Absolutely not. They are a liability.
That said, they are no more a liability than a weaker male guard that can’t control the 400lb inmate. And therein is the problem with “qualifying” anyone. The job is as much technical performance if not more than physical. So where is the cut off for relative strength for a “qualified” candidate? Most CO’s cannot control that imaginary inmate one on one in your example. And women actually have an advantage where they can gain cooperation where a male guard might not.
I do believe it’s a bad idea overall. I just don’t know how you justify their exclusion other than to say “she’s a woman, she shouldn’t be working here”, and that doesn’t cut it. [/quote]
I think the rape incentive should be enough.
I’m not aware of any real risk of a CO being raped. Men rape men in prison, does that make male CO’s at risk for rape? I think your logic is flawed. CO’s work in teams, units, platoons, whatever. It’s not like some female CO will be assigned to the showers by herself to be “taken advantage of”
I think the ONLY answer is to have standards for hire that apply across the board and are not adjusted for sex. If there is a physical element for qualification, it is the same for men AND women and it hasn’t been watered down so that women can meet it. If they create a fair physical standard (to the extent the job is “physical”) and as woman can pass that standard, she should not be precluded from employment.
That said, there IS an issue of potential impropriety where mixed sexes are involved. There have been cases of CO misconduct with opposite sex inmates. However, I’m guess such misconduct is pretty anomalous coming from a female to a male prisoner. Male CO’s in female prisons would be at much higher risk for misconduct than their female counterparts in my opinion. [/quote]
Probably an accurate opinion. I just might be biased on a certain issue.
But if the standards are the same for both sexes, sure, that makes sense, but I still don’t think the inmates will treat them as equal.
It’s not politically correct, or ‘fair’, but I think it’s realistic. If a female CO works in a women’s prison, perfect, but I think it’s kind of silly for her to work in a male prison, and vice versa.[/quote]
Don’t you think a female CO could have an advantage over a male CO in gaining compliance in some situations? Many of these inmates haven’t had the best mothers if their lives. Some of those mothers were probably here on Tnation posting attention whoring pics instead of buying formula and paying attention to junior. And look at the fucker now! But seriously, don’t you think there’d be a natural inclination for a male inmate to yield to the reason of a woman in some situations and be less prone to be violent to a woman (barring sexual predators of course and the like)? Even criminals have some sense of chivalry. Unless you’re a sexual predator or abuser, it’s pretty difficult to be violent to a woman, not so difficult to wage violence against your fellow man, or male captor.
What got you on to this subject? I’m curious. [/quote]
I suppose, in minimum security situations, then yes, female psychology could be a plus. But dealing with ‘dangerous’ people, then, no, I think it’s reckless. And the women that choose to do it have something SERIOUS they feel they have to prove. Otherwise, they’d work elsewhere or in a women’s prison. I feel like men who want to work in a women’s prison would have similar issues, by the way…
Ad, as far as personal interest, suppose someone I cared about was sexually assaulted. Like I said, I’m biased. But a woman should’t set herself up for that shit, anymore than I would drop my pants in a dark alley and bend over.[/quote]
As I said, I don’t think a female CO is at any risk of rape whatsoever. They may risk assault like any c/o, but rape? No.