Mexican Border Crossers: The Mexican Body in Immigration Discourse

Author(s): Adalberto Aguirre Jr. and Jennifer K. Simmers

Source: Social Justice , 2008-09, Vol. 35, No. 4 (114), Migrant Labor and Contested Public
Space (2008-09), pp. 99-106
Published by: Social Justice/Global Options

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29768517

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/29768517?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Social Justice/Global Options is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Social Justice

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Mexican Border Crossers: The Mexican
Body in Immigration Discourse

Adalberte* Aguirre, Jr., and Jennifer K. Simmers*

The United States and Mexico share a border that extends nearly 2,000
miles along the southern borders of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and
Texas. In most areas, the border is located in remote and sparsely popu?
lated areas of vast desert and rugged mountain terrain. Historically, the U.S. side
of the border has served as a staging arena for U.S. military forays into Mexico.
For example, after Pancho Villa's excursion into Columbus, New Mexico, on the
evening of March 9,1916, General John "Black Jack" Pershing launched a military
invasion into Mexico (Welsome, 2006). The border has also served as a burying
ground for Mexicans crossing into the United States who get lost in the desert and
die of thirst. The likelihood of finding dead Mexican bodies along the border joining
Arizona and Mexico is so high that the area is known as "The Devil's Highway"
among Mexicans crossing into the United States (Urrea, 2004: 20):

You'd be hard pressed to meet a Border Patrol agent in either southern

Arizona sector who had not encountered death. It would be safe to say that
every one of them, except for the rankest probie just out of the academy,
had handled at least one dead body. And they all knew the locations of
unidentified skeletons and skulls. Bones peppered the entire region.

The border shared by the United States and Mexico, however, is more than just a
line on a map demarcating the geographical separation between the two countries. It
identifies a sharing of geographical, cultural, and social space between two neighbors
(Weisman, 1986). The two neighbors are joined together by the border, almost like
a seam between two pieces of cloth on a quilt. The U.S.-Mexico border engenders
a discourse that encompasses the social, economic, political, and physical confines
of social and geographical space. Regarding the cultural and political complexities
of the border separating the United States and Mexico, Fox (1999: 122) has noted
that "the border was always much more than a line demarcating national space.
Emphasizing the social and cultural dimensions of the U.S.-Mexico border over

*Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., is Professor and Chair of Sociology in the Department of Sociology at
the University of California-Riverside (Riverside, CA 92521; e-mail: adalberto.aguirre@ucr.edu).
His research interests focus on immigration, critical race theory, and diversity in higher education.
Jennifer K. Simmers is a graduate student in Sociology at the University of California-Riverside. Her
research interests focus on critical theory, media-cultural studies, and criminology.

Social Justice Vol. 35, No. 4 (2008-09) 99

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 100 Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., and Jennifer K. Simmers

topographical ones immediately gave 'border consciousness' a certain mobility."

As a result, the U.S.-Mexico border, la frontera, is synergistic?it fuels social and
cultural representations of the border.
The shared social and physical space that characterizes the U.S.-Mexico border
has generated numerous social and public policy concerns in the United States, from
immigration issues to terrorist threats (House Committee on Homeland Security,
2006; Doty, 2007). These concerns reflect the border's elasticity and vulnerability
regarding the level of criminalization the United States imposes on Mexicans
crossing the border into the United States. However, these concerns focus on only
one aspect of the border: its use as a line separating "us" from "them." As a result,
little attention is given to the representativeness of the U.S.-Mexico border for
a discourse on meaning and belonging, in particular, situating the Mexican body
in border discourses. We borrow from critical theory to construct a discussion re?
garding the social and cultural representations of the U.S.-Mexico border and the
movement of Mexican bodies into the United States (see Beltran, 2004). Contrary
to conventional perceptions that the border is a fixed concept that demarcates "us"
from "them," we argue that the border is constantly changing in form and meaning.
The movement of Mexican bodies into U.S. social spaces illustrates this synergism.
An implicit argument here is that the border has the potential to merge land and
people together into a shared body of social and cultural representations.

