Discussion: Feminism and Carceral Justice (Term Paper Sample)

Feminism and Carceral Justice
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Submission Due Date
Feminism and Carceral Justice
Carceral feminism is the advocacy that enhances and increases prison sentences that deal with gender and feminist issues (Terwiel, 2020). It is a belief that longer and harsher prison sentences will assist in finding solutions to these issues. Carceral feminism was coined by a sociologist feminist known as Elizabeth Bernstein in her article of 2007. Bernstein articulated that feminist support in the anti-trafficking laws, which equate prostitution to sex trafficking, has undermined the sex worker's efforts in past decades for the organization of their rights and instead of supporting their criminalization. In her article, 'Carceral politics as Gender Justice?' (Bernstein, 2012). Bernstein went ahead to expand on this analysis by using the case of the anti-trafficking movement to show how feminism has become a tool of punitive politics abroad and in the United States. She concluded by urging more and greater nuanced attention to the functioning of sexual and gender politics in the mainstream in the analyses of the contemporary punishment modes and careful consideration of the neoliberal carceral state, which is in the discussion of feminists on sexuality, gender, and the law (Lerum et al., 2015). Feminism helps one to understand Carceral Justice in several ways.
Halley (2008) employed Bernstein's argument similarly to narrate a specific type of feminist justice-seeking in the International Criminal Law and International Humanitarian Law, whose aim is to particularize and elevate sexual violence crimes by horizontal and vertical juridical reform. Here, carceral feminism aims to move sexual violence upon the criminality ladder and also impose sentences that are tougher on the perpetrators while at the same time separating sexual offenses from other offenses for it to be made possible for the accusation of charges of rape and sexual violence alone. Although Halley is not clear on this point, it could signify that carceral feminism is considered a subset of what she refers to as 'governance feminism.' It is theoretically tenable to postulate carceral feminism as another facet of broader current feminism that seeks to engage juridical strategies and human rights discourse to obtain women's social justice (Heiner et al., 2017). To obtain a suitable means to secure the juridical guarantees of a certain freedom, whether negative or positive. Most probably in the negative form, this means that people who violate other people's rights should be subjected to sanctions and penalties as an inherent form of punishment to respond to violation and serve as a deterrent to others.
Many modern feminists are open to the rejection of criminal law, but they need assurance that programs that are non-criminal will work. There are non-profit service programs and several states which are designed for the prevention and remedy of abuse. Many take a community and holistic approach like API Chaya in Seattle. Some take Community Restorative Justice Solutions in California Contra Costa and pilot the restorative-justice alternative programs of the court. Thomas Mathiesen, a prison abolitionist in the year 1986, warned that instead of helping in the construction of alternatives that become add-ons to prison solutions, we should view it as a task in an attempt toward shrinking the system (Mathiesen, 2005). Kim (2018) articulates that add-on phenomenon frequently in the context of gender violence, as transformative ideas and programs of activists are taken over by court administrators and prosecutors and become another reason for maintaining penal intervention.
Throughout the history of most nations, women who break the law, women who are criminally victimized, and women in the justice system as professionals have been ignored at large. The plight of women who were victimized was overlooked for many years because of sexism institutionalized in the legal system. Criminal justice professionals and women offenders have remained invisible, laboring in the excuse that professionals and female offenders make up a minor percentage of the criminal justice system. This logic has been undermined recently, as women's participation in the criminal justice system has dramatically increased. For instance, many women today work in the justice system as judges, lawyers, and police officers. Feminists lobbying the efforts have strengthened laws that deal with crimes against women like sexual assault, stalking, battering, and sexual harassment. As offenders, the attention is recently on women since the number of imprisoned women has increased in the United States over the last two decades. Some issues are unique in the criminal justice system for women, and they include a disadvantaged status that results from their class, race, and gender. As offenders, researchers have made conclusions that African-American women undergo harsher treatment in the system of criminal justice from when the decision to be arrested is made through sentencing than white women.
A department of Human Rights Watch in the United States reported that criminal sexual contact, sexual abuse or assault, rape, and other misconduct by staff of the correctional facilities are continuing and severe challenges in women's prisons (Culley, 2012). These offenses have been tolerated at both the departmental and institutional levels for quite some time. The Michigan Department of Corrections was required to reduce access to areas that are secluded and one-one contact between inmates and male staff, implementing a policy of knocking and announcing that male staff announces their presence before entering areas where prisoners undress. The other measure was to increase the presence of the female staff in the units of housing and restrict pat-downs of cross-gender by a male officer, make reasonable efforts in limiting staff in women's housing units and maintain areas where prisoners use the bathroom, shower, and dress free of observation by the male staffs. The Michigan Department of corrections passed a policy whereby only female correction officers will be assigned to transportation duties and housing units in women's prisons. This decision was made to curb the male guards' persistent and systemic sexual abuse of the female prisoners. A bona fide occupational qualification was revised by the Court of Appeals in the United States, realizing that gender was a bona fide occupational qualification for positions in question. The court's decision was based on prisoners' privacy interests, security, and safety. 
On security, the court found out that security concerns supported the designation of female-only positions in question. The presence of male officers in the housing units of females imperiled security in various ways. For instance, the presence of male guards in housing units necessitated artificial security barriers; false sexual abuse allegations created a poisoned atmosphere, and male guards who feared false allegations were unable to do their duties of disciplining and monitoring inmates proactively. Women guards were at risk of being assaulted by male sex offenders, undermining women's ability to provide security. For safety, the court believed that eliminating male offers is necessary to safeguard female prisoners from sexual abuse. Sexually abused inmates endured the actual abuse and faced pregnancy risk and disease (Lerum et al., 2015). The movement of feminists pushed hard to implement an equal employment paradigm. Hence, many feminists are within equal employment camps, and in this context, they are protecting female inmates. Feminists are correct in maintaining a high sensitivity to policies motivated by sex-based stereotypes. A feminist decision was made by the Michigan Departmen