Victor Rios begins chapter six by describing the way the Latino boys he studied used masculinity as a rehabilitative tool. He describes how the boys are constantly “questioning” each other’s manhood as a way of proving their own masculinity. “The boys’ social relations with one another and with community members were saturated with expressions and discourses of manhood” (pg.125). Rios continues to describe the affects criminalization and its gendered practices has influenced these young boy’s mentality of what it means to be masculine. In chapter six, the author explains that although the boys had easy access to weapons, they rarely used them because of their clear understanding the consequences associated with such violence. During his time studying these boys, he found that most cases of conflict were resolved without the use of weapon(s), but rather with “harsh conversation”. This observation highly contradicts the typical view of gang members who are commonly stereotyped by their local community and justice system in Oakland. Rios describes how the boys “Conversations often involved references to guns as analogies for resolving conflict and demonstrating manhood”. The fact that most conflicts are dealt with in non-violent ways, highlights the negative role …show more content…
The author observed that most criminals and or police officers are men. He associates this with the importance for a man to prove his masculinity to others. “Violent acts committed by men, whether these acts break the law or are designed to uphold it, are often a way of demonstrating the perpetrator’s manhood” (pg.135). This gendered violence is often experienced by boys in poor neighborhoods at a young age. This form of masculinity is described by Rios to be the center of police youth interactions, which has influences many young men to live lives of defiance and