in sex offences is so high.  Gone are the days of letting a jury decide on occasions where the evidence hangs on little more than one person’s word against the other.

Andrew Malkinson and his legal representative have called for a judicial review, a review where witnesses can be compelled to attend to give evidence and documentary evidence can be demanded to be produced.  Instead, the government has said there will be an independent inquiry.  On a personal note, I have little faith in such inquiries.  My experience is that they are rarely independent of government direction and wishes.  Andrew Malkinson’s case is a travesty and the least that can be done is to have a proper inquiry. I suspect though that the Malkinson case might just be the tip of the iceberg. The Criminal Justice System is in crisis but budgetary restraint and political whim seem to be far more important than justice.  We can look forward to more finger pointing and yet more reorganisation and regulation.  

Reproductive Healthcare Ramblings

Reproductive health in England and Wales is a shambles: particularly for women and people who menstruate. The failings start early, where, as with most things, stereotypes and ‘norms’ are enforced upon children from GPs, schools, from parents/guardians who have experienced worse, or who do not know any different, which keep children from speaking up. These standards and stereotypes come from a male dominated health care system especially in relation to gynaecology, and our patriarchal society silences children without the children even realising they are being silenced. As a child, you are expected to go about your daily routine, sit your exams, look after your siblings, represent the school at the tournament of the week, and do all this while, for some, bleeding, cramping, being fatigued but not be expected to talk about it. After all, you are told time and time again: it’s normal.

Moving through life, women and people who menstruate face similar stigma, standards, assumptions during adulthood as they faced during childhood. There is more awareness now of endometriosis, adenomyosis, uterine fibroids, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Condition (PCOS) to name but a few. But women and people who menstruate report feelings of being gaslighted by [male] gynaecologists, encouraged to have children in order to regulate their hormones (pregnancy and childbirth comes with a whole new set of healthcare problems and conditions), to take the contraceptive pill and deal with the migraines, mood swings, weight gain and depression which many women and girls report. Some of the above chronic illnesses impact fertility, so ‘try for a baby’ is not an easy, or even a wanted path. Diagnosis is also complex: for example a diagnosis for endometriosis takes on average 8 years (Endometriosisuk, 2023), and can only be confirmed with surgery. That relies on women and people who menstruate going to their GP, reporting their symptoms, listening to the ‘have you tried the pill’ or ‘having a baby will help manage your symptoms’: which relies on trust. Not everyone trusts the NHS, not everyone feels comfortable being dismissed by a nurse, or GP or then their gynaecologist. Especially when a number of these illnesses are framed and seen as a white-woman illness. Communities of women and people who menstruate remain hidden, dealing with the stigma and isolation that our reproductive health system carries in England and Wales. And this is not a new issue.

The reproductive healthcare for women and people who menstruate is dire. Just ask anyone who has experienced it. What then is it like for women in prison? The pains of imprisonment are well documented: deprivation of goods, loss of liberty, institutionalisation, no security, depreciation of mental health (Sykes, 1958; Carlen, 1983). The gendered pains, fears and harms less so, but we know women in prison are fearful about the deterioration of relationships (especially with children), lack of facilities to support new mothers, physical and sexual abuse, and poor mental and physical health support including reproductive health. The poor reproductive healthcare available to women and people who menstruate within society, is a grade above what is available in prisons. These women are quite literally isolated, alone and withdrawn from society (through the process of imprisonment), and for some, they will become further isolated and withdrawn via the pains of their chronic illness.

There isn’t really a point to this blog: more like a rambling of frustrations towards all the children who will journey through our subpar reproductive healthcare system, who will navigate the stigma and assumptions littered within society. To all the women and people who menstruate who are currently wading through this sh*t show, educating themselves, their family, their friends and in some cases their GPs, those people unable to speak out, not knowing how or simply not wanting to. And to those in the Secure Estate, grappling with the pains of imprisonment and having their reproductive healthcare needs ignored, overlooked or missed.

I haven’t even mentioned menopause…

References:

Carlen, P. (1983) Women’s Imprisonment, Abingdon: Routledge.

