GENDER, RACE, AND SYMBOLIC BOUNDARIES:

CONTESTED SPACES OF IDENTITY AMONG

ARAB AMERICAN ADOLESCENTS
KRISTINE J. AJROUCH*
Eastern Michigan University

ABSTRACT: Attention to social patterns within immigrant groups

provides a critical means for discerning processes of ethnic identity forma-
tion. This study draws from the theoretical foundations of boundary work
to examine identity formation among second-generation Arab American
adolescents. Contested spaces of identity emerge as teens distinguish them-
selves from immigrant culture and “white” society. Focus group discus-
sions highlight the significance of gender relations and the way in which
interpretations of religious teachings shape identity formation. Specifically,
boundaries drawn reflect moral superiority by controlling girls’ behaviors
as interpretations of religious teachings are used to justify restrictions.
However, while these boundaries provide significant markers of in-group
inclusion, they also are contested. This study concludes by discussing the
implications of symbolic boundaries lodged in race, gender, and religion
and suggests avenues for future research.

Two prominent theoretical perspectives regarding identity formation among chil-

dren of immigrants are segmented assimilation (Portes and Rumbaut 2001) and
transnationalism (Levitt and Waters 2003). The former posits that among the second-
generation assimilation may occur upward or downward, depending on both
the social capital held by the immigrant group and the predominant culture of the
host society in which children of immigrants are enmeshed (e.g., Zhou and Bank-
ston 1998); the latter addresses identity formation by highlighting how regular
contact with parents’ country of origin contributes to this process (Espiritu and
Tran 2003; Kibria 2003). Yet with a few notable exceptions (Das Gupta 1997; Diner
1983; Espitiru 2001; Lopez 2003) the absence of gender relations in the articulation
of the boundaries that distinguish ethnic membership is a conspicuous omission
in the study of second-generation ethnic identity formation processes. This study
contributes to the emerging work on gender relations and ethnic identity by explor-
ing the mechanisms associated with activating and maintaining boundaries,

* Direct all correspondence: to Kristine J. Ajrouch, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminology, Eastern
Michigan University, 712 Pray-Harrold, Ypsilanti, MI 48197; e-mail: kajrouch@emich.edu.

Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 47, Issue 4, pp. 371–391, ISSN 0731-1214, electronic ISSN 1533-8673.
© 2004 by Pacific Sociological Association. All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photo-
copy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press’s Rights and Permissions website, at
http://www.ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm.
372 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

specifically, how adolescent children of Muslim immigrants from Lebanon and

Palestine define what it means to be “Arab.”
By examining how children of Lebanese and Palestinian immigrants describe
themselves ethnically, I address an ethnic group that is understudied but currently
the target of much attention, particularly in the wake of Arab-Muslim attacks on
U.S. soil and the resulting turmoil in the Middle East. Furthermore, I situate the
analysis within the framework of symbolic boundaries, defined by Lamont and
Molnar (2002:168) as “the tools by which individuals and groups struggle over
and come to agree upon definitions of reality.” The study of symbolic boundaries
is a promising theoretical framework for understanding the efforts by which indi-
viduals and groups discern identities (Lamont 1992; Lamont and Molnar 2002).
Boundary definitions are particularly relevant for second-generation immigrants
who must negotiate between parents’ and host cultures. An interesting case of
this boundary work may be found among people entering a society stratified by
race but who are not easily classified according to that system. I aim to construct
an emic portrait of identity negotiation among Arab American youth by demon-
strating how they use gender relations and religion as discourse and markers for
establishing the boundaries of their collective identity, negotiating between the
poles of an immigrant and “white” identity.

GENDER, ETHNICITY, AND IDENTITY

The significance of gender relations to boundary work among immigrants is most
aptly illustrated in the work of feminist sociologists. Feminist approaches challenge
conventional paradigms and draw attention to power relations within immigrant
groups. Contributions range from historical analyses that address how gender rela-
tions, or shifts in gender relations, help to demarcate identity parameters (Diner
1983; Doran 1997; Kaminsky 1994) to ethnographic approaches that discern how
gender relations shape the immigrant adaptation experience (Das Gupta 1997;
Hondagneu-Sotelo 1994; Menjivar 2000).
Research findings propose both liberating and constraining forces at work for
immigrant women. One ethnographic study of undocumented Mexican immi-
grants suggested that the status of women after such migration improves in vari-
ous ways, tending toward egalitarianism (Hondagneu-Sotelo 1994). However,
others argue that gender relations incur a dynamic that supports patriarchal
structures and in many ways increases traditional authority. For instance, Das
Gupta (1997) illustrates how the boundaries that differentiate second-generation
South Asian Indian women from other groups living in New York City involve
relations of power, gender hierarchies that serve to define authentic cultural char-
acteristics by assigning women the role of upholding tradition.
A recurring theme evident in the emerging work addressing the significance of
gender is the connection between morality and ethnic exclusivity. Boundary work
that involves gender relations often materializes in order to build and maintain
ethnic group characteristics and results in an assertion of moral superiority over
the dominant culture. Diner (1983) examines how gender relations contributed to
definitions of what it meant to be Irish in the United States in the late 1800s and
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 373

early 1900s. Irish immigrants did not necessarily believe that men were superior to
women; Irish women were looked up to as a cohesive force that kept families together
and guided children to move up from poverty to the middle class. However, Irish
immigrants, both first- and second-generation, adhered to the notion that men
and women occupied separate spheres, that women differed from men in essential
ways and should not attempt to emulate men (e.g. by voting). According to Diner,
both men and women understood that the different worlds they occupied ensured
order, balance, and rationality in their lives, which ultimately benefited everyone.
In a more recent analysis, Espiritu (2001) presents the situation of Filipinos in
the United States. She argues that assertions of moral superiority represent a strat-
egy of resistance as Filipinos are always viewed as cultural others, even when they
have been born in the United States. As racialized immigrants, Filipinos resist
subordination as a racial minority by asserting power through gender roles. Spe-
cifically, the site of “womanhood” is equated with traditional, ideal norms of
appropriate behavior, which then develop into the parameters by which lines are
drawn to indicate in-group membership and out-group status. Filipino identity is
lodged in chaste behavior among girls so that the defining line against which to
differentiate one as better than dominant society rests in that behavior. Ultimately,
moral superiority represents a strategy of resistance to the political and economic
subordination experienced by Filipino Americans.
Gender is a structuring mechanism that orders social life according to accepted
definitions of masculinity and femininity, and undertakings that seek to address
gender relations will invariably address relations of power (Connell 1987, 1995).
Gender is not relegated to a corner, impinging on a small area of social experience;
it structures the entire social gamut, from interpersonal relationships to the rela-
tionships people have with institutions. As such, gender relations intersect with
other stratifying forces, including race, class, and nationality (Connell 1995; Espir-
itu 1997). Indeed, the challenge in presenting research on gender relations among
Arabs and Arab Americans lies in the difficulty of superseding stereotypes. In
comparison to white American women, many ethnic and foreign women are pre-
sented as somehow especially oppressed, undervalued, and, above all, living in a
more patriarchal culture (Baca Zinn 1980; Kaminsky 1994; Lazreg 1994). The char-
acterization of Arab and Muslim women is no different. Conversations among non-
Arab feminists often take for granted a general consensus that Arab men unques-
tionably lack respect for women. This tendency is perhaps most obvious as customs
and norms (e.g., veiling) are presented void of context. Many American non-
Muslims assume that women who wear scarves are forced to do so. Yet studies that
explicitly address the scarf, or hijab, reveal that this act among Muslim women,
particularly in the United States, emerges out of an intricate web of motives, rang-
ing from family and community pressure to personal choice that may be regarded
with dismay by family and friends (Read and Bartkowski 2000; Shakir 1997).

