Hell hath no fury like a man with no porn — particularly if the man in question is serving ten to fifteen for aggravated armed robbery. In response to the Connecticut Department of Correction's announcement that all material containing "pictorial depictions of sexual activity or nudity" would be banned following the next year, a group of furious prisoners have initiated an angry letter-writing campaign, arguing that the ban violates their First Amendment rights. According to a spokesperson for the Department of Correction, the ban is intended to improve working conditions for staffers who might have been inadvertently exposed to porn, as well as minimizing harassment against female guards.

Anyone who's ever seen at least the opening credits to Oz knows that people in jail are slightly quicker to anger than people who are, well, not in jail, and the inmates in the Connecticut correctional facilities are no exception. So far, the Department of Correction has received over three dozen letters from prisoners, suggesting that the ban either be overturned or modified to allow access to "cable programming that offers and displays nudity, also sexual activity." Because this applies to absolutely everything on cable television today, it's safe to say that if this proposal is adopted, the Department of Correction will have the last laugh when prison programming is restricted to Nancy Grace's nipple slip (NSFW, kinda) on Dancing with the Stars.

Still, while it's difficult to get up in arms over a convicted felon's constitutional right to watch two blond girls in Lucite heels get it on, the ban could have disturbing consequences for the censorship of non-pornographic materials. "Similar regulations have been used to censor an image of the Sistine Chapel, newspapers and magazines with lingerie ads, and the novel Ulysses," Connecticut ACLU executive director Andrew Schneider recently said in a statement. Sure, we want our federal penitentiary employees to have the best possible working conditions, but do they have to come at the expense of a prisoner discovering the works of James Joyce or Michelangelo? Then again, I can't say that I recall Brother Vern Schillinger ever reading Proust's Remembrance of Things Past on Oz, so maybe the Connecticut Department of Correction has a point. 

Commentarium (9 Comments)

Oct 11 11 - 11:22am
fistix

they should only be able to watch Lifetime or Oxygen and their food should be laced with estrogen.

Oct 11 11 - 11:53am
Lawrence

They censored Ulysses in prison? What for? "If we give them 25 years to read Ulysses, they might actually figure it out!"

Oct 11 11 - 2:59pm
nope

Really? It's a very sexual book that has a graphic masturbation scene and a long history of censorship.

Oct 11 11 - 4:38pm
VBN

If they want porn, let them try out good behavior for it. Make it a reward and a privilege, not a right.

Oct 12 11 - 8:59am
Dean

Yeah, I'm sure prisoners will be much better-behaved if they're sexually frustrated in addition to everything else.

Oct 15 11 - 10:27am
maryrose

please i will like you to contact me through my Email maryrosekhalifa1@yahoo.com
then i will explaine my self to you and send you my picture, i love your profile

Oct 23 11 - 1:28pm
Wildwest

This is the stupid! Here's the choice, let these guys beat off two naked women OR have some of them beat up 90 pound weaklings and have unprotected BUTT SEX with them.

This fulfills the prophesy, 'The prisons would be transformed from a place that offers rehabilitation and punishment to punishment only. We should expect the recidivism rate to sky rocket even more!

Nov 20 11 - 11:07pm
Nelda

Great atrilce but it didn't have everything—I didn't find the kitchen sink!

Nov 21 11 - 2:34pm
tjmdkd

IjHJkp fvmosxxzxqqq