Corston, Baroness J. (2007) The Corston Report: A Review on Women with Particular Vulnerabilities in the Criminal Justice System, London: Home office.

Endometriosis UK (2023) Endometriosis Facts and Figures [online] Available at: https://www.endometriosis-uk.org/endometriosis-facts-and-figures#:~:text=Endometriosis%20affects%201.5%20million%20women,of%20those%20affected%20by%20diabetes.&text=On%20average%20it%20takes%208,symptoms%20to%20get%20a%20diagnosis. [Accessed 24th August 2023]

Sykes, G. (1958/2007) The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Reflecting on Research Access

I am currently undertaking a part-time PhD and, as part of my qualitative research project, I need to keep a reflexivity diary, reflecting on my own position in relation to the subjects of my research. My first entry reflects on the process of negotiating access, and I thought it might make an interesting subject for a criminology blog!

As a reflexive qualitative researcher it is important constantly to reflect on my own position in relation to my research and my participants. I am about to start collecting data but only after a very lengthy process of negotiating access (12 months). This process was one in which my own position and history had a significant influence.

For my first project, I am conducting detailed qualitative interviews with serving prisoners. This required approval from the HMPPS National Research Committee (NRC). As a former HMPPS employee, I thought that my inside knowledge would be helpful – indeed at a later stage, in negotiating access to specific prisons, I think it has been. However, at the stage of submitting my application for national approval my prior experience added emotional baggage.

I worked for the Prison Service for nearly 12 years. I really enjoyed working with prisoners and I also enjoyed the camaraderie of working within the tight community of a prison. I worked with some lovely individuals who were dedicated to helping people and who supported me personally in my career. However, the Prison Service is a large, unwieldy organisation and large unwieldy organisations do not always treat individuals well. There were several times in my career when I felt that the organisation had treated me badly: when a recruitment freeze was introduced just after I passed the assessment centre so that I was stuck in limbo without a permanent job; when the in-house MSc was abolished (with no replacement) just before I was due to start it; when I ended up taking on my boss’ responsibilities as well as my own with no promotion or increase in pay; when my request to work part-time after maternity leave was declined; when my post was put on the “surplus list” during a phase of job cuts. It was not all negative – as I say, I enjoyed the work very much, I was proud to be a prison psychologist and there were times when the organisation was good to me (I eventually had a different distance learning MSc funded by the Prison Service, and I was able to take a 12 month career break following my maternity leave) but those negative incidents felt like personal insults when I was working hard. The biggest kick in the teeth came more recently in 2020 when I applied to re-join HMPPS when my tenure on the Parole Board came to an end. I had an unremarkable remote interview and was then turned down. I knew that HMPPS advertised for qualified psychologists every month, so there were plenty of vacancies – that they didn’t want me when I knew I was a good psychologist and had already given them the best years of my career really hurt.

Since then, I have started my PhD and secured a great job with St Andrew’s Healthcare which suits me better and has taken me in a new direction. The memory of the rejection was still lingering, however, when my initial research application to the HMPPS NRC was rejected. I felt like they were kicking me in the teeth again. My initial application was for a piece of research with both a quantitative and a qualitative element. The feedback in relation to the quantitative project was so devastating that I scrapped this part of the research altogether and focused on the qualitative part only. To be fair, the feedback was justified and the re-written proposal is for a much more methodologically sound piece of research, but it still felt personal at the time.

Conducting research during a pandemic is not easy. By the time I had responded to the NRC feedback and was ready to re-submit, there was a resurgence in COVID-19 cases and the NRC were not accepting any further applications. I was advised not to re-submit until applications were being accepted again, otherwise I would have been rejected with no chance to re-submit again. This caused a three-month delay and I had to chase to find out when applications re-opened. When I finally re-submitted, my application was not rejected, but I did receive a long list of requests for further information. Some of these seemed very petty. Responding to them was a significant piece of work and the sense of personal rejection and being made to jump through hoops returned. I was very grateful to one of my supervisors who read my responses before I submitted them and helped to remove the irritation that was evident!