RELIGION, IMMIGRATION, AND GENDER

Practices based on religious doctrine are often symbolic, rhetorically promulgat-
ing traditional male dominance. Yet interpretations of gender roles and relations
374 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

deriving from religious doctrine are frequently shaped by societal realities (Ebaugh
and Chafetz 1999, 2000; Read and Bartowski 2000). For instance, as Gallagher
and Smith (1999) discovered, conservative evangelical Christian families refer-
ence biblical notions of appropriate masculine and feminine roles (man as bread-
winner, woman as homemaker), yet also configure these ideals with the reality
of the economic downturn that has drawn women increasingly to the workforce
in order to maintain middle-class standards of living, producing what Gallagher
and Smith refer to as “pragmatic egalitarianism.” This work emphasizes how the
postindustrial economy informs rhetoric about gender roles among evangelicals and
highlights the process by which interpretations of religion shape gender relations.
The act of immigration affects interpretations of religion in significant ways
(Ebaugh and Chafetz 2000; Warner and Wittner 1998). It is not uncommon for
immigrant women to “do gender” in the sense of maintaining social ties through
food preparation and organizing family gatherings; however, as Ebaugh and
Chafetz (1999) point out, the reproduction of traditional culture in religious settings
occurs alongside a quest to challenge gender inequality inherent to the norms and
religious ideals underpinning that traditional culture. This is particularly relevant
for American-born and/or American-raised daughters, who begin to sense gender-
based inequities through religiously sanctioned traditional norms (Ebaugh and
Chafetz 1999).
The influence of religion on gender relations among the second generation
sometimes stems from the conditions of immigration. For example, George (1998)
found in his study of Christian immigrants from India that men immigrated as the
spouses of women who were recruited because of their nursing expertise. In this case,
immigration created a situation whereby men were marginalized because their
wives became the main economic supporters of the family. However, men found
status and power in the church. When their American-born daughters wanted to
share in church activities, the men (their fathers) attempted through gender dis-
course to block their participation. These immigrant men were unsuccessful in
blocking the young women, however, reasons they offered ranged from female
weakness and frailty to female sexuality. Boundaries based on gender attributes
emerged as a significant means by which men strove to capture a sense of power
and control.
The influence of religion on Arab American women’s gender role attitudes has
been addressed in the work of Read (Read 2003; Bartowski and Read 2003). In a
study of both Christian and Muslim Arab American women, Read (2003) discov-
ered religiosity and ethnicity had more to do with traditional gender attitudes
than did religious affiliation. In other words, regardless of being Muslim or Chris-
tian, attachment to ethnic community and high attendance at religious services
were associated with more traditional gender beliefs. Furthermore, not all Arab
American Muslim women agree that veiling is mandatory (Bartowski and Read
2003; Read and Bartowski 2000). Veiling among women living in the United States
can be seen to emerge through negotiations at the interpersonal level. While Mus-
lim women living in Austin, Texas, disagree about whether veiling is mandatory,
they do not consider it a basis to assert moral superiority over one another
(Read and Bartowski 2000). Interpretations of religious doctrine, and how those
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 375

interpretations frame individual and group behaviors, particularly in the realm of

gender and gender relations, encompass a critical area of inquiry regarding iden-
tity among children of immigrants.

THE STUDY
Adolescence is a key period in identity development (Erikson 1985; Rumbaut
1994). This life stage marks the first juncture at which individuals begin to social-
ize more frequently in various social contexts outside of the family. Tensions arise
between self-definitions and attributions of identity by family, peers, and the com-
munity or society, producing situations that are confirmed or contested. The indi-
vidual or group may choose to accept or reject identities, and this decision is often
based on exposure to prevailing norms and customs. As an exploratory project,
this study seeks to document the ways in which children of immigrants designate
the boundaries that differentiate themselves from others. The question I am inter-
ested in is, what parameters do children of Arab immigrants use to define them-
selves ethnically?
My approach to answering this question began broadly, with the intent to uncover
the meaning of an Arab ethnic identity. However, the discussions among the ado-
lescents I interviewed suggested significant structuring mechanisms that shape
identity boundaries, including gender relations as primary, which interact in vari-
ous ways with religious interpretations and understandings of racial categories.
As the data demonstrate, the identity choices and accompanying consequences
that confront second-generation Arab immigrants become a contested space of
negotiation in which gender becomes a critical factor.

The Setting
I conducted this study in Dearborn, Michigan, home to the largest concentra-
tion of Arab Americans living in the United States (Zogby 1990). The Arab com-
munity in Dearborn is composed of immigrants who entered the United States at
different points in time and with various educational, economic, and social back-
grounds. The largest group of Arab immigrants is from Lebanon, and among the
most recent is a significant proportion who tend to be well educated and prosper-
ous, along with a small number who come from the villages or rural areas of Leb-
anon (Aswad 1992).
East Dearborn is a working-class and lower-middle-class community that has
recently been referred to as “Little Beirut.” It is a community that strives for success,
with no purposeful attempt to re-create life as it was in the homeland. For instance,
there is no deliberate effort to replicate Middle Eastern architecture, and many
immigrants wear Western clothing. In addition, the businesses in this ethnic com-
munity seek to attract non-Arab clients (Walbridge 1997).
Although much of the social activity in East Dearborn tends to be community
and family centered (e.g., weddings become community events), other social-
izing among adolescents tends to be segregated by gender, and dating is not
openly accepted. Therefore, boys and girls generally engage in separate activities.
376 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

Arranged marriages are not the norm, but it is not uncommon for girls to become
engaged while still in high school and to marry immediately after graduation.
Most adolescent girls in the community do not wear the hijab, although begin-
ning at puberty, young women entering a mosque are expected to cover their hair.
The area setting provides an important backdrop to the analysis, as ethnic com-
munities often exert influence on the interactions that occur among and between
its members. That Dearborn represents a stronghold for those of Arab origin (see
Abraham and Shyrock 2000; Suleiman 1999) shapes the various challenges chil-
dren of immigrants living in this setting face as they come of age in an immigrant
community.

