The growing household service economy (e.g., domestic service, gardening) introduces social heterogeneity both within and near suburban regions that have previously been segregated by race and class. The author examines this dynamic through an ethnographic study of a community in Orange County, California, and argues that the shifts in social geography accompanying the household service economy in this neighborhood had exacerbated existing anxieties about security and contributed to the popular desire among residents to “fortress.” The findings of this study suggest that in a bifurcated economy in which household services proliferate, more suburban neighborhoods may retreat into highly regulated, gated communities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alba, R. D., J. R. Logan, B. J. Stults, G. Marzan, and W. Zhang. 1999. Immigrant groups in the suburbs: A reexamination of suburbanization and spatial assimilation. American Sociological Review64 (3): 446-460.
2.
Baldassare, M. 1992. Suburban communities. Annual Review of Sociology18:475-494.
3.
Blakely, E. J., and M. G. Snyder. 1997. Fortress America: Gated communities in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press; Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
4.
Burawoy, M. 1991. Reconstructing social theories. In Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis, edited by M. Burawoy, A. Burton, H. A. Ferguson, K. J. Fox, J. Gamson, N. Gartrell, L. Hurst, C. Kurzman, L. Salzinger, J. Schiffman, and S. Ui, 1-8. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
5.
Burawoy, M. 2000. Introduction: Reading for the global. In Global ethnography: Forces, connections, and imaginations in a postmodern world, edited by M. Burawoy, J. A. Blum, S. George, Z. Gille, T. Gowan, L. Hanen, M. Klawiter, S. H. Lopez, S. O'Riain, and M. Thayer, 1-40. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
6.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1983. Geographic profile of employment and unemployment, 1982. Bulletin 2170. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
7.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2002. Geographic profile of employment and unemployment, 2000. Bulletin 2550. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
8.
Caldeira, T.P.R. 1996. Fortified enclaves: The new urban segregation. Public Culture8 (2): 303-328.
9.
Caldeira, T.P.R. 2000. City of walls: Crime, segregation, and citizenship in São Paulo. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
10.
Colen, S. 1990. Housekeeping for the green card: West Indian household workers, the state, and stratified reproduction in New York City. In At work in homes: Household workers in world perspective, edited by R. Sanjek and S. Colen, 89-118. Washington, DC: American Anthropological Society.
11.
Davis, M. 1992. City of quartz: Excavating the future in Los Angeles. New York: Vintage.
12.
Dodson, M. 1989. Where is the county's “Mason-Dixon” line? Start at Costa Mesa freeway and meander south. Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, Metro, 27 August, 2:1.
13.
Glassner, B. 1999. The culture of fear. New York: Basic Books.
14.
Glenn, E. N. 1992. From servitude to service work: Historical continuities in the racial division of paid reproductive labor. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society18 (1): 1-43.
15.
Gutierrez, D. G. 1995. Walls and mirrors: Mexican-Americans, Mexican immigrants, and the politics of ethnicity. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
16.
Haas, L. 1991. Grass-roots protest and the politics of planning. In Postsuburban California: The transformation of Orange County since World War II, edited by R. Kling, S. Olin, and M. Poster, 254-280. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
17.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. 1994. Regulating the unregulated: Domestic workers' social networks. Social Problems41:201-215.
18.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. 2001. Doméstica: Immigrant women cleaning and caring in the shadows of affluence. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
19.
Jackson, K. 1985. Crabgrass frontier: The suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
20.
Judd, D. R. 1995. The rise of new walled cities. In Spatial practices, edited by H. Ligget and D. C. Perry, 144-166. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
Kennedy, D. J. 1995. Residential associations as state actors: Regulating the impact of gated communities on nonmembers. Yale Law Journal105, 3:761-793.
22.
Kuper, H. 1947. The uniform of colour: A study of white-black relationships in Swaziland. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand Univ. Press.
23.
Laslett, J. H. M. 1996. Historical perspectives: Immigration and the rise of a distinctive urban region, 1900-1970. In Ethnic Los Angeles, by R. Waldinger and M. Bozorgmehr, 39-75. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
24.
Low, S. 2001. The edge and the center: Gated communities and the discourse of urban fear. American Anthropologist103 (1): 45-58.
25.
Lowe, L. 1996. Immigrant acts: On Asian American cultural politics. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.
26.
Maher, K. H. 1999. A stranger in the house: American ambivalence about immigrant labor. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Irvine.
27.
Mahler, S. 1992. First stop: Suburbia. Report on the Americas26 (1): 20-25.
28.
Mahler, S. 1995. Salvadorans in suburbia: Symbiosis and conflict. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
29.
Marcelli, E. 2001. From the barrio to the “burbs”: Immigration and urban sprawl in Southern California. Working paper no. 32, University of California-San Diego, Center for Comparative Immigration Studies.
30.
Marcuse, P. 1997. The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: What has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city. Urban Affairs Review33 (2): 228-264.
31.
Massey, D. S., and N. A. Denton. 1993. American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
32.
McKenzie, E. 1994. Privatopia: Homeowner associations and the rise of residential private government. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.
33.
Parel, R. 2000. Suburban immigrant communities: Assessments of key characteristics and needs. Chicago: Fund for Immigrants and Refugees.
34.
Reich, R. B. 1991. Secession of the successful. New York Times, 20 January, 6:16, 42.
35.
Rocco, R. A. 1996. Latino Los Angeles: Reframing boundaries/borders. In The city: Los Angeles and urban theory at the end of the twentieth century, edited by A. J. Scott and E. W. Soja, 365-389. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
36.
Romero, M. 1992. Maid in the U.S.A. New York: Routledge.
37.
Sassen, S. 1990. Economic restructuring and the American city; Annual Review of Sociology16:465-490.
38.
Sassen, S. 1991. The global city. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
39.
Sassen, S. 1998. Globalization and its discontents. New York: New Press.
40.
Schiesl, M. J. 1991. Designing the model community: The Irvine company and suburban development, 1950-88. In Postsuburban California: The transformation of Orange County since World War II, edited by R. Kling, S. Olin, and M. Poster, 55-91. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
41.
Scott, A. J., and E. W. Soja, eds. 1996. The city: Los Angeles and urban theory at the end of the twentieth century. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
42.
Till, K. 1993. Neotraditional towns and urban villages: The cultural production of a geography of “otherness.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space11:709-732.
43.
U.S. Census Bureau. 1970. California: Characteristics of the population. General social and economic characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
44.
U.S. Census Bureau. 1980. California: Characteristics of the population. General social and economic characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
45.
U.S. Census Bureau. 1990. California: Characteristics of the population. General social and economic characteristics. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
46.
Uttal, L., and M. Tuominen. 1999. Tenuous relationships: Exploitation, emotion, and racial ethnic significance in paid child care work. Gender & Society13 (6): 758-780.
47.
Waldinger, R. 1989. Immigration and urban change. Annual Review of Sociology15:211-232.
48.
Zavella, P. 1997. The tables are turned: Immigration, poverty, and social conflict in California communities. In Immigrants out! The new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States, edited by J. F. Perea, 136-161. New York: New York Univ. Press.