Having submitted the answers to these further questions I waited for ages for a reply. By this stage, I was on first name terms with the reviewer on the NRC. She had sent my application for further feedback from the HMPPS Interventions Team (one of whom I had worked closely with in the past). I was given further questions to answer (which seemed to miss the point of what I was trying to achieve). I tried my hardest to remain positive and to suppress the irritation. HMPPS had the power and were entitled to it. They had every right to reject my research application. Just because I had been a good employee in the past, did not oblige them to give me research access. I resigned myself to receiving a final rejection and started to think of other ways to explore my research questions. And as I reached this point of acceptance, I finally received a positive response saying that my application had been accepted!

Since then, things have moved quickly. I revised my University ethics application in the light of all the amendments I had made following the HMPPS feedback and this was quickly approved. I approached individual prisons for specific access and received positive responses from HMP Grendon and HMP Onley – in these cases possibly reaping the benefits of personal connections from my time in the Prison Service. I will be going into HMP Grendon in early January to start to recruit participants. I no longer work for HMPPS or for the Parole Board, but my status as a Forensic Psychologist and as a former HMPPS employee and Parole Board member will have an influence on my relationships with participants. They will have had experiences with psychologists (and may have had experiences with the Parole Board) which may be positive or negative and which may facilitate or hinder trust in me as a researcher. I will need to look out for these influences and reflect on them as the research progresses.

What to do with my criminology?

Let’s arrange time and set out two temporal constants: point one: a random meeting now and another one about three years later! The first one occurs during a standard University Open Day; a young person coming to a session to hear about criminology; they have seen crime programmes, read crime fiction, bought some real crime literature and now they feel fascinated. There is an interest there; what happens next? Why did they do it? How did they do it? Many questions and even more ideas of what to do to those who do horrible things. The Open Day is not just a response to singular identities, in fact it takes these curiosities and turns them on their head. Crime is bigger and smaller; its is more and less and, of course, most importantly is socially constructed, meaning that is does not mean the same thing across time and space.

This first encounter, was interesting, informative, and on the way home generated more questions and more curiosities. It is the first step to a decision to come back to read the subject, to get involved studying the course material and engaging in discussions. Suddenly the crime programme seems artificial; it does not explore social realities; the methods employed are too expensive and the investigation timeframe random. Knowledge is constructed on information but challenging the source of that information becomes the tool of academic exploration. Reading the crime novel or exploring true crime literature is not simply a guilty pleasure, it is a means to get narratives to ascertain cultural dominance and to address crime prioritisation (you wish to know more…then join us!).

Point two: an event sometime after the three years; a graduation. Wearing a gown and taking pictures with family and friends. A recognition that three years of study have come to a successful conclusion. The curiosity remains; there are still a lot of questions to ponder but now there is a difference in how this takes hold. The concept of crime becomes complex, interconnected with social and personal experience, but this is just the beginning. Studies haven’t answered the original questions, in fact they have added more questions, but they have given a “methodology of thought”. A process to relate to any situation that is known or unknown and explore the criminology within.

The completion of studies inevitably bring the issue of what to do next. How to use criminology; professionally, educationally, academically. As a social science, criminology contains plenty of theoretical perspectives and those relate to the lived experience and in many ways explain it or even predict future criminalities. Some decades ago, criminological imagination, considered cyber justice as a model of swift resolution, international justice was seen as the tool to prevent conflict and global crisis. Suffice to say that neither worked. Criminologists are more than keen to explain why neither of these work.

At both points we have been there; we saw you struggle at first to set the question, to consider the merit of the argument. We also saw you growing in confidence and writing work that you never thought you would, but most importantly to consider perspectives never thought of before. Your criminology is a tool; an instrument to understand social realities, when people are at their worst. To observe, study, analyse and explain crime without judgment or bias. Your criminology is a tool to let you join those groups that will ask “what about the human rights” that will consider “what is the value in this rehabilitation” that will advocate the objections for those people who are deprived a voice and for you to give them space. It is not always easy working with people who are kept locked up for the protection of others but it is in that point that your criminology lights up their lives. When all others give up and when the systems seem not to be working and when all seems so hopeless, your criminology will give hope and clarity to those who need it.