Methods
Studying a group where it constitutes the majority allows for an examination of
activities and social relationships defined as important by members of the com-
munity (Horowitz 1992). School settings often represent a microcosm of society
reflecting social patterns that shape daily experiences for those coming of age
(Bettie 2003; Olsen 2003). Moreover, the adolescent years provide an ideal oppor-
tunity to examine the phenomenon of ethnic identity announcements.

Participants
Throughout this article, I refer to the adolescents who participated in the study
by by the pan-ethnic terms “Arab” and “Arab American” (Shakir 1997; Zogby
1990). Participants volunteered to take part in a series of focus group discussions
by printing their names, telephone numbers, and addresses on a sheet of paper
that was circulated in their social studies classes near the end of the school year.
My primary informant allowed me a few minutes at the beginning of each of her
five social studies classes to recruit participants. At the end of the day, she and I
reviewed the list of volunteers, and based on agreement between the teacher and
me about which of the volunteers would interact comfortably yet contribute to a
varied discussion in terms of disposition and experience, I contacted each adoles-
cent and his or her parent(s) and went to their homes to introduce myself as well
as to obtain consent.
Eight of the ten participants—Lynn, Lama, Mariam, Zacharia, Houssam, Adel,
Abe, and Nabil—were of Lebanese descent. Raya identified with her Palestinian
ancestry; Hanan’s mother was born in Palestine and her father emigrated from
Tunisia. I refer to all participants by pseudonyms. Raya and Hanan’s national ori-
gins differed from the majority of the participants, whose families emigrated from
southern Lebanon, but they lived and attended school in a community that is pre-
dominantly Lebanese. All adolescent participants knew one another, although
some were closer friends than others. For instance, Hanan, Raya, and Lynn were
friends, Zacharia and Houssam were friends, and Lama and Mariam were friends.
The discussions that follow suggest that religion represents a more salient affili-
ation for the teens than does national origin. All of the adolescent participants
were Muslim. Only Lama wore the hijab. Most were born in the United States and
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 377

have lived in an ethnic community for most of their lives. Those who were born
overseas (Houssam, Lama, and Adel) immigrated to the United States before the age
of ten. Participants ranged in age from fourteen to fifteen and are best described
as coming from working-class families (i.e., most of their fathers worked “on the
line” in automobile factories or were employed in small businesses).

Focus Groups
Focus group interviews are especially useful for discovering those social char-
acteristics that distinguish a cultural group (Hughes and DuMont 1993). Focus
groups allow researchers to collect data about the language and words participants
use to structure their experiences and reveal how they think and talk. In addition,
the homogeneous characteristics of the group provide an environment in which
the participants tell detailed stories. This allows for an understanding of how par-
ticipants structure and organize their social worlds.
I organized and moderated three focus groups, which took place in early June
at the end of the school day. Although I did not grow up in East Dearborn or in an
Arab community and do not currently reside there, my Lebanese “roots” are sim-
ilar to those whom I interviewed. My maternal grandparents originate from
southern Lebanon and were of the peasant class, as are most of those immigrants
in this study. The fact that I am Arab and a Muslim facilitated access to the adoles-
cents, whose parents confided on many occasions that they would not have per-
mitted their children to participate otherwise.
The same adolescents participated in each focus group discussion over a ten-
day period. Each discussion lasted for approximately two hours. The first focus
group comprised five girls and two boys. The second group included the same
seven original participants with the addition of one more boy, and the third dis-
cussion group incorporated two more boys to allow for a more succinct under-
standing of the emerging gender issues. Keeping the original participants for all
three focus groups allowed me to gain insight into the adolescents’ attitudes and
experiences. They developed shared understandings about an array of situations
and also demonstrated areas that were contested. At our first meeting, partici-
pants were asked to introduce themselves and to describe the advantages and dis-
advantages of attending a school where most of the other students are Arab (see
Appendix). The questions addressed in the next two focus group discussions fol-
lowed from the topics that emerged in the first, thus providing an opportunity to
talk in some detail about issues that the adolescents themselves deemed impor-
tant. Questions that guided the bulk of the discussion emanated from statements
the adolescents made. For instance, in describing the advantages of going to a
school where the majority of students are Arab, the term “boater” arose. This trig-
gered a discussion that lasted the entire period about what a boater is and how
the participants differ from boaters. Two issues I did not introduce were gender
and religion. The adolescents’ narratives revealed that both represented signifi-
cant subjects that preoccupied their thoughts of being Arab. The primary subject
introduced and discussed by the adolescents involved the differential expecta-
tions for girls and boys by parents, peers, and the community. This brought up the
378 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

issue of how they differed from their non-Arab counterparts. I ended the last
focus group by having the adolescents address the question of whether or not
they believe they will continue to live in Dearborn when they become adults.
All interviews were audiotaped and then transcribed verbatim by the author.
The analysis consisted of a detailed reading of each interview (open coding), fol-
lowed by axial and selective coding (Strauss 1987; Strauss and Corbin 1990). Once
the initial themes were identified, connections between themes and subthemes
became apparent. This resulted in the development of master categories used to
set the parameters of the overall analysis (Strauss and Corbin 1990). The master
categories that guided this analysis are (1) boater and (2) white. Subthemes included
the categories of religion, restrictions, chastity, language, caring, and dating. It
became quite evident that gender relations are rooted in these poles of identity
and manifest in the subthemes. The findings draw attention to an identity range,
what I term the “boater-white poles of identity.”

Methodological Limitations
While focus group discussions provide a unique opportunity to discern group
consciousness, they also have the potential to inhibit alternative points of view.
The themes that emerged throughout the focus group discussions, however, pro-
vided important insights into how adolescents think about identity and the bound-
aries they draw, even if those boundaries are sometimes crossed. Moreover, ideas
developed throughout the discussions were later corroborated in one-on-one in-
depth interviews (see Ajrouch 2000).

THE TWO POLES: BOATER AND WHITE GIRL

The boundaries drawn by the adolescents involve a continuum of identity, two
poles that designate otherness labeled by the adolescents “boater” and “white.”
The narratives gathered through focus group discussions delineate the ways in
which gender relations underpin boundary work that shapes categorizations of
the cultural other. The following data demonstrate how girls are important to the
construction of ethnic identity and culture, but, ironically, their value emerges
from a gender hierarchy in which boys gain freedom but girls do not. Below I
wish to consider each pole of identity (boater and white) as well as places in the
middle to illustrate the process of boundary work and the way in which gender
figures into the lines that designate Arabness, or in-group membership.

Boater
The adolescents’ dilemma of finding themselves caught between two cultures is
illustrated by a conversation that arose during the first focus group discussion.
When I asked each participant to indicate where his or her parents came from,
why they immigrated to the United States, and what language they spoke at home,
the “B word” emerged.
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 379

Hanan: My dad was, you know, going to take me to the Arabic private school
in Canton, but I can’t take it because you know, I’m not used to—I don’t
mean it in a bad way or I don’t want to offend anybody, but boaters . . .

The process of eliciting from the participants a definition of “boaters” involved

some probing, yet features significant insight into their ethnic identity. They
began by saying that they use the term to define those who have come from a dif-
ferent country. Finally, Lynn clarified the meaning by stating that in her school, it
refers to people who only speak Arabic. And indeed the focus group members
elaborated on the particulars of language as they emphasized that boaters speak
Arabic more than English, and when they do speak English their accent still
defines them as a boater, as does style of dress:
Moderator: How would you define a boater?
Zacharia: The same thing, they just talk different.
Moderator: So basically, it’s just that they speak Arabic.
Hanan: No!
Lama: I think it’s because we know how to, I don’t know, like they wear their
pants up to their chests.
[Laughter]
Hanan: No, you know what. There’s this girl, she wears purple stockings, yel-
low socks, and a brown T-shirt. Tell me that doesn’t look weird. I mean it’s
not only that, it’s like how they walk, how they talk . . .
Lynn: . . . it’s like saying they’re ignorant.

“Boater,” then, is a term applied to those recent immigrants who are not yet famil-
iar with the dominant culture. As the participants elaborated on the defining char-
acteristics of a boater, they also suggested the existence of three groups: boater,
white, and themselves, “Arab Americans.”
Lynn: I guess it’s also who you hang around with in this school.
Hanan: Yeah. . . . There’s like three different groups, you know. I don’t know
how to describe it, but there’s a boater group, a group that’s all Arabic. There’s
a group that’s Arab American who like, I don’t know, we’re mixed. And
then there’s like this white group, you know, it’s an all-American group.
Lynn: The majority, though, is the middle.
Hanan: The Arab American, you know. We’re much different than the boater.
Mariam: Boaters [laughs].

“Boater” is used by these children of Arab immigrants to describe a purely Arab

identity, that part of ethnicity which captures the originating immigrant culture. In
this discussion and in the ones that followed the participants had an embarrassing
dislike for those whom they had categorized as boaters, and so boundaries emerged
through this categorization in order to distance themselves from the immigrant
identity. They want to make it clear that although they may be Arab, they are dif-
ferent. The term “boater” is rooted in historical immigration patterns to the United
States: immigrants from various locations crossed the Atlantic and arrived on
boats. Conversations with older members of the community confirm that the term
“boater” was used by non–Arab Americans to refer to newly arrived Arab immi-
grants to Dearborn. That the children of immigrants picked up this term and use
380 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

it to construct otherness suggests that they value an American identity and, more-
over, have learned that Americanness emerges by debasing immigrant otherness.
The undesirable boater status can be transcended, however. Some of the partic-
ipants in the focus group were at one time considered boaters, and although they
were not able to articulate how they overcame that label, others made it clear that
once an immigrant adopts the same style and language and chooses to mix with
others who are not immigrants, they may shed the boater status.
Hanan: No, like Adel, you know. He’s a boater. But he came here in sixth or
fifth grade, and now, he’s like one of us. It takes a while for him to get—
Lynn: I don’t remember him . . .
Hanan: But when he came here he was so different, but after he gets used to
us, he gets adapted to us, you know.
In other words, once a boater sheds his or her immigrant ways and accepts the
community-sanctioned elements of “American” culture, then that individual loses
the boater label and becomes one of them—an Arab American.
The boundary work inherent in the development and description of the boater
category reflects part of the process of constructing an Arab American identity.
The characteristics of a boater constitute the defined boundaries by which the teens
differentiate themselves. Designating the boater category effectively distances the
adolescents from the immigrant identity, affirming their link to American culture.
However, given that they have grown up embedded in both cultures, they feel
both distant and linked. They engender distance by announcing that they are not
“Arab” but maintain links by describing themselves as “Arab Americans.”

White
The categories invoked by the adolescents against which to define who they are
also hint at a racialized identity. The juxtaposition of “white” to all the others
(including themselves, boaters, and other racially defined groups such as African
Americans) relates to the issue of race in American society. The children of immi-
grants in this study invoke racial categories to define who they are not, suggesting
that race is a pervasive influence on their understanding of identity and will likely
influence their interactions with the dominant society. Individuals who have Middle
Eastern backgrounds are labeled “white” on U.S. Census forms, yet the discussions
elicited from the adolescents suggest that they do not see themselves as “white.”
Little research exists to entertain a situation in which “white” children of immi-
grants define themselves as racially distinct from the mainstream, dominant soci-
ety. The emergence of this “white” category is significant in that it (1) underscores
the fact that these adolescents view America as a pluralistic society, not as one big
pot into which all peoples melt, and (2) demonstrates that they view the dominant
society with some apprehension. Perhaps the most salient characteristic that dif-
ferentiates whites from Arab Americans pertains to symbols of femininity. The
boundaries that signify ethnic identity for the adolescents draw heavily on articu-
lations about appropriate feminine behavior, as the following discussion in the
the first focus group demonstrates.
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 381

Lynn: I don’t consider myself white.

Hanan: American, Arab American.
Lynn: Yeah, Arab first.
Hanan: Not American, no way.
Moderator: No way American?
Hanan: When I think American, I think white girl, on a corner, you know.
Like boaters, whites represent a group from which the adolescents distinguish
themselves. The description of an American as a “white girl, on a corner” intro-
duces the significance of race and connotes the idea of spatial mobility and public
display. White American girls symbolize for the adolescents the freedom to hang
out without restrictions on place or movement. Focus group participants criti-
cized white American girls for the perceived high levels of freedom they enjoy.
However, at least two of the girls, Hanan and Lynn, struggled in that the very
same behaviors they criticized are those they hoped to gain permission to display.
The adolescents focused their discussion of “white” on the behavior of individual
girls and the interactions among girls as well as between girls and boys. The fol-
lowing exchange took place during the second focus group.
Hanan: We all know what we’re going through, and it’s like, I don’t know. If
you have a problem, your sisters yell. Your sisters are there to help you. In
this school, we’re one family, you know? We may get in fights, we may have
arguments, you’re this and you’re that, but still, we all feel for each other.
We all go through the same things. It’s not like how it is with white people.
Moderator: How are white people?
Hanan: White people? They’re different. I don’t know, they don’t care for each
other that much. They don’t care about their reputation. I don’t know,
they’re different.
Lama: If like there’s an Arabic girl, and she’s sending a bad influence on all the
Arabs, we’re not afraid to go up and tell her. We can. We go up and talk to
her. We tell her, you know, this is right. The Americans, what do they care?
They take after each other.
Hanan: The Arab guys, lets say if I’m doing something wrong. I know two or
three guys that will come up to me. They go “Hanan, you need to watch
out.” But if an American girl, they don’t care about her. They’ll say, “Oh,
who cares about her?”
Lama: They don’t care about each other.
Hanan: They say she’s a slut. They don’t care about her. If they see me doing
something wrong, they’d come up to me. You don’t see a white, like Ameri-
can guys going up to American girls telling them “Oh watch out.” And
Arab guys, they usually don’t go out with Arab girls. They usually go out
with American girls. They use them.
Lama: They know Arabic girls will get in trouble.
And then:
Lynn: The bad thing is that everyone complains about what other people do.
For instance, oh you’re Muslim, you can’t wear that short skirt or see-through
blouse. They all talk about each other when somebody is breaking a rule for
their religion. Sometimes I sit at lunch and I hear, “Oh my God, you saw
what she was doing today?” Let’s say we’re in a school that’s all American.
382 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

They wouldn’t say that. They would be doing the same thing. They won’t
talk behind your back, and complain about you.
Hanan: Yeah, some people are jealous.
Lynn: Yeah, that’s true, and its like in the American school or something I think
the reason they won’t talk about you is because they would do the same
thing. Why should they talk about you if they do the same thing?
Mariam: She’s right. Because some people come up to you and say, “Oh my
God, aib [shameful], you’re doin’ this, this, and this . . .”
These characterizations reveal two important points. The first is the perception
that being American is equated with a girl who is morally suspect. The second key
point is the extent to which religion underscores the ideals of appropriate behavior.
The word aib, or shameful, invokes religious doctrine. Another word used by par-
ticipants, haram, signifies something that is religiously prohibited. The adoles-
cents frame girls’ behavior by referring to their understanding of religion. Arab
American women and girls are aware of the importance of maintaining a good
reputation and therefore refrain from identifying too closely with being “American.”
The adolescents rarely alluded to the behavior of American boys, although they
acknowledged that they sometimes called them “white boys.” Understandings
about how Arabs differ from Americans unfolded almost exclusively through per-
ceptions of white girls. The irony of this situation lies in the observation that
although white girls are viewed with disdain as wayward, their autonomy and
freedom sometimes emerge as an object of envy:
Lynn: Can I ask you something? It’s not really on exactly what they’re saying,
but dance clubs. If guys who are Arabic go there, and that’s cool and stuff,
and they say only American girls go there. If an Arabic girl goes there, you
know she’ll get talked about, except American girls are allowed to go there.
You don’t see Arab girls going to dance clubs. That’s what my brother was
telling me. He goes there, and he tells me. I go to him, well, you know that
seems fun. I’d like to go there one night. It seems fun to dance with your
friends. But he goes, “No. When you go there guys come up to you and they
start dancing with you. They don’t care what you say and stuff.” There are
no Arabic girls there. American girls can go and they don’t get talked about
or anything. They’re allowed to and we’re not, because of our religion or
something like that. I don’t know. (Focus Group 1)
Though the boundaries seem defined and clearly understood, Lynn’s narrative
also suggests that she does not necessarily accept without question the criteria
applied to distinguish her and her friends.

PLACES IN THE MIDDLE:

BOUNDARIES CONSTRUCTED, CONTESTED
Finding themselves somewhere between boater and white, the adolescents dem-
onstrated strategies to maneuver the multiple paths toward identity. “Talk” repre-
sents a powerful form of social control for the adolescents; however, the situations
that give rise to “talk” vary. Religion becomes the site from which the ultimate
form of control originates:
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 383

Hanan: You know the girls that wear scarves? No offense, but girls that wear
scarves get talked about more than girls that don’t wear scarves.
Lynn: Yeah, because they expect that girl not to do anything wrong, whatso-
ever. One little mistake she makes, even if she swears once. She shouldn’t
be wearing a scarf if she swore once. I don’t know, something like that.
Mariam: Respect the thing that’s on your head. Respect this, respect that.
(Focus Group 1)
Arab girls who wear the hijab are held to a higher standard than are Arab girls who
do not. This situation underscores the importance of religion to defining appro-
priate behavior for girls. While all Arab girls are the target for talk, those who
wear the hijab symbolize the pinnacle of respect and obligation and are farthest
from any sort of freedom. Maintaining honor is central not only for the girl her-
self; it extends to other family members and to the community. Her actions are
carefully scrutinized, and thus she essentially becomes the measure of “Arabness.”
The construction of boundaries takes shape most sharply in the behavior of
girls. One reason the adolescents focus on girls for defining an American identity
is the antiassimilation pressure placed on Arab American girls by their mothers
and fathers, sisters and brothers, aunts and uncles and by the community in gen-
eral. The girls incessantly addressed the different behaviors tolerated by their
families and community, often torn between expected behavior and how they
wished to behave. The American value of autonomous choice is an ideal many of
the girls long to acquire, an ideal often exhibited by the boys in the group itself
and within their families. Discussions initiated by students in the focus groups
most often centered on the issue of dating, which is a sensitive issue among this
age group but has far-reaching implications with regard to the preservation of an
Arab identity. They agreed that boundaries do not go uncontested, however.
Hanan: I want to ask Abe this, because Abe, you know a lot about this, not to
offend you . . .
Abe: Go ahead, what?
Hanan: . . . it’s good, but how come a girl’s a rat if she just talks to a guy? Even
if she didn’t do anything with a guy. How come you guys consider her a rat,
even if she didn’t do anything? OK, if she did something with a guy, OK, I’d
consider her a rat, even I’ll consider her a rat, even if she’s my friend. But
even if she did nothing and she talks to a guy or something. You say, “That
girl, what a rat, look how sick, oh what a rat.”
Nabil: How do you think he got that in his head?
Hanan: Just if I talk to a guy, and maybe we’re talking about homework, “Oh,
look at her, what a rat.” Why?
Abe: You know what a rat is? It’s an Arabic girl that flirts and is desperate for
a guy.
Nabil: How do you think a guy got that in his head? His dad passed it down
to him. His dad told him an Arab girl should be a lady.
Lama: Respected.
Nabil: Respected. You know she shouldn’t walk around with guys.
Abe: Exactly.
Nabil: His dad tells him that, which that gives him the picture, that if he sees
an Arabic girl talking to a guy, that he should warn her, to tell her that she’s
doing something. (Focus Group 3)
384 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

