In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio

Bourgois turns to the role of fathers and masculinity in the last chapter. Particularly in the East Harlem nuclear households he’s surrounded by, there’re an inordinate number of fathers who abuse both their wives and children. As with earlier examples, like with Candy and Maria, these women allow the abuse, even when it comes to life-threatening injuries. Bourgois notes that women sometimes become single parents once they have children and eventually leave abusive spouses, but they endure years of abuse before even coming to this decision. What’s more, they simply leave but then begin a relationship with a man who is often going to treat them the same way.

While many people in mainstream society believe that the lack of fathers in these households is damaging to children, Bourgois notes that poverty in households where mothers are the sole parent is the most devastating factor to contend with. The fact that these mothers put up with so much abuse and wait so long to get rid of abusive men is worse than allowing these men to remain in the home due to some concept of a male’s presence being needed for a child to properly function. Bourgois again brings up the concept of the jíbaro in relation to "vulnerable fathers" (287), realizing that the dignity and respect which is idealized in the concept of the independent jíbaro is still something that affects these Puerto Rican fathers who are so enmeshed within street culture.

In “Masculinity in Historical Crisis,” Bourgois discusses how masculinity is exemplified—or lacking—in households. Traditionally, masculinity was exemplified in Puerto Rican culture in men having large families. These men were able to provide for these families economically and were the undisputed head of the household. This is no longer the case in Bourgois’s modern-day East Harlem. For example, Ray had many children with different women, but he didn’t support them when Bourgois lived in the neighborhood. Bourgois posits that this lack of support is often met with denial or aggression. Men like Ray end up blaming their significant others for mistakes or flaws that they say caused the lack of support in the first place. To Ray’s peers and "hangers-on" (22), however, he was a man to look up to. They all respected the fact that he had been with so many women and had so many kids. This sign of masculinity, mixed with his success as a competent businessman, garnered him praise and respect from other men.

Other sections and conversations focus on how men like Caesar understand how their economic situations are affecting their kids but are unable to step up and be the fathers they need to be. Bourgois also shows the hypocrisy of a father who is released from jail for a small window to greet his son, only to be told that the father had robbed the son’s mother’s apartment previously and stolen many items. He set up the robbery at a time when he knew his son’s mother would be out of the house. Even though there are examples of fathers trying to be better, as in the case of this father who Bourgois sees greeting his son, the cycle of violence and the reliance of these fathers on the underground economy usually ensures that they return to lives of absence and abuse.

Bourgois cautions against attempting to bring about change via “simple solutions” (318). Due to racism and class segregation in the United States, it’s illogical to expect the government to suggest or enact "isolated policy initiatives" (318)that target one group of the disenfranchised. In fact, when solutions have been suggested in the past, they have been ineffective: "In part, this is because drugs are not the root of the problems presented in these pages; they are the epiphenomenal expression of deeper, structural dilemmas" (319). Bourgois realizes that the political economy of the United States has actually lost its will to even try and fix the problem of poverty. Despite this, his hope in presenting the individuals of El Barrio to readers is that the United States—"the richest industrialized nation on earth, and the greatest world power in history" (318)—can indeed take steps toward this change.

Bourgois reiterates that deeper social issues like racial and class inequality are the real culprits that cause abuse and inner-city poverty, even though most, even at the policy level, attack drugs. The war on drugs has a short-term policy intervention, even though the larger issues of inequality need to be addressed in order to stymie the drug problem, not the other way around. To do this, perceptions of poverty need to change as well. Bourgois also points to the fact that, historically, drug use is mostly culturally constructed. Bourgois also reinforces here his earlier sentiment: “To reiterate: The problem of substance abuse in the United States is worse in the 1990s than in the recent past because of a polarization of the structural roots that generate self-destructive behavior and criminal activity” (319). He also adds that any attempt to tackle the drug problem must change the positive rewards of engaging in an underground economy versus the lackluster rewards for adhering to a legal economy.

The easiest way Bourgois sees to wipe out the allure of drugs and the underground economy is to decriminalize drugs. Street dealers would be forced out of business because there would be no need to sell their small quantities to youths in the inner city. This would take drugs off the street and reduce crime rates, including violence and incarceration. The alternative would be to continue criminalizing drugs and lock everyone up, which is problematic for many reasons. For starters, Bourgois notes that the United States has the shameful record of, at least in the 1990s, having "the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world" (377).

Bourgois maintains that the workplace must also change. Political intervention is needed to provide well-paying and meaningful employment at entry-level positions. Providing high school and college-level kids with gainful employment helps to deter the allure of drugs. Another solution would be to change the bureaucratic red tape that punishes the poor for working legally. Penalizing families for rights that should be free, like healthcare, doesn’t help. United States policy must realize that criminal activity will also be appealing when there are material needs that must be met and the prevailing government’s values don’t extend to these material needs. State policy and free market lead to urban decay, which then leads to troubling race relations. Middle-class America "dissociate themselves" (322) from these issues, when the reality of the matter is that budget cuts and other economic indicators keep the Anglo-middle-class world afloat while the working poor suffer.

Most importantly, inner-city youth and those involved in street culture must be met with respect. The concept of the jíbaro still remains relevant, with inner-city kids conscious of the self-worth and independence they want and desire. White, middle-class America must engage the poor on their level to combat the effects of institutionalized racism. Bourgois wants readers to know that the drug dealers he profiles are "not 'exotic others,'" nor are they inferior: "On the contrary, they are 'made in America'" (326). They’re real-life, hardworking individuals who are chasing the American Dream in their own way. This chase leads to drugs and abuse because they are not allowed into mainstream agency.