From a small personal curiosity, this is not a simple journey, but it is definitely one worth taking and now that you finish, you take with you that mindset and the professional obligation to carry it further. It’s your voice and the way you articulate it; it’s your appreciation of the complexity and these are invaluable skills to carry with you. From us, all we have to say now is…Happy journeys.

A world without prisons follow-up.  A student/staff reflection piece

As a department Criminology has pushed the envelope in promoting discussions around the key disciplinary debates.  @franbitalo and myself co-ordinated a conversation where the main focus was to imagine “a world without prisons”.  The conversation was very interesting, and we decided to post parts of it as a legacy of the social debates we engage in.  The discussion is captured as a series of comments made by the students with some prompts in bold. 

The original question stands, can you imagine a world without prisons?  First thing first, there is a feeling that prisons will always exist as mechanisms to control our society.  Mainly because our society is too punitive and focused on punishment rather than rehabilitation.  We live in a society that ideologically sees the prison as the representation of being hard on crime.  Further to this point we may never be able to abolish the prison, so it can always remain as the last resort of what to do with those who have harm others.  Especially for those in our society who deserve to be punished because of what they did.  Perhaps we could reform it or extend the use of the probation service dealing with crime. 

In an ideal world prisons should not exist especially because the system seems to target particular groups, namely minorities and people from specific background.  It important to note that it does stop people seeking or taking justice into their hands and deflecting any need for vengeance “eye for an eye”.  Prison is a punishment done in the name of society, but it does carry political overtones.  There are parts of political ideology that support the idea that punishment is meant to make an example of those breaking the law.  This approach is deeply rooted, and is impervious to reform or change. Which can become one of the biggest issues regarding prisons. 

Then there is the public’s view on prisons.  When people hear that prisons will go they will be very unhappy and even frightened.  They will feel that without prisons people will go crazy and commit crimes without any consequences.  Society, people feel, will go into a state of anarchy where vigilantism will become the acceptable course of action.  This approach becomes more urgent when considering particular types of criminals, like sex offenders and in particular, paedophiles.  Regardless of the intention of the act, these types of crime cause serious harm that the victim carries for the rest of their lives.  The violation of trust and the lack of consent makes these crimes particularly repulsive and prison worthy.  How about child abduction?  Not sure if we should make prison crime specific.  That will not serve its purpose, instead it will make it the dumping ground for some crime categories, sending a message that only some people will go to prison. 

Will that be the only crime category worthy of prison?  In an ideal world, those who commit serious financial crimes should be going to prison, if such a prison existed.  Again, here if we are considering harm as the reason to keep prisons open these types of crime cause maximum harm.  The implication of white-collar crime, serious fraud and tax evasion deprive our society of taxes and income that is desperately needed in social infrastructure, services and social support.  Financial crime flaunts the social contract and weakens society.  Perhaps those involved should be made to contribute reparations.  The prison question raises another issue to consider especially with all the things said before!  Who “deserves” to go to prison.  Who gets to go and who is given an alternative sentence is based on established views on crime.  There are a lot of concerns on the way crime is prioritised and understood because these prioritisations do not reflect the reality of social disorder.  Prison is an institution that scapegoats the working classes.  Systematically the system imprisons the poor because class is an imprisonable factor; the others being gender and race. 

If we keep only certain serious crimes on the books, we are looking at a massive reduction in prison numbers.  Is that the way to abolitionism?  The prison plays too much of a role in the Criminal Justice System to be discounted.  The Industrial Prison Complex as a criminological concept indicates the strengths of an institution that despite its failings, hasn’t lost its prominence.  On the side of the State, the establishment is a barrier to any reform or changes to this institution.  Changes are not only needed for prison, but also for the way the system responds to the victims of crime as well.  Victims are going through a process of re-victimisation and re-harming them.  This is because the system is using the victims as part of the process, in giving evidence.  If there is concern for those harmed by crime, that is not demonstrated by the strictness of the prison.

