Pervasive Social Control: How Merit Shapes Authorities’ Perception

This chapter documents the use of discretion by those in charge of enforcing rules and implementing programs, using the moral category of deservingness. Drawing from Cohen's definition of social control (1991), it offers an analysis of the concepts of desert and merit, distinguishing between the two and highlighting the interactional nature of desert—a primary lens for judging individuals and, consequently, disciplining them. Beginning with the semantic distinction between desert and merit, the chapter argues that individual actions are always evaluated in the context of the person's biographical history, contributing to the formation and reinforcement of a specific idea of deservingness. In the second part of the chapter, the discussion focuses on the achievements commonly assessed as deserving, often merged with objective criteria of merit-based assessments, as they typically rely on pre-existing gender norms (Simpson, 2020). Accordingly, the gender bias in the exercise of discretionary power is examined in-depth, retracing the discriminatory evaluation criteria and stigmatizing stereotypes within the prison system. In doing so, a conceptual framework is presented, depicting the prison as a gendered organization that utilizes sex segregation as a disciplinary tool.