Greetings, bro! It was great talking with you again on the telephone yesterday afternoon. BRADFORD TOUCHES BASE WITH SANITY! At least that’s how I felt after our conversation. Sometimes I do wonder if I’ve gone mad when I wasn’t paying attention, or if the people around me have beat me to it. It isn’t any particular kind of thinking or behavior that shakes me out of my tree as much as it is the combination of thought patterns and behaviors in general that unnerves me sometimes. I try not to listen, but it is as though the perpetrators want you to hear them.

One of the most personally offensive types of conversations are those where a small group (between three to six inmates) will gather around and listen to a loudmouth braggart describe his violence against his victims. This gross individual will gave a play-by-play account of his attack, even imitating the screams of pleading and terror of the victim. He will say in a high, quavering and pleading voice, "Oh, God!" And the entire group will burst out laughing. They will repeat the victim's entreaty with glee as though the victim’s terror is wonderfully exciting.

These moments are when I have doubts about how much I have really changed, because I want to go over to the group and start smashing their faces to a bloody pulp, so that I could make them say, "Oh, God" with an entirely new understanding of those pleading words. Not simply as a racial issue, but more as a cultural issue, it is the black inmate describing his attacks of "soft" (weak) white folks (men and women). I say cultural issue because there are white inmates who share the hateful attitudes of the aforementioned. These types of individuals and groups proudly call themselves "niggers" (pronounced "niggah!") The term "nigger" is no longer applied to the color of a person’s skin, but now to the person’s behavior. The new American "nigger" is the incarcerated and the ex-felon, regardless of race, color or creed. It is an equal opportunity endeavor to become a "nigger." Anyone can! One of the gang rap slogans stated astutely, "Niggers say Bitches; Bitches say Niggers; all the rest, shut the fuck up!"

This behavior mode isn’t simply an effect and affect of an environment alone, it is primarily a matter of CHOICE! Most of the sociopathic jerks who behave so obnoxiously and violently will try to convince an authority that they are simply a product of their environment; that the deprivation they smear everywhere they go, on everything they touch,is not their "fault." For such blacks, as those who pride themselves being "niggers," it is usually some "white muhfukker’s fault. For such whites who pride themselves as being "niggers," it is usually and simply the fault of the "system," and the white bitches who run it (authorities).

The majority of decent human beings, black and white alike, are scorned by the new "nigger" element of our contemporary society. They are viewed as "soft" (weak) and as "pieces of meat" [Unka Toms, Oreos (black on the outside--white on the inside) for the decent blacks; Pink bitches, "hoes," white muhfukkahs, white boy, for the decent whites). If you are outside the cliques, but still hold a degree of respect for whatever skill or ability you possess (position, strength, or psychopathic potential) you are called "Dude" by the sociopathic elements.

Another interesting situation that always impressed me in my thinking beyond the confines of the prison setting was the oddity of seeing thieves hating to be stolen from, to seeing rapists scream out in anger and anguish when they are being raped, and watching bullies protest against someone bullying them, and to watch the murderer fear for his life when it is threatened. Amazing! I would think that those persons who have undoubtedly rationalized their own hurtful behaviors on others should accept such behaviors against themselves when they run into persons with personalities like their own. I mean, when a boxer steps into a boxing ring, he expects to face another fighter who will be hitting him in return. When an opposing boxer hits him, he doesn’t cry out that it isn’t fair, does he? Hell no! He just keeps on hitting back, hoping that his punches will win the fight in the end. If he loses, he doesn’t try to have his opponent arrested or try to get a weapon and get even for his loss in the ring. But you should see the changes convicted felons go through when someone wrongs them! Wow! The same is most notably true of the liar. A liar cannot stand to be lied to; they become irate and nearly aghast, especially when someone in authority lies to them I heard them rant and rave about the caseworker who has lied to them about some issue, time and time again.

One time, I asked such an offended complainer why, he was so ticked-off about being lied to by his caseworker. He said, "I can’t stand a fuckin’ liar! I’m a man of my word, and I can’t stand being lied to!"

I asked him if he plead guilty to his charge in a court of law. He said, "Hell no! I’m not stupid!"

I asked, "Were you guilty of the charge?"

"Well, sure; but you don’t cop out to the man. I pled not guilty and made ‘em take it to the ‘box.’"

I said incredulously, "You lied?"

"Fuck no! It ain’t the same thing! Nobody tells the truth in the courtroom unless you are a lame or just plain want to go to prison."

I agreed with him, but it was hard to keep the smile off of my face as I turned and walked away.

It comes back not so much to "duplicity" as much as it seems to be a "point of view" issue. I remember daydreaming about what it might be like if a lamb and a wolf could be interviewed about their stations in life and how Nature had assigned them roles in the scheme of things. I would ask the wolf how he saw himself in relation to his interaction with the lamb, and his answer might go something like, "Well, I don’t particularly enjoy getting all that wool in my mouth when I rip its throat out when I kill it. But the blood and meat are good; satisfying. It's a meal, ya know? It tries to run away, but doesn’t put up much fight at all; easy dinner!"

Then, if I were able to ask the same question of the lamb, I might get a response something like, "Personally, I think it sucks! I don’t bother the wolf; why does the wolf bother me? Why can’t the wolf eat grass like I do? Nature messed up if you ask me!"