A Critical View of the Border

Sociologically, borders are partitions that divide social and geographical

space, as well as cultural forms and their representations. Within this perspective
the border shifts in form and meaning from a physical notion of geographical and
social space to a discursive notion of the border as fluid. For example, according
to bell hooks (2000), the idea of a border incorporates a mindset that incorporates
habits of being and lifestyles. By conceptualizing the border as multidimensional,
it serves as a rhetorical and metaphorical representation of border crossers and the
landscape. As such, the border merges land and people into a shared body of social
and cultural representations (see Martinez, 1988; Velez-Ibanez, 1996).
Regarding abstract constructions of the border, Dear and Leclerc (2003) argue
for articulating the inclusion of physical form (land) and people into a discursive
and critical discussion of the border. As such, the border shared by the U.S. and
Mexico is a nexus for the social and cultural representation of border crossing.
Crossing from Mexico into the United States is perceived in the American pub?
lic's mind as seeking "place" in social space that is unwilling to incorporate its
actualization (e.g., Mexican immigrants). As such, the Mexican border crosser is
situated as an object tied to the physicality of the border, such that any movement
away from the border enhances the perception of border crossers as being "out
of place." By ascribing social and cultural expression to the border in a tangible
geographic space, as well as a visible social element in the built environment, we

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Mexican Border Crossers: The Mexican Body in Immigration Discourse 101

suggest that border crossing enacts via bodies passing through fences, over walls,
and across rivers a rhetorical and metaphorical representation of the border crosser.

The U.S.-Mexieo Border as Site-Specific Text

Fox (1999: 1-2) notes that although "the border has received a great deal of
attention in recent literature and art, this body of work has not yet been fully ac?
knowledged by scholars and critics. Meanwhile, an abstract, metaphorical 'border'
has gained widespread currency in academic writing...but this usage is rarely tied
to the U.S.-Mexico border." Thus, a discussion about the U.S.-Mexico border as
site-specific text needs to incorporate conceptions of the border, border crossing,
and border crossers into a metaphorical and rhetorical paradigm. As site-specific
text, the border is "a place where urban and rural, national and international spaces
simultaneously coexist, often in complex and complicated ways" (Ibid.). Within
this framework, we suggest that the border must not be looked at as just a physi?
cal separation between people and culture. Rather, we conceive of the border as
a transcultural social space, with the potential for erasing the binary distinction
of "us and them." Thus, border crossing in its corporeal representation of border
crossers signifies the movement of the border across social space. According to Dear
and Leclerc (2003: 19), corporal representation (e.g., border crossers) and social
spaces are coupled in the same metaphorical representation: "bodies are always
emplaced. Individual perfomativities occur in space, and thereby create the places
of human (as well as nonhuman imprint)." The location and movement of border
crossers therefore map out where the border exists; in a sense, the U.S.-Mexico
border moves on the backs of border crossers.
Dell'Agnese (2005:205) has observed that "the border is, above all, a politically
charged place...[and] the same signifier (the 'border') can have different mean?
ings..., [implying] both the line demarcating the end of sovereignty and the zone
of interchange between one state and the other. It can also mean a barrier limiting
the free movement of people and goods, a symbolic end of the nation-Self and/or
an open frontier." Logistically, the presence of a border between the United States
and Mexico is very real. On October 26, 2006, the Senate passed into law House
Bill 6061 (The Secure Fence Act of 2006). House Bill 6061 authorized the con?
struction of a 700-mile fence to run along the southern border between the United
States and Mexico (Hew, 2007; Hurt, 2007; Tavares, 2007). As an extension of
the political state, a "border wall" functions to eliminate the number of Mexican
bodies that cross into U.S. territory. It is a monument in the built environment
that shields politically acceptable behavior (e.g., U.S. citizens) from threats (e.g.,
Mexican border crossers). As a result, border crossers from Mexico into the United
States are perceived as illegal or illegitimate by the political state, which labels
them as "political criminals."
Stopping the movement of Mexican bodies across the border into the United
States robs the border of cultural expression, that is, of the opportunity to perform as