As a society currently we may not be able to abolish prisons but we ought to reduce the harm punishment has onto people.  In order to abolish prisons, the system will have to be ready to allow for the change to happen.  In the meantime, alternative justice systems have not delivered anything different from what we currently have.  One of the reasons is that as a society we have the need to see justice being served.  A change so drastic as this will definitely require a change in politics, a change in ideology and a change in the way we view crime as a society in order to succeed.  The conversation continues… 

Thank you to all the participating students: Katja, Aimee, Alice, Zoe, Laura, Amanda, Kayleigh, Chrissy, Meg, and Ellie also thank you to my “partner in crime” @franbitalo.      

The Problem is Bigger than Tate

While there are many things that have got under my skin lately, it seems that every time I go on social media, turn on the television, or happen to have a conversation, the name Andrew Tate is uttered. His mere existence is like a virus, attacking not only my brain and soul but it seems a large population of the world. His popularity stems from his platform followed by thousands of men and young boys (it’s known as the ‘Real World’).

His platform ‘educating’ men on working smarter not harder has created a ‘brotherhood’ within the manosphere that celebrates success and wealth. Tate is framed as a man’s man, physically strong, rich and he even has a cigar attached to his hand (I wonder if he puts it down when he goes to the bathroom). It seems many of his aspiring followers want to mimic his fast rich lifestyle.

This seems to be welcomed, especially now when the price of bread has significantly risen (many of his followers would sell the closest women in their life for a whiff of his cigar, and of course to be deemed to have an Insta-desirable lifestyle). While this ideology has gained hype and mass traction in recent years (under the Tate trademark) it seems that his narcissistic, problematic image and what he stands for has only just been deemed a problem … due to his recent indiscretions. 

There is now outrage in UK schools over the number of young boys following Tate and his misogynistic ideology. But I cannot help but ask … why was this not an issue before? I am aware of rape culture, victim blaming, sexual harassment, and systems of silence at every level of the UK education establishment. The launch of ‘Everyone’s Invited’ shone a light on the problematic discourse, so why are we only seeing that there is a problem now?

There are many reasons why there’s a delayed outrage, and I would be here all day highlighting all the problems. So, I will give you a couple of reasons. The first is the Guyland ideology: many Tate supporters who fall into the cultural assumption of masculinity expect to be rewarded for their support, in ways of power and material possession (this includes power over women and others deemed less powerful). If one does not receive what they believe they are owed or expected, they will take what they believe they are owed (by all means necessary).

There is also a system of silence within their peer group which is reinforced by parents, female friends, the media, and those that are in administrative power. The protection of toxic behavior has been continuously put under the umbrella of ‘boys will be boys’ or the idea that the toxic behavior is outside the character of the individual or not reflective of who they truly are.

I will go one step further and apply this to the internalised patriarchy/misogyny of the many women that came out and supported Jeremy Clarkson when he callously attacked Meghan. While many of the women have their individual blight with Meghan for reasons I do not really care to explore, by supporting the rhetoric spewed by Clarkson, they are upholding systemic violence against women.

The third point is that capitalism overthrows humanity and empathy in many ways. All you need to do is to look at a history books, it seems that lessons will never be learned. The temptation of material possessions has overthrown morality. The media gives Tate a platform and in turn Tate utters damaging ideology. This brings more traffic to the platforms that he is on and thus more money and influence….after all he is one of the most googled people in the world.

The awareness of the problematic behaviour and the total disregard for protecting women and girls from monsters like Tate shows, how the outrage displayed by the media about harms against victims such as Sabina Nessa and Sarah Everard is performative. The news coverage and the discussion that centred on the victimisation of these two women have easily been forgotten. If the outrage is real then why are we still at a point where we are accepting excuses and championing misogyny under the guise of freedom of speech, without challenging the harm it really does.

It seems that society is at a point of total desensitization where there is more interest in Tate losing an argument with Greta Thunberg, posing with a cigar on an exotic beach for likes, than really acknowledging the bigger picture. Andrew Tate has been accused of rape and human trafficking. The worst thing is, this is not the first time that he has been accused of horrific crimes – and with the audio evidence that was released to the press recently, he should be in prison. But with the issues that permeate the Met police there is no surprise as to why he has been given the green light to continue his violent behaviour. But this is not just a UK issue.  There has been a large amount of support overseas with young men and boys marching in masses in support of Tate, so I cannot be surprised that he was able to and continues to build a platform that celebrates and promotes horrendous treatment of women.