The above discussion links adolescents’ criteria to parental attitudes. When Nabil
explains that boys perceive girls in a negative light when they do not act in a
respectful manner, for example, “walking with a boy,” he offers as an explanation
lessons that he learned from his father. Though girls may have learned that they
must act in a respectful way, for example, they should not “do” anything with a
boy (sexually), they are frustrated by these cultural taboos. Later in the focus
group, the discussion turned to addressing sex acts directly.
Nabil: I want to ask one thing. OK, Abe! I’m not saying that I’m asking all the guys
here. It’s happened to me, I mean. Excuse me if this is like too graphic for you.
Would you respect a girl after you have sex with her? Would you respect her?
Hanan: No.
Nabil: I don’t respect them.
Abe: No, hell no. Not respect them.
Nabil: That’s why we try to tell the girls to watch what they’re doing. I’m just
telling you one thing. If a guy kissed a girl, an Arabic girl, he’ll spit on her,
he won’t have respect for her anymore.
Abe: You’re too high for that, you know what I mean? You’re Muslim, you
shouldn’t do that.
Nabil: I mean, an Arab would take advantage of an Arabic girl if she was will-
ing to do that with a guy.
Abe: You guys are made for the marriage part, OK, not the other part.
The discussion between Nabil and Abe highlights the double standard that
exists for boys and girls, links the expectations to religion, and explains how the
girls’ restrictions are presented as a means to enhance their worth. However, this
gender hierarchy, sanctioned by religious teachings, is also obviously based on
selected interpretations of Islam.
Lynn: Why are girls not allowed to go out with guys?
Hanan: You fool around enough!
Lynn: Exactly.
Abe: Because they forget about religion, alright! You’re not supposed to go out
with whatever . . . we’re allowed to.
Lynn: Why are you allowed to?!
Hanan: No, you guys are not allowed to! In the Qu’ran, it’s going to say guys
go out with girls, and girls stay home?!
Lynn: Look according to your religion—
Abe: My dad told me!
Nabil: For girls its aib.
Lynn: Quit arguing religion. Guys are not allowed to go out with girls either.
Abe: Guys, its OK, wallah [I swear to God] it is.
These contested interpretations of religion represent critical pathways through
which power differentials in gender hierarchy may be challenged. Pragmatic real-
ities of gender relations often do not coincide with ideal representations in Islam
(Ahmed 1992). The boys are adamant that they are exempt from any restrictions
based on religious teaching, while the girls suggest that the boys are mistaken in
their interpretations. Boys gain autonomy and freedom by adhering to their
understandings, which are supported by their peers and families and privileged
in comparison to their sisters and other girls in the community.
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 385

Evidence that the boundaries defined do not unquestionably guide the girls’
behavior can be seen in the following admission and declaration by Hanan:
You know what, I talk to guys. I’m going to say the truth. I talk to guys, and I
do flirt with guys. Don’t show my dad that. [Laughs] But I flirt with them, you
know when we’re playing around. But I don’t do anything that I think is a rat,
you know? And I don’t care. I’m going to change womanhood. I’m going to let
girls be able to do whatever they want, and not be talked about. [Laughs]
Although Hanan does not discuss being sexually active, she announces her flir-
tatious tendencies and in so doing defines it as acceptable and decides that she
wants to change “womanhood.” It is clear that she will have to actively reinterpret
religious teachings. Previous studies demonstrate that conservative ideologies
may be reinterpreted among groups whose identity is informed by religion (Gal-
lagher and Smith 1999). In much of these discussions, religion influences the ado-
lescents’ conceptualizations of their ethnic identity. For instance, the scenario
introducing the concept of the boater refers to an “Arabic” private school in Can-
ton, which in reality is an Islamic school. It is not uncommon for children of Mus-
lim immigrants from the Arab world to use “Arab” (which refers to origin from
an Arabic-speaking country) and “Muslim” (which refers to a religion) inter-
changeably. It may be that the tendency to use the terms interchangeably consti-
tutes a rhetorical strategy to develop boundaries that exclude Christians from
Arabic-speaking countries from being considered Arabs and vice versa, that is,
Muslims from non-Arab countries (e.g. Pakistan) from being Muslim. It seems more
likely, however, that this is simply a reflection of what the children learn from
their parents, that Arabness, at least for them, is lodged in the dictates of religious
doctrine.
The status of boys as protectors of girls ensures the structural reality of men’s
domination of women (Connell 1987). Both boys and girls monitor behavior;
however, it seems that boys have a substantial stake in girls’ actions. Boys learn
from family, peers, and the community that their reputation is tied to that of the
girls in their family.
Houssam: I think when a big brother finds out that his little sister is going out
with a guy or something like that, he doesn’t know what to do.
Lama: His reputation ruins more than hers does.
Houssam: Because I have this little sister, and I have this friend. He saw my
sister talking to a guy. And he goes up to her, “Why you talking?” She goes,
“That’s none of your business.” Then he told me what happened. And then
I told him I can’t do anything. I don’t know what to do. I just didn’t know
what to do. (Focus Group 1)
Houssam faces the pressures of masculine ideals as they are defined by his peers.
This scenario reveals gender work and one of the processes by which social con-
structions of appropriate “boy” behavior emerge. In Houssam’s story we detect a
means by which girls are subjugated to male authority. Though Houssam did not
perceive his sister’s actions as problematic, the fact that his peer defined them as
such caused him discomfort and confusion. Houssam is learning how to be a “man,”
which to some extent involves controlling his sister’s behavior. Gendered behaviors
386 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

are created and reinforced through such interactions, supporting heterosexual

masculinity through the process of managing girls’ behavior. His response that he
“just didn’t know what to do” indicates that he felt pressure to act, yet did not
know what his actions as an older brother should entail. Hence evidence emerges
to suggest that not all boys learn these behaviors from their families, though there
is significant pressure in the community setting to adopt such attitudes and
behaviors. Furthermore, the cultural ideal of how girls should behave (i.e., they
should not talk to boys) does not necessarily represent the reality of daily interac-
tions. The existence of this ideal nevertheless serves to create and maintain the
privileged position of boys as they collaborate to ensure that code of behavior.
The maintenance of ethnicity is not a benign act but involves the subjugation of
women to a moral authority as articulated by immigrant parents and community
(Das Gupta 1997; Espiritu 2001; George 1998; Maira 1999–2000). There are costs
associated with maintaining ethnicity, and women often pay in the form of incur-
ring sanctions against participating in diverse roles offered in the host country.
The moral authority inherent in the ethnic culture subsumes women to a gender
hierarchy in order to guarantee legitimacy. In the case of the Arab American ado-
lescents who participated in this study, while girls may stray from the ideal
notions of femininity, they nevertheless acknowledge and easily communicate the
ideal rhetoric as a way to create and maintain boundaries that separate them-
selves from boaters and whites.