Then, reaching real far out, I’d venture to ask "Nature" why the relationship was not mutually beneficial for the lamb and the wolf. The answer might go something like, "Why bother to ask? Do you really think you’d understand if I told you? While you’re at it, why do you eat lamb? Why don’t you eat wolf? If you understood nature, you wouldn’t even ask about things obviously over your head. How about working on a real question, like ‘What is the meaning of life...’ if you really want to confuse yourself."

a—2l

Dear R.,

Greetings, again, my friend. I found an open electrical outlet and decided to write more while I have the opportunity.

This might be a good time to write some personal observations while my hatred for prison life in general isn’t at such a high pitch that it spills over onto the prisoners. All inmates in prison are not corrupt, evil and full of hatred. There are actually some decent human beings who make mistakes, bad choices, and get into trouble with the law. I’m not saying these are innocent people in prison on a "bum rap." Many of these decent people had behaved inappropriately and committed serious crimes. But these are the type of people who accept responsibility and try to do something about becoming a better person. Usually, these people keep a low profile in the prison setting and try to stay out of the way.

This type of person is not to be confused with the "penitentiary slick" who usually finds his way into the "Rehabilitated" spotlight. They go through self-improvement programs intellectually with flying colors. These are the "cutsie-pies" that Administrators love to show off on community tours at Juvenile and High School settings for anti-crime speaking engagements. These are usually model inmates who have attractive appearances; like the boy next door or better. These are the "golden boys" who reflect the hollowness and shallowness of rehabilitation as endorsed and as practiced by such inmates today.

Some of these shining examples of them really believe they are the real McCoy. That is the sad part, because there is no real issue of conscious duplicity or dishonesty going on. They can act out their new "reformed" roles smoothly, spewing out touching phrases of behavioral wisdom; I shall go and sin no more...etc. The tragic part comes when the facade breaks down in real life settings in the larger community at a later date. The harsh reality of what lies deep in this individual’s core comes to surface to be acted out in unacceptable behaviors.

I really do feel sorry for this type of individual, because when this person messes up again in the larger community, they are as shocked as the people who had faith in their having been rehabilitated or reformed. Usually, in this state of shock, blame is tossed about liberally, in all directions, by all parties concerned. This adds to the tragedy, when it isn’t even a "blaming" situation at all; it’s nobodys fault. It’s simply a matter of understanding that although "ignorance may be no excuse, it certainly could be an explanation." The ignorance lies in not realizing that true rehabilitation or being truly reformed cannot happen nor be sustained without internalizing the new values necessary to alter thinking and behavior processes beyond a simplistic "intellectual" understanding of what thinking and behavior is right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate, acceptable or unacceptable.

My personal theory is that the inmate (or anyone desiring to internalize change away from criminal behaviors) must learn to "emotionalize" their understanding about crime and criminal behavior. The individual must learn the significance of personal values and the rationale of value formation. This might begin to sound complex, but it can be simplified to workable levels. I use an analogy that usually reaches even the illiterate and uneducated of my convicted peers. It is a rather base, if not downright nasty analogy, but it gets the point home to the individual.

I begin with asking such an individual, why they do what they do to get into trouble with the Law. These are usually the people who claim to be powerless against temptation to behave criminally when circumstances beyond their control seem to force them to do the wrong things. They seem aware that such behavior is seated in the seeming need to address their need for immediate gratification in their day-to-day lives. This is true of their behavior in the outside community, as well as in the prison community.

Then I ask the crucial question that I want to know if there is anything that they wouldn’t do to get what they want. This does seem to stump the average inmate because they are not usually accustomed to thinking in those terms. Some will ask for clarification of the question, and I ask if there isn’t anything they wouldn’t do for money, drugs, and/or sex. They think, and the answers vary; some say they wouldn’t kill; some wouldn’t steal; some wouldn’t hurt any family or friends for personal gain. I usually point out that there are many people who do that very thing in their criminal behaviors. So then I ask if there is any possible way they could convince themselves to eat a full bucket of pig shit for money, drugs, and/or sex. Most will screw-up their faces in disgust and say that I am asking stupid questions.

I press on, and ask them to answer my question honestly; to search their souls to see if there is any way they could be induced, by any circumstance of love, money, drugs, lust, greed, or any type of passion, to eat a full bucket of hot, steaming pig shit. By this time, the individual looks as though they are ready to fight me. They usually say, "No; fuck no!"

I try to get a confused look on my face, and I mention that if they had the same negative feelings about crime and criminal behavior, it is very unlikely that they would ever think of crime and behave criminally; so it must be a matter of "values" after all.

There is no law against eating a bucket of pig shit. There is no authority figure running around hassling people not to eat pig shit, and yet people would shun and ostracize you quicker for eating pig shit than they would for most criminal behavior; right?

There doesn’t seem to be any "intellectual" concerns against eating a full bucket of hot, steaming pig shit; it would seem that it is really an "emotional" issue. We might decide intellectually that it is an unacceptable behavior to eat pig shit because of societal "feelings" rather than intellectual arguments against such a practice. It’s just something a cool person would not do, regardless of their social station or....