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 102 Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., and Jennifer K. Simmers

a transcultural social space for crossers and residents. In contrast, the visual impact
of a border fence challenges notions of belonging and community. A "border wall"
eliminates the possibility of a space characterized by a hybridity of cultures and
peoples. For example, Dear and Leclerc (2003:4-5) see the border as a metropolis
composed of "border cities" that are merged into a single system composed of urban
lifestyles. In such a post-border city, a "border wall" prevents the interface between
culture as a flexible entity and the physical border as a moving, transformative
construct (see Romo, 2007).
Consider the imposition of a border wall onto the built environment of this
hypothetical post-border city as an attempt to recover the border as a physically
tangible entity. In building a border wall, the United States is expressing its material
resistance to the emergence and persistence of transcultural social space, especially
its challenges to U.S. social and cultural practices. In addition, it reflects a contin?
ued commitment by the state to impose a binary identity on the border (e.g., us/
them) instead of a shared binational identity that is congruent with transcultural
social space. Thus, a border wall is a material act that acknowledges difference
by erasing similarity. Ironically, in his testimony before the Committee on House
Government Reform regarding the building of this fence, T.J. Bonner (2006: 26),
National President of the AFL-CIO, stated that "neither barriers nor increased staff?
ing will discourage millions of impoverished people from illegally crossing our
borders annually. At best, such measures will only serve to push the problem from
one location to another." A wall incapable of stopping the cross-border movement
of people similarly will not prevent the inevitable mixing of social and cultural
practices that would typify a transcultural social space (e.g., a post-border city).
The concept of the U.S.-Mexico border as site-specific text merges metaphorical
and rhetorical constructions of the border with perceptions of its physical complexion.
For instance, metaphorical constructions of the "hard border" identify the built
environment of the cities located along a borderline while rhetorical constructions
of a "soft border" ("la frontera") identify a landscape comprised of maquiladoras,
militarized border crossings, and colonias infested by toxic pollution. At the
borderline and la frontera, the "hard border" of the built environment converges
with the "soft border" features of transcultural social space.
Currently, conflict and instability typify social and political issues on the
U.S.-Mexico border. The construction of a border fence and the installment of the
National Guard ("Operation Jump Start") along the U.S.-Mexico border serve to
portray conflict and instability as social forces that engender social, political, and
cultural separation between the United States and Mexico (Cannata, 2006; Moreno,
2007; VandeHei and Weisman, 2006). Unsurprisingly, the United States has decided
that militarization of the border is a simple and direct solution to enforcing separa?
tion between the two countries. However, since the border's inception after the
signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), skirmishes over territory have
been a central feature of binational relations between the two countries (Gregg,

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Mexican Border Crossers: The Mexican Body in Immigration Discourse 103

1937; Henderson, 1979; Lorey, 1999; Sandos, 1992; Utley, 1996). For example,
concern in the United States that the Mexican Revolution would result in the border
crossing of Mexican "terrorists" into the U.S. was the catalyst for the creation of a
"border air patrol" to monitor Mexicans crossing the U.S.-Mexico border (Hinkle,
1970; Ragsdale, 1984). Similarly, after the tragic events of September 11, the U.S.
government decided to deploy pilot-less drone aircraft to photograph and monitor
the movement of people crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in an attempt to prevent
terrorists from entering the United States from Canada and Mexico (Barber, 2004).
Ironically, pilot-less drone aircraft are the "weapon of choice" against the move?
ment of Mexicans crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Mexican Body in Rhetorical Space

There exists a physical border between the United States and Mexico that has
been carved into the landscape by political agreements between the two countries.
However, the border must not only be perceived in a normative, static form. An
invisible border exists in the form of mobile technologies, such as infrared cameras
and pilot-less drone aircraft, used by the U.S. government to safeguard the physi?
cal fabric of the border from penetration. The intersection between the physical
border and the movement of bodies (e.g., people) crossing it creates the illusion
that the U.S.-Mexico border accompanies the movement of Mexicans into the
United States. As Mexicans crossing the border move into the United States, the
border is perceived in the American public mind as invading the United States.
As Flores (2003: 376) notes regarding U.S. government deportations of Mexicans
and Mexican Americans to Mexico during the Great Depression, "the emphasis of
criminality and the criminalization of entry combined to provide a rhetorical space
in which the Mexican body became a criminal body." In this sense, the Mexican
body is the border wherever it moves. Public perception that the border is erected
wherever Mexicans situate themselves in the U.S. creates a sense of urgency for
criminalizing their movement.
For example, when the Hazelton, Pennsylvania, city council approved the Il?
legal Immigration Relief Act in July 2006, it reinforced the notion of the Mexican
body as border. The act imposed strict penalties on landlords who rented to illegal
immigrants and declared English as the city's official language (Barry, 2006). This
city ordinance was based on a template ("The Model Illegal Alien Immigrant Relief
Act Ordinance") developed by the Immigration Reform Institute, a conservative
Washington, D.C., legal think tank. Although the passing of this law was ostensibly
a reaction to sentiments against illegal immigrants that are currently rampant in
U.S. immigration discourse, in the context of the U.S.-Mexico border discourse, the
visual signifier of a Mexican body constructs a moral crisis of cultural intermixing
(Akers-Chacon and Davis, 2006). The Mexican body is perceived as creating ten?
sion in communal social space where it is not expected to be present; as a result, the
Mexican body is transformed into an unwelcome guest. In Hazelton, the presence

