I also thought I had made it clear by now that I simply have no patience for the idea that corrections officers, of any gender, deserve our sympathy if they should feel threatened by any non-violent behavior by inmates. She’s at risk of being raped? Not if she does her job competently, and not if her fellow officers do theirs competently. The entire power equation is stacked so thoroughly against the inmates that for corrections officers to admit to feeling threatened is, or ought to be, akin to an admission that they are unfit for the job.

You say she “doesn’t have a lot of choice” and “hasn’t consented” to seeing that. I’m saying, she made that choice when she took the job. Your position is about as sensible as a Mormon cop complaining because his job puts him in contact with drunk people.

If you make a person shit and shower subject to the full view of corrections officers and other inmates, and even lift his penis on command, it’s simply unreasonable to expect him not to touch his penis except in the privacy he doesn’t have. That’s all I’m saying.

Well, not quite all. I’m also saying it’s unjust and inhumane. Piling on. Schoolyard bullying. Contemptible. Hypocritical. Lame. Weak. Like that.

By the terms of her job and her duties, she doesn’t have a lot of choice about being in a position where she has to watch him doing it. Therefore, he’s getting off by exposing her to a sex act she presumably doesn’t want to be exposed to and hasn’t consented to.

It’s not a whole lot different from a customer groping a waitress as she goes about her job, or saying dirty things to her and getting off on it.

After reading the details of the case more closely, I have to agree that it does sound like this particular guard is abusing her authority. The fact that she’s brought similar charges on seven separate occasions and was secluded in an observation room dissuades my initial empathy for her situation.

I will contest the notion that prisoners or detainees are “harmless” or “powerless”. In my experience (and especially for female employees who are often disregarded by co-workers and inmates alike), the detainees often have equal or more power than the staff. In this case, it was my mistaken understanding that Veal was in close proximity with Alexander, and was specifically targeting her in an attempt to assert a “predator/victim” dynamic. If that were the case, my initial criticisms would stand. However, since it does not appear she was being groomed or targeted, I can’t reasonably argue on her behalf.

Sorry for the conclusion jumping, and thanks for the comment clarification. Serves me right for reading blogs before dawn–

Nobody doubts that prisoners do what you describe. Indeed, the August ’07 Harper’s Magazine excerpts a list of prisoner slang that includes the word “gunner”, defined as “a prisoner who masturbates while looking at a female corrections officer.”

I also cannot dispute that she’s within her (legal) rights to go after him. My criticism is for the framework of laws and policies making that possible. He’s powerless and helpless, and kept that way at great expense and difficulty. His actions, although offensive, are harmless. I’m not convinced that sexual harassment is theoretically possible when inflicted by someone without power, since I’m not sure there can be harassment without threat. Nor am I convinced that the concept of a right to avoid a “hostile work environment” makes much sense in a prison, which is pretty much gonna be that no matter what you do, and she knew the job was unpleasant when she took it.