For many the progression of a fair and equal society is an aspiration, but for the supporters of the Tate’s in the world they tend to lean on the notion that they are entitled to more, and to acquire what they think they are owed, and will behave to the extreme of toxicity. While it is easy to fixate on a pantomimic villain like Tate to discuss his problematic use of language and how this translates in schools, the bigger picture of institutionalised patriarchy is always being missed.

It is important to unpick the toxic nature of our society, to understand the contributing factors that have allowed Andrew Tate and others like him to be such influential figures.

Youth or Adult: can you tell?

This week’s blog begins with a game: youth or adult, secure estate in England and Wales. Below are some statements, and you simply need to guess (educated guesses please), whether the statement is about the youth, or adult secure estate. So, are the statements about children in custody (those under the age of 18 years old) or adults in custody (18+). When you’re ready…

  • 70% decrease in custody in comparison to 10 years ago
  • Segregation, A.K.A Solitary Confinement, used as a way of managing the most difficult individuals and those who pose a risk to themselves or others
  • Racial disproportionality in relation to experiencing custody and being remanded to custody
  • Self-harm is alarmingly high
  • 1/3 have a known mental health disability
  • Homelessness after release is a reality for a high proportion of individuals
  • Over half of individuals released from custody reoffend, this number increases when looking at those sentenced to 6months of less

How many did you answer youth secure estate, and how many adult secure estate? Tally up! Did you find a 50/50 split? Did you find it difficult to answer? Should it be difficult to spot the differences between how children and adults are treated/experience custody?

All of the above relate specifically to children in custody. The House of Commons Committee (2021) have argued that the secure estate for children in England and Wales is STILL a violent, dangerous set of environments which do little to address the needs of children sentenced to custody or on remand. Across the academic literature, there is agreement that the youth estate houses some of the most vulnerable children within our society, yet very little is done to address these vulnerabilities. Ultimately we are failing children in custody! The Government said they would create Secure Schools as a custody option, where education and support would be the focus for the children sent here. These were supposed to be ready for 2020, and in all fairness, we have had a global pandemic to contend with, so the date was pushed to 2022: and yet where are they? Where is the press coverage on the positive impact a Secure School will make to the Youth estate? Does anyone really care? A number of Secure Training Centres (STCs) have closed down across the past 10 years, with an alarmingly high number of the institutions which house children in custody failing Ofsted inspections and HM Inspectorate of Prisons (2021) found violence and safety within these institutions STILL a major concern. Children experience bullying from staff, could not shower daily, experience physical restraint, 66% of children in custody experienced segregation which was an increase from the year prior (HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2021). These experiences are not new, they are re-occurring, year-on-year, inspection after inspection: when will we learn?

The sad, angry, disgusting truth is you could have answered ‘adult secure estate’ to most of the statements above and still have been accurate. And this rings further alarm bells. In England and Wales, we are supposed to treat children as ‘children first, offenders second’. Yet if we look to the similarities between the youth and adult secure estate, what evidence is there that children are treated as children first? We treat all offenders the same, and we treat them appallingly. This is not a new argument, many have raised the same points and concerns for years, but we appear to be doing very little about it.

We are kidding ourselves if we think we have a separate system for dealing with children who commit crime, especially in relation to custody! It pains me to continue seeing, year on year, report after report, the same failings within the secure estate, and the same points made in relation to children being seen as children first in England and Wales: I just can’t see it in relation to custody- feel free to show me otherwise!

References:

House of Commons Committees (2021) Does the secure estate meet the needs of young people in custody? High levels of violence, use of force and self-harm suggest the youth secure estate is not fit for purpose [Online]. Available at: https://houseofcommons.shorthandstories.com/justice-youth-secure-estate/index.html. [Last accessed 4th April 2022].

HM Inspectorate of Prisons (2021) Children in Custody 2019-2020: An analysis of 12-18-year-old’s perceptions of their experiences in secure training centres and young offender institutions. London: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons.