No abstract

The traditional literature on homosexuality in prisons employed an essentialist approach that held that sexuality was a static trait. To avoid the apparent contradiction that occurred when researchers were forced to explain how heterosexual men engaged in homosexual behavior, the literature shifted its focus to rape. Rape victims, prostitutes, and rapists were then defined as situational homosexuals, which served to blur the distinction between consensual sexual acts and coercive ones. This study examines correctional officers' attitudes toward homosexuality and prostitution to determine whether they reflect an essentialist approach to prison sexuality. It also examines officers' ability to distinguish between these various types of acts.

Traditionally, police officers have viewed domestic "disputes" as private, family matters. In the 1960s and 1970s, officers were trained not to arrest the perpetrators of domestic violence. Instead, officers were trained to defuse the situation. Some police agencies even developed domestic dispute teams that coupled police and social service workers to mediate these disputes (

No abstract

This paper analyses homosexuality in male prisons and argues that the essentialist approach has dominated research in this area. Essentialists define homosexuality as a static trait and dichotomize sexuality into two categories, homosexuals and heterosexuals. A review of the literature on male homosexuality suggests that an essentialist approach resulted in a paradoxical situation in which researchers were forced to account for "normal" heterosexuals who engaged in situational homosexual behavior while in prison; because the very existence of "situational homosexuality" was inconsistent with essentialist definitions of homosexuality, researchers instead shifted the focus to sexual deprivation and then proceeded to include rape in typologies that purported to address homosexuality. Thus, distinctions between consensual homosexual behavior and rape were blurred. As a result of this conceptual ambiguity and because of paradigmatic changes in the study of homosexuality, there is a tremendous void in the literature on homosexuality in prison. This paper argues that a social constructionist approach would add to our understanding of homosexuality in male prisons.