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 104 Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., and Jennifer K. Simmers

of Mexicans stimulated an uproar among the city's predominantly white residents

because they believed the U.S.-Mexico border had arrived at their doorsteps.
Using legal ordinances to deny the Mexican body access to social and living
space in Hazleton resulted in the construction of another border. The clear message it
sent about the separation of one set of bodies from another is not unlike the intended
purpose of the U.S.-Mexico border wall. One could argue that this law is directed
only at illegal immigrants, but the "body" of the brown individual problematically
tinges all brown bodies with the scent of illegality (for example, see Aguirre, 2004;
Romero and Serag, 2005). The representation of Mexicanness in border discourse
has always focused on reinforcing Anglo hegemony (see Campbell, 2005; Mains,
2000; Sanchez, 1997). The consequence of looking Mexican creates the presence
of the border on the body. Because the force of Hazleton's illegal immigrant law
inflicts all Mexican bodies, irrespective of status, the wall is clearly present. One
result was the mass exit of Mexican and Latino familiesfrom Hazleton (Barry, 2006).

Concluding Remarks

In our perhaps unconventional view of the U.S.-Mexico border, it is not a static,

one-dimensional representation of social and cultural space. By using critical theory
as a framework, we have suggested that the U.S.-Mexico border is transnational
and transcultural. It has its own synergism, which allows for the blending of so?
cial identities and cultural representations into a hybrid representation of border
crossers and border residents. We have tried to show that building a wall robs the
U.S.-Mexico border of its identity as a transcultural social space to reinforce Anglo
hegemony regarding biased views of the border. Since Mexicans are the only ones
perceived as "crossers," building a border fence robs them of the opportunity to
use the border as a vehicle for their representation in border space.
The notion of the border as transcultural social space enhances the discourse
regarding nationhood and identity along the U.S.-Mexico border. In particular,
the concept of the body as border is essential for understanding the relationship of
Mexican identity to their presence and voice in U.S. society. In American public
opinion, the U.S.-Mexico border flows with the movement of Mexican immigrants,
fueling the construction of ideologies that, as in Hazelton, are nested in racial bias.
Bias embedded in ideologies that attempt to criminalize the Mexican body reflect the
overt power of the political state in its protection of civil society. Hazelton's ordinance
is an example of how civil society chooses to transform Mexican immigrants into
criminals. The portrayal of Mexican immigrants as political criminals empowered
Hazelton's residents over a perceived social problem, e.g., Mexican immigrants. In
the end, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated Hazelton's anti-immigrant ordinance,
but it highlights the precarious reality of the Mexican body in U.S. society; that
is, the Mexican body's perceived threat to civil society depends on labor-market
needs, political climate, and public sentiment.

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Mexican Border Crossers: The Mexican Body in Immigration Discourse 105

