MARCH 2014
GUEST
adulthood milestones help contribute
to social control and conformity, argue
Hagan and Uggen. When a person is
systematically excluded from achieving
adulthood milestones inside and outside
of prison, I call this exclusionary recidivism. As a process, exclusionary recidivism begins when former inmates are
categorized as unworthy of socioeconomic assistance and denied the traditional rights of citizenship. In turn, ‘anti-citizens’ are prevented from engaging
in society and do not have equal access to
opportunities, which ultimately propels
them back into the criminal justice system. Providing the theoretical foundation for exclusionary recidivism, Braithwaite writes that reintegrative shaming
occurs during the process of
reintegration and reabsorption
into society when a person or
group is shamed on account of
their perceived or actual antisocial behavior. Those affected
by incarceration internalize this
shame, causing them to react
angrily and defiantly toward
society according to Scheff &
Retzinger and Sherman. This
process of shaming and reactionary defiance creates public discourses labeling people as ‘super
antisocial’ or unsalvageable by society.
The idea that someone or a group is
unsalvageable is at the heart of exclusionary public policy that increases socioeconomic inequality. For example,
Wilkerson et al. and Ward argue the presumption that the ‘promiscuous nature’
of low-income black females caused
increases in premarital births and perpetual poverty underscored conservative
efforts to limit access to welfare benefits
during the 1990s. This example shows
how those most impacted by inequality become labeled and demonized by
popular discourses preaching individualism, the American dream, and hard
work. As a result of these discourses,
socially disadvantaged groups are publically stereotyped as the loafing perpetrators of crime and anti ͽ