CONCLUSION
In-group characteristics are defined by the participants in this study in relation to
both boaters and whites, and boundaries are defined through the use of labels
that “both abstractly and concretely” (Lamont 1992:xvii) describe people to whom
they feel superior as well as people who represent an ideal. The boater label
applies to immigrant culture, a purely Arab identity unaffected by American
influence. Adolescents clearly differentiate themselves from that group but also
consider it a status from which immigrants can break away. Arab Americans are
not considered a legal minority group in the United States, but those who partici-
pated in this study clearly distinguish themselves from white America, particu-
larly through the juxtaposition of white girls to Muslim Arab American girls.
Demarcating chaste womanhood as a marker of cultural superiority is not unique
to Arab Americans, however (see Maira 1999–2000). Similar situations occurred
among children of those who immigrated in the late nineteenth and early twenti-
eth century, for example, the Irish (Diner 1983), Poles (Lopata 1994), and Italians
(Kessner and Caroli 1982). Parallel processes exist among more recent immigrant
groups, including the children of Asian Indians (Das Gupta 1999), Mexicans
(Horowitz 1992), and Filipinos (Espiritu 2001). The construction of ethnic identity
and the parameters of in-group membership, which are lodged in women’s body
and behavior, may constitute “one of the most potent ideologies shaping second-
generation social spaces” (Maira 1999–2000:141).
This study aimed to uncover the symbolic boundaries that underpin ethnic
identity formation for Arab American adolescents. Focus group discussions reveal
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 387

how gender relations contribute to the adaptation and identity formation among
Arab American adolescents residing in an ethnic community. The centrality of
gender relations to identity among the Arab Americans who participated in this
study contributes to the elucidation of “the dynamics of a neglected analytic
category—gender—in processes of immigration and settlement” (Hondagneu-Sotelo
1994:xxiii). The understanding of self-identity, particularly among those who are
Muslim and from the Middle East, contributes to an extended articulation of the
dynamics of ethnicity. Traditional markers of ethnicity are language, food, and
family values. However, this analysis addresses the parameters of ethnic identity
by giving voice to second-generation immigrants. The results suggest potential
theoretical value in that interactions between and among adolescents offer empir-
ical examples in narrative form that provide insights into prospective processes
of boundary work among an understudied immigrant ethnic group. This research
was pursued with an appreciation for the fact that identities themselves are mul-
tiple and may shift depending on external forces.
The insights gained from these adolescents are not meant to represent all Arab
Americans. Instead, these focus group discussions offer one portrait of the processes
that underly identity formation from the perspective of Arab American adoles-
cents living in a specific ethnic community. Specifically, the discussions demon-
strate how cultural norms are informed by religious norms. As Haddad and Smith
(1996:20) state in their discussion of Muslim values among Arab Americans in the
United States, “The values of Islam have shaped and confirmed Arab cultural val-
ues and thus continue to influence, however indirectly, the expectations of those
who do not participate directly in religious activities. This is especially true in the
definition of gender roles and in setting the parameters for what constitutes
proper social interaction between the sexes.” That is, among this group of adoles-
cents, who are not particularly “religious” (in the sense that they do not adopt an
Islamic identity above all other identities), interpretations of religion guide their
understandings of what it means to be Arab, applied exclusively to “girl” behavior.
But what is most striking is that Arab Americans are not the only ethnic group
to implement this strategy. As illustrated in historical analyses (e.g., Diner 1983)
and recent ethnographies (e.g., Espiritu 2001), identity parameters draw from
interpretations of permissible behaviors allotted to girls. The overlap in experi-
ences among second-generation immigrants from a variety of cultures suggests
that a similar process of ethnic identity formation operates through gender rela-
tions and also lends evidence to the role of girls as cultural carriers, transmitters,
and bearers of identity. For the Arab American adolescents in this study, restrictions
on girls are justified because girls are defined as valuable and important, in need of
protection. Moreover, the rationalization underpinning the sanctions on girls is
found in the traditional interpretation of religious precepts, which serve to create
and maintain a hierarchy whereby boys’ positions incur privilege and authority.
Studies of immigrant adaptation usually focus on outcomes, with little atten-
tion to the social patterns that emerge between and among immigrants (Hondag-
neu-Sotelo 1994). The symbolic boundaries described by these adolescents point
to how gender hierarchies produce and designate in-group membership but also to
how interpretations of religion inform that authenticity. While moral superiority
388 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

surfaces by criticizing white women, it is not clear that this practice occurs in an
effort to resist racism, as argued by Espiritu (2001). Select interpretations of Islam,
however, serve to control girls’ behaviors, at least during adolescence. The impli-
cations of this gendered process hold potential challenges for adolescent boys and
for Arab American culture in general. For example, if girls assimilate to the domi-
nant U.S. culture, they may alter taken-for-granted assumptions about Arabness
as understood by boys and their families.
These adolescents distinguish themselves from the white majority but are labeled
“white” by the racial-ethnic classification system of the U.S. government. Recent
world events threaten to increasingly place them as the cultural other, and so it is
not clear if these adolescents will permanently adopt a nonwhite identity or instead
opt for inclusion in the dominant culture as they reach adulthood and have more
contacts outside of the community.
Future research might examine whether the issues of gender and race remain
important to identity over time and whether they emerge among other immigrants
from Arabic-speaking nations, who are religiously and culturally diverse. For
instance, while religion is used to justify restrictions on girls among the children
of Muslim immigrants in Dearborn, is religion a pervasive influence among children
of Greek Orthodox Arab immigrants living on the west side of the city, or for those
living in other parts of the country? Arab American immigrants represent a varied
group, and more research needs to be conducted that taps into that diversity.
Particularly among young women, those who learn to navigate the two cul-
tures, that of their parents, community, and peers and that of the dominant soci-
ety, will undoubtedly benefit from both worlds. However, the situation may arise
where they embrace one culture over the other. Arab American girls occupy a pre-
carious position in that conforming to Arab cultural values constitutes a deviation
from dominant cultural norms in the United States, yet conforming to dominant
cultural norms likely challenges Arab cultural values. Arab American girls must
negotiate between two worlds and two sets of cultural values that often seem
incompatible. Restrictions on girls’ behavior represent a social practice whereby
boundaries emerge to designate in-group membership. However, these social
practices do not go unchallenged. The contested nature of these boundaries again
suggests that girls are actively questioning the gendered hierarchy. The adoles-
cents’ narratives illuminate where restrictions are identified, discussed, and ulti-
mately challenged, providing some context to the experience of growing up Arab
American in an ethnic community.

APPENDIX
FOCUS GROUP GUIDING QUESTIONS
1. Let us go around the table, and introduce ourselves. For example, where were
you born? Where were your parents born? How did your parents meet? What
languages do you speak?
2. Have you ever visited your parents’ country of birth?
3. How does your growing up in America differ from your parents growing up in
Lebanon or Palestine?
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 389

4. What is it like for you to attend a school in which most of the students are Ara-
bic? What are the good things, and what are the problems?
5. Do parents treat daughters differently than sons? Tell me about that.
6. What is it like for you to attend a school in which most of the students are Ara-
bic. What are the good things, and what are the problems?
7. Do you think you look Arabic?
8. What do you think of when you think of “American”?
9. What is it like to live in Dearborn? Would you like to live in Dearborn for the
rest of your life?