REFERENCES
Aguirre, Jr., Adalberto
2004 "Profiling Mexican American Identity: Issues and Concerns." American Behav?
ioral Scientist 47: 928-942.
Akers-Chacon, Justin and Mike Davis
2006 No One Is Illegal: Fighting Racism and State Violence on the U.S.-Mexico
Border. Chicago: Haymarket Press.
Barber, D.A.
2004 "Wings over the Border." Tucson Weekly (January 8): 1-2.
Barry, Ellen
2006 "The Nation: City Vents Anger at Illegal Immigrants." Los Angeles Times (July
14): Al.
Beitran, Cristina
2004 "Patrolling Borders: Hybrids, Hierarchies and the Challenge of Mestizaje."
Political Research Quarterly 57: 595-607.
Bonner, T.J.
2006 "Expanding the Border Fence." Testimony before the Committee on House
Government Reform. Congressional Quarterly (July 20): 20-29.
Campbell, Howard
2005 "A Tale of Two Families: The Mutual Construction of 'Anglo' and Mexican
Ethnicities along the U.S.-Mexico Border." Bulletin of Latin American Research
24: 23-43.
Cannata, Amy
2006 "Guard Group Fueled for Border." Spokesman Review (Spokane, WA, August
1):A1.
Dear, Michael and Gustavo Leclerc (eds.)
2003 Postborder City: Cultural Spaces ofBajalta California. New York: Routledge.
Deil'Agnese, Elena
2005 "The U.S.-Mexico Border in American Movies: A Political Geography Perspec?
tive." Geopolitics 10: 204-221.
Doty, Roxanne
2007 "States of Exception on the Mexico-U.S. Border: Security, Decisions, and Civil?
ian Border Patrols." International Political Sociology 1: 113-137.
Flores, Lisa
2003 "Constructing Rhetorical Borders: Peons, Illegal Aliens, and Competing Narra?
tives of Immigration." Critical Studies in Media Communication 20: 362-387.
Fox, Claire
1999 The Fence and the River. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gregg, Robert
1937 The Influence of Border Troubles on Relations Between the United States and
Mexico, 1876-1910. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.
Henderson, Peter
1979 Mexican Exiles in the Borderlands, 1910-1913. El Paso: Texas Western Press.
Hew, Maurice
2007 "The Fence and the Wall (Mart)... Maginot Line Mentality." Connecticut Law
Review 39: 1383-1400.
Hinkle, Stacy
1970 Wings over the Border, the Army Air Service Armed Patrol of the United States
Mexico Border, 1919-1921. El Paso: Texas Western Press.
hooks, bell
2000 "Choosing the Margin as a Space of Radical Openness." Jane Rendell, Barbara
Penner, and Iain Borden (eds.), Gender Space Architecture. New York: Rout
ledge.

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 106 Adalberto Aguirre, Jr., and Jennifer K. Simmers

House Committee on Homeland Security

2006 A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border. Washing?
ton, D.C.: House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Investiga?
tions.
Hurt, Charles
2007 "House Passes Border Fence; Democrats Bill a Gimmick." The Washington
Times (September 15): A01.
Lorey, David E.
1999 The US-Mexican Border in the Twentieth Century. Wilmington: Scholarly
Resource, Inc.
Mains, Susan
2000 "An Anatomy of Race and Immigration Politics in California." Social and Cul?
tural Geography 1: 143-154.
Martinez, Oscar J.
1988 Troublesome Border. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Moreno, Sylvia
2007 "For Residents of Arizona Town, Towers Are Unwelcome Eyes in the Sky."
Washington Post (June 10): A3.
Ragsdale, Kenneth
1984 Wings over the Mexican Border: Pioneer Military Aviation in the Big Bend.
Austin: University of Texas Press.
Romero, Mary and Marwah Serag
2005 "Violation of Latino Civil Rights Resulting from INS and Local Police Use of
Race, Culture and Class Profiling: The Case of the Chandler Roundup in Ari?
zona." Cleveland State Law Review 52: 75-96.
Romo, Rene
2007 "Border Fence Aims to Keep Illegal Immigrants out, but Communities Say They
Share a Bond." Albuquerque Journal (July 8): Bl.
Sanchez, George J.
1997 "Immigrant Adaptation and Native-Born Responses in the Making of Ameri?
cans." Internntinnnl Mi.0ra.ti.nn Rp.vi.pw 31: 1009?1030
Sandos, James
1992 Rebellion in the Borderlands: Anarchism and the Plan of San Diego, 1904
1923. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Tavares, Marta
2007 "Fencing Out the Neighbors: Legal Implications of the U.S.-Mexico Border
Security Fence." Human Rights Brief14: 33-37.
Urrea, Luis
2004 The Devil's Highway: A True Story. New York: Back Bay Books.
Utley, Robert Marshall
1996 Changing Course: The International Boundary, United States and Mexico,
1848-1963. Tucson: Southwest Parks and Monuments Association.
Velez-Ibanez, Carlos
1996 Border Visions: Mexican Culture of the Southwest United States. Tucson: Uni?
versity of Arizona Press.
VandeHei, Jim and Jonathan Weisman
2006 "Bush Begins Push for Immigration Deal with Congress." Washington Post
(April 25): A04.
Weisman, Alan
1986 La Frontera: The United States Border with Mexico. San Diego: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Welsome, Eileen
2006 The General and the Jaguar: Pershing 's Hunt for Pancho Villa. New York:
Little Brown and Company.

This content downloaded from

152.118.24.31 on Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:28:56 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms