Rios, Victor M. (2009). The Consequences of the Criminal Justice Pipeline on Black and Latino Masculinity. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 623: 150. DOI: 10.1177/0002716208330489

Masculinity, Crime, and Crime Control

Individuals shape their behavior according to gendered expectations and are subject to a system of accountability that is gendered, raced, and classed
(Fenstemaker and West 2002; West and Fenstemaker 1995).
Youth of color are inculcated into a set of hypermasculine expectations that often lead them to behaviors that conflict with the structures of dominant institutions.
For example, Ferguson (2000) demonstrated that schools participate in the making of black masculinity in children as young as ten years old. Masculinity-making is heavily responsible for the deviance and punishment that takes place in the classroom and later in the criminal justice system.

To be assigned “real man” status by relevant others and institutions, young men must pass multiple litmus tests among peers, family, and other institutions.
These masculinity tests, or codes, were identified by sociologists as early as the
1920s.
In 1924, Edwin Sutherland discussed how boys are taught to be rough and tough, rendering them more likely than girls to become delinquent (cited in
Sutherland and Cressey 1955). In 1947, Parsons noted that at the very core of
American adolescence an aggressive masculinity is at play:

Western men are peculiarly susceptible to the appeal of an adolescent type of assertively masculine behavior . . . to revolt against the routine aspects of the primary institutionalized masculine role of sober responsibility, meticulous respect for the rights of others, and tender affection towards women. (Quoted in Kimmel 2006, 82)

Contemporary urban ethnographers also emphasize this point. For example,