Well, I don’t want to create another problem that you have to solve, but I will say this: millions of people’s lives are shaped by the trauma of being caught in the American criminal punishment system. Especially in cases of wrongful incarceration, which do happen, and of oversentencing, which happen constantly, I think those people can meaningfully be described as victims. The types of letters that you were trying to defend are sometimes an important part of bringing home someone who either never broke a law, or has done a disproportionate amount of time for a law that they did break. When advocates for victims of sexual violence resort -- as several high profile ones did -- to arguing that these types of letters should not exist, that to send one is tantamount to condoning a crime, that remaining friends with someone who commits a crime is also tantamount to condoning that crime -- they send a message to every family member and friend of a prisoner, a message that is direct and unambiguous and absolutely dehumanizing.
Since you have been accused of centering the feelings of powerful white men, I will also note that your post says nothing about the feelings of these three C-list actors, all of whom I’m sure are total nightmares on a personal level. I saw you taking up in defense of an aspect of the criminal punishment system that is little discussed in public. I agree that it would be better and easier to defend these kinds of letters in the case of someone who isn’t a smug violent rapist. However, this is the case that the Discourse gave us to work with. It has nothing to do with whose feelings you were centering and everything to do with the fact that we rarely see much news about prison unless some famous asshole is involved. You saw a news event happen, and you saw arguments being made that have every likelihood of blowing up in the face of powerless people – it’s very easy to imagine, for example, some progressive prosecutor responding to this discourse cycle by saying “no more supportive letters for anyone,” and there goes some 83-year-old former drug dealer’s chances of parole. That’s just how this stuff works. There’s a news outcry about some truly loathsome murderer, and the system responds with more harshness, and next thing you know somebody has gotten life in prison under a “three strikes” law for stealing tapes from Blockbuster. You saw that happening, and you said something true in response.
My experience is that if you advocate for anything that makes life in prison in prison, and under our system, a little bit easier for anyone, the right, accuses you of being a smug, sheltered liberal who doesn’t understand that crime can hurt people, while the center left will accuse you of being soft on sexual assault. It just will happen sooner or later. My university tried to implement a policy by which anyone who is charged with a felony automatically gets fired. My union pressed back on this, pointing out that, for example, it would mean that a woman could be fired for killing her abuser. Even people who consider themselves a very progressive got mad at us and accused us of being soft on faculty rapists. No messaging strategy success. Worrying about people in prison just feels so wrong on a gut level to so many people that you’re always fighting uphill. It goes with the territory. As someone whose close family member did 20 years for a murder that he didn’t commit, I appreciate you taking the heat on our behalf this time. He was also a victim. His daughter is also a victim. We are also victims. On my reading, you were not speaking on behalf of this rapist asshole who I’m glad is not free to hurt any more people. You were speaking in defense of us.
I appreciate your thoughtful response to the thoughtful responses about your thoughtful response to the thing that happened. As a society, there will always be layers of context and meaning we have to sift through as we sort out our ideas, ideas that are deeply intermingled with our stories, and the challenges our personally held convictions face in the midst of all of our stories. “Peacekeeping” is an impossible task.
Thank you for your response and openness to engage with criticism. I think both these posts share a fuller picture of the gap of justice our country refuses to acknowledge.
Well, I don’t want to create another problem that you have to solve, but I will say this: millions of people’s lives are shaped by the trauma of being caught in the American criminal punishment system. Especially in cases of wrongful incarceration, which do happen, and of oversentencing, which happen constantly, I think those people can meaningfully be described as victims. The types of letters that you were trying to defend are sometimes an important part of bringing home someone who either never broke a law, or has done a disproportionate amount of time for a law that they did break. When advocates for victims of sexual violence resort -- as several high profile ones did -- to arguing that these types of letters should not exist, that to send one is tantamount to condoning a crime, that remaining friends with someone who commits a crime is also tantamount to condoning that crime -- they send a message to every family member and friend of a prisoner, a message that is direct and unambiguous and absolutely dehumanizing.
Since you have been accused of centering the feelings of powerful white men, I will also note that your post says nothing about the feelings of these three C-list actors, all of whom I’m sure are total nightmares on a personal level. I saw you taking up in defense of an aspect of the criminal punishment system that is little discussed in public. I agree that it would be better and easier to defend these kinds of letters in the case of someone who isn’t a smug violent rapist. However, this is the case that the Discourse gave us to work with. It has nothing to do with whose feelings you were centering and everything to do with the fact that we rarely see much news about prison unless some famous asshole is involved. You saw a news event happen, and you saw arguments being made that have every likelihood of blowing up in the face of powerless people – it’s very easy to imagine, for example, some progressive prosecutor responding to this discourse cycle by saying “no more supportive letters for anyone,” and there goes some 83-year-old former drug dealer’s chances of parole. That’s just how this stuff works. There’s a news outcry about some truly loathsome murderer, and the system responds with more harshness, and next thing you know somebody has gotten life in prison under a “three strikes” law for stealing tapes from Blockbuster. You saw that happening, and you said something true in response.
My experience is that if you advocate for anything that makes life in prison in prison, and under our system, a little bit easier for anyone, the right, accuses you of being a smug, sheltered liberal who doesn’t understand that crime can hurt people, while the center left will accuse you of being soft on sexual assault. It just will happen sooner or later. My university tried to implement a policy by which anyone who is charged with a felony automatically gets fired. My union pressed back on this, pointing out that, for example, it would mean that a woman could be fired for killing her abuser. Even people who consider themselves a very progressive got mad at us and accused us of being soft on faculty rapists. No messaging strategy success. Worrying about people in prison just feels so wrong on a gut level to so many people that you’re always fighting uphill. It goes with the territory. As someone whose close family member did 20 years for a murder that he didn’t commit, I appreciate you taking the heat on our behalf this time. He was also a victim. His daughter is also a victim. We are also victims. On my reading, you were not speaking on behalf of this rapist asshole who I’m glad is not free to hurt any more people. You were speaking in defense of us.
Last para should say “consider themselves very progressive” and “No messaging strategy fixes this”, sorry, dictating in haste
I appreciate your thoughtful response to the thoughtful responses about your thoughtful response to the thing that happened. As a society, there will always be layers of context and meaning we have to sift through as we sort out our ideas, ideas that are deeply intermingled with our stories, and the challenges our personally held convictions face in the midst of all of our stories. “Peacekeeping” is an impossible task.
I've always admired your humility.
Thank you for your response and openness to engage with criticism. I think both these posts share a fuller picture of the gap of justice our country refuses to acknowledge.
I was not offended by the post. However, I do appreciate your transparency. Keep up the good work.