American homeownership has long been characterized by racial, ethnic and geographic inequality. Inequality in homeownership, in turn, has contributed to racial and class segregation and inequality in other aspects of American life. Recently, however, there have been signs of dramatic change, as minorities and low-income groups have achieved all time record high rates of homeownership. To explain these developments, we compare and contrast neoclassical economic theory, which suggests that banking deregulation, increased competition, better information and improved risk assessment reduce or eliminate mortgage market discrimination, with a sociological theory of networks that argues industry restructuring can disrupt markets and social relationships and create new opportunities for exploitation. We argue that, as the old inequality in home mortgage lending has slowly diminished, a new inequality has emerged, characterized by less favorable loan terms, sometimes-problematic forms of housing, and a lack

Contemporary patterns of homeownership reflect the continuing racial and ethnic stratification that exists in nearly all areas of American society. Of particular interest, especially within the context of recent immigration legislation, are the homeownership experiences of Mexican immigrants in the United States. Copyright (c) 2007 Southwestern Social Science Association.

The 1999 Women’s World Cup Soccer Championship serves as a particularly good site for examining both the social construction of gender and the structure of contradiction surrounding women’s role in sport and society. We conducted a content analysis of 576 American newspaper articles reporting on the 1999 Women’s World Cup Soccer Championship. Contradictory messages surrounding women and sports were present, as past research has suggested. An analysis of more qualitative aspects of our data reveals the structure of these contradictions and provides substantial depth to this analysis. We discuss how the media actively promoted or constructed certain gender ideologies and how these gender ideologies contributed to the popularity of the event.

Although U.S. Latinos continue to be concentrated in particular places, many have shifted to “new” locations around the country. This study employs data from the Mexican Migration Project (MMP107) to examine the relationship between individual‐level characteristics and diverse U.S. destinations chosen by post‐1965 Mexican immigrants. Multinomial logistic regression analyses confirm the importance of human capital, social networks, and temporal context in directing immigrants to particular U.S. sites. The findings also suggest that employing a typology of U.S. destinations is useful for understanding the spatial distributions of contemporary Mexican immigrants.

No abstract

Immigrants represent an increasingly vital component of the U.S. housing market, though there is a substantial and growing gap in homeownership rates between natives and the foreign born. We employ the New Immigrant Survey‐2003 to examine the housing tenure of immigrants recently adjusted to new legal permanent resident status. The results reveal important cross‐national differences in the linkages between transfers to the origin country, relationships with U.S. mainstream financial institutions, previous unauthorized experience, and housing tenure. Analyses also document that immigrants occupy three distinct housing outcomes in America; renting, owning, and living for free.

Housing costs are a substantial component of U.S. household expenditures. Those who allocate a large proportion of their income to housing often have to make difficult financial decisions with significant short-term and long-term implications for adults and children. This study employs cross-sectional data from the first wave of the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) collected between 2000 and 2002 to examine the most common U.S. standard of housing affordability, the likelihood of spending thirty percent or more of income on shelter costs. Multivariate analyses of a low-income sample of U.S. born Latinos, Whites, African Americans, authorized Latino immigrants and unauthorized Latino immigrants focus on baseline and persistent differences in the likelihood of being cost burdened by race, nativity and legal status. Nearly half or more of each group of low-income respondents experience housing affordability problems. The results suggest that immigrants’ legal status is the primary source of disparities among those examined, with the multivariate analyses revealing large and persistent disparities for unauthorized Latino immigrants relative to most other groups. Moreover, the higher odds of housing cost burden observed for unauthorized immigrants compared with their authorized immigrant counterparts remains substantial, accounting for traditional indicators of immigrant assimilation. These results are consistent with emerging scholarship regarding the role of legal status in shaping immigrant outcomes in the United States.

No abstract