REFERENCES
Abraham, Nabeel and Andrew Shyrock. 2000. Arab Detroit: From margin to mainstream.
Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ajrouch, Kristine J. 2000. “Place, Age and Culture: Community Living and Ethnic Identity
among Lebanese American Adolescents.” Small Group Research 31(4):447–69.
Aswad, Barbara. C. 1992. “The Lebanese Muslim Community in Dearborn, Michigan.” Pp.
167–87 in The Lebanese in the World: A Century of Emigration, edited by A. Hourani and
N. Shehadi. London: Centre for Lebanese Studies in association with I. B. Tauris.
Baca Zinn, Maxine 1980. “Gender and Ethnic Identity among Chicanos.” Frontiers 5(2):18–
24.
Bartkowski, J. P. and J. G. Read. 2003. Veiled Submission: Gender, Power, and Identity
among Evangelical and Muslim Women in the United States.” Qualitative Sociology
26(1):71–92.
Beoku-Betts, Josephine. 1994. “When Black Is Not Enough: Doing Field Research among
Gullah Women.” NWSA Journal 6:413–33.
Bettie, Julie. 2003. Women without Class: Girls, Race, and Identity. Berkeley: University of Cal-
ifornia Press.
Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and Power. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
———. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Das Gupta, Monisha. 1997. “‘What Is Indian about You?’ A Gendered, Transnational
Approach to Ethnicity.” Gender & Society 11:572–96.
Diner, Hasia R. 1983. Erin’s Daughters in America: Irish Immigrant Women in the Nineteenth
Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Doran, Christine. 1997. The Chinese Cultural Reform Movement in Singapore: Sin-
gaporean Chinese Identities and Reconstructions of Gender. Sojourn 12:92–107.
Ebaugh, Helen Rose and Janet Saltmen Chafetz. 1999. “Agents for Cultural Reproduction
and Structural Change: The Ironic Role of Women In Immigrant Religious Institu-
tions.” Social Forces 78:585–613.
———. 2000. Religion and the New Immigrants. New York: Alta Mira Press.
Erikson, Erik. 1985. Childhood and Society. New York: Norton.
Espiritu, Yen Le. 1997. Asian American Women and Men. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
———. 2001. “‘We Don’t Sleep around Like White Girls Do’: Family, Culture and Gender
in Filipino American Lives.” Signs: Journal of Women and Culture and Society 26:415–40.
Espiritu, Yen Le and Thom Tran. 2003. “‘Viet Nam, nuoc toi’ (Vietnam, My Country): Viet-
namese Americans and Transnationalism.” Pp. 367–98 in The Changing Face of Home:
The Transnational Lives of the Second Generation, edited by P. Levitt and M. C. Waters.
New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
390 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Volume 47, Number 4, 2004

Gallagher, Sally K. and Christian Smith. 1999. “Symbolic Traditionalism and Pragmatic Egal-
itarianism: Contemporary Evangelicals, Families, and Gender.” Gender & Society
13:211–33.
George, Sheba. 1998. “Caroling with the Keralites: The Negotiation of Gendered Space in
an Indian Immigrant Church.” Pp. 265–94 in Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Commu-
nities and the New Immigration, edited by R. S. Warner and J. Wittner. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
Haddad Y. Y. and J. I. Smith. 1996. “Islamic Values among American Muslims.” Pp. 19–40
in Family and Gender among American Muslims, edited by B. C. Aswad and B. Bilge.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierette. 1994. Gendered Transitions: Mexican Experiences of Immigration.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Horowitz, Ruth. 1992. Honor and the American Dream: Culture and Identity in a Chicano Com-
munity. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Hughes, D. and Kathleen DuMont. 1993. “Using Focus Groups to Facilitate Culturally
Anchored Research.” American Journal of Community Psychology 21:775–806.
Kaminsky, Amy. 1994. “Gender, Race, Raza.” Feminist Studies 20:7–31.
Kessner, Thomas and Betty Boyd Caroli. 1982. Today’s Immigrants, Their Stories. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Kibria, Nazli. 2003. “Of Blood, Belonging, and Homeland Trips: Transnationalism and
Identity among Second-Generation Chinese and Korean Americans.” Pp. 295–311 in
The Changing Face of Home: The Transnational Lives of the Second Generation, edited by
P. Levitt and M. C. Waters. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lamont, Michele. 1992. Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and the Ameri-
can Upper-Middle Class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lamont, Michele and Virag Molnar. 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences.”
Annual Review of Sociology 28:167–95.
Lazreg, Marnia. 1994. The Eloquence of Silence: Algerian Women in Question. New York:
Routledge.
Levitt, Peggy and Mary C. Waters, eds. 2003. The Changing Face of Home: The Transnational
Lives of the Second Generation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lopata, Helena. Z. 1994. Polish Americans. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Maira, Sunaina. 1999–2000. “Ideologies of Authenticity: Youth, Politics and Diaspora.”
Amerasia Journal 25:139–49.
Menjivar, Cecilia. 2000. Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America. Berke-
ley: University of California Press.
Olsen, Laurie. 2003. Made in America: Immigrant Students in Our Public Schools. New York:
New Press.
Portes, Alejandro and Ruben G. Rumbaut. 2001. Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second
Generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Read, Jen’nan Ghazal. 2003. “The Sources of Gender Role Attitudes among Christian and
Muslim Arab-American Women.” Sociology of Religion 64:207–23.
Read, Jen’nan Ghazal and John P. Bartowski. 2000. “To Veil or Not to Veil? A Case Study of
Identity Negotiation among Muslim Women in Austin, Texas.” Gender & Society
14:395–417.
Rumbaut, Ruben G. 1994. “The Crucible Within: Ethnic Identity, Self-Esteem, and Seg-
mented Assimilation among Children of Immigrants.” International Migration Review
28:748–94.
Shakir, Evelyn. 1997. Bint Arab: Arab and Arab American Women in the United States. West-
port, CT: Praeger.
Gender, Race, and Symbolic Boundaries 391

Strauss, Anselm. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory
Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Suleiman, Michael. 1999. Arabs in America: Toward a New Future. Philadelphia: Temple Uni-
versity Press.
Walbridge, Linda S. 1997. Without Forgetting the Imam. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University
Press.
Warner, R. Stephen and Judith Wittner. 1998. Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious Communities
and the New Immigration. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Waters, Mary C. 1990. Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
———. 1997. “The Intersection of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity In Identity Development of
Caribbean American Teens.” Pp. 65–81 in Urban Girls: Resisting Stereotypes, Creating
Identities, edited by B. J. Leadbeater and N. Way. New York: New York University Press.
———. 1999. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. New
York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Zhou, Min and Carl Bankston. 1998. Growing up American: How Vietnamese Children Adapt to
Life in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Zogby, John. 1990. Arab America Today: A Demographic Profile of Arab Americans. Washington,
DC: Arab American Institute.