Individualization and Popular Culture

  • Uncategorized

Individualization and Popular Culture 3

Individualizationand Popular Culture

Due

Individualizationmarks the change of the human social relation that values personalautonomy rather than the social inter-connectedness. These relationsinclude categories such as religion, gender, status group, and class.In other terms, human beings need not behave in accordance with theirsocietal or parental demands. Instead, they can decide their ownpath. These choices range from their love preferences and the amountof time to engage in the relationship, their mannerisms, eatinghabits, beliefs, and their fashion sense. Due to this, Dempsey &ampLindsay (2014: 58) claim that the lack of older source guidelines andthe creation of current moral models and guidelines facilitateindividualization. In this paper, I will strive to analyze theindividualization’s key features and describe its connection to thechanges in relationships and families. I will also attempt todescribe individualization among relationships and families using anexample of popular culture.

Theprimary factors that promote individualization include globalization,secularization, women’s liberations, gay rights, and urbanization(Kruske et al., 2012). It is apparent that these features integratewith one another. They add into the assortment of ambitions andlifestyles among others. For instance, through the concept ofglobalization, individuals tend to collect different philosophiesfrom every part of the world adding them to their lifestyles. Inagreement with Zorc-Maver (2002), these features give people an openmind since they manage to realize that there are different religions,races, and cultures. They allow people to choose from broad scopes ofnotions rather than the traditional democracy, which allowed them todecide from a narrow set of perspectives (Rubin &amp Morrison,2014).

Beck&amp Beck-Gernsheim (2013) point out that relationship are eitherobjective links grounded on marriage or biological relatedness orsubjective connections founded by sexual interactions or connectionsand emotion. With relation to marriage, individualization theorystresses that new behavior, values, and a more conveyed andself-conscious attitude towards relationships is arising. Beck &ampBeck-Gernsheim (2002) asset that this is to adapt to the socialmodifications related to gender, workforce, and class. People as wellas policy and lawmakers must regularly rethink mindfully concerningbeing ethical and moral. For instance, the many marriages are endingup in divorce, which defies the normal nuclear family structure sincepeople seek to be an individual. Further, it claims that thedelicateness of intimate relationships due to many demands on couplesmakes it hard to maintain an emotional commitment (Beck-Gernsheim,2012). Therefore, it is true that individualization causes people toseek independent lives to cater for the economic aspect of theirlives where they must meet long hours and flexibility demands.

Subsequently,popular culture assumes people normally perform tasks to enjoy theireveryday life through entertainment and culture. It is perceived thata number of movie producers realize the influence they have onculture if they incorporate individualism. For example, in the movieparent trap, a couple thinks it best to separate and with eachindividual taking care of one set of twins. They generally grewdistance due to the pressures of work, which allowed them to detachemotionally from one another. In accordance with O`Brien (2015),individualization supports the change of family systems from a normalnuclear family to one where a single parent takes control. However,the twins in this case conspired to get their parents together andeventually managed to bring their family together. Popular culture iseffective in outlining the concepts of individualization and showshow family and intimate relationships are changing with time.

References

Beck,EU, &amp Beck-Gernsheim, E 2013, DistanceLove,n. p: Wiley

Beck,U, &amp Beck-Gernsheim, E 2002, Individualization:Institutionalized Individualism And Its Social And PoliticalConsequences,n. p.: London, England

Beck-