Inmate subculture refers to the distinct values, norms, and behaviors that develop among incarcerated individuals as they adapt to the prison environment. It forms due to the unique challenges and pressures inmates face, such as deprivation of basic needs, loss of autonomy, and isolation from the outside world. In response, inmates create their own social structure and rules to cope with these stressors and establish a sense of order and control (Wooldredge, 2020). The inmate subculture has a distinctive set of values, norms, and behaviors that arise within the prison environment. This essay will describe the inmate subculture, including the prison code, prison argot, and gender differences for male and female prisons.
The prison code is a vital component of the inmate subculture, as it shapes the behavioral expectations within the prison community. Adhering to the code is crucial for inmates’ social standing, demonstrating their ability to adapt to the prison environment and function within the established norms (Wooldredge, 2020). For example, an inmate who exhibits weakness or vulnerability may be targeted by others and become a victim of violence or exploitation. In contrast, those who display strength and emotional resilience are more likely to gain respect from their peers, which can offer a measure of protection and influence.
Prison argot serves as a means of communication and as a way to assert one’s identity and affiliation within the inmate subculture. This unique language includes slang terms, euphemisms, and code words that can obscure the meaning of conversations from prison staff or outsiders. Some examples of prison argot include “fish” (a new inmate), “kite” (a written message), “shot caller” (an inmate in a position of power), and “shank” (a homemade weapon) (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2020). The use of prison argot allows inmates to communicate covertly, enabling them to share information, plan activities, or discuss sensitive topics without drawing the attention of prison staff. Additionally, mastery of this specialized vocabulary can serve as a marker of an inmate’s experience and knowledge of the prison environment, further reinforcing their status within the subculture (Wooldredge, 2020). In this way, both the prison code and prison argot are essential aspects of the inmate subculture that shape the social dynamics and behavior of incarcerated individuals.
The social structure in women’s prisons differs from men’s in several ways. Male inmates often form hierarchical, competitive, and gang-based social structures. Women’s prisons tend to have a more cooperative and communal environment, with relationships centralizing the social order (Jewkes et al., 2019). Female inmates may develop strong emotional bonds and support networks, referred to as pseudo-families, which help them cope with the challenges of incarceration (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2020). The structural differences between male and female prisons reflect the unique needs and challenges their respective populations face. While male prisons often prioritize security and control, women’s prisons tend to focus on creating a therapeutic environment that fosters healing and addresses the root causes of criminal behavior. These distinctions are essential for developing gender-responsive policies and programs that effectively address the needs of both male and female inmates.
Understanding the complexities of inmate subculture is crucial for developing effective strategies to manage and rehabilitate offenders. The prison code and prison argot shape the social dynamics and behaviors within the prison environment, influencing inmates’ adaptation and ability to navigate incarceration’s challenges. Furthermore, acknowledging the differences in social structures and needs between male and female prisons is essential for creating gender-responsive policies and programs that cater to the unique challenges faced by each population. Ultimately, recognizing and addressing the intricacies of inmate subculture and gender-specific differences in prison environments can lead to a more effective and compassionate approach to rehabilitation.
References
Jewkes, Y., Jordan, M., Wright, S., & Bendelow, G. (2019). Designing ‘Healthy’ Prisons for Women: Incorporating Trauma-Informed Care and Practice (TICP) into Prison Planning and Design. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), 3818. Web.
Schmalleger, F., & Smykla, J. O. (2020). Corrections in the 21st Century (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Wooldredge, J. (2020). Prison culture, management, and in-prison violence. Annual Review of Criminology, 3, 165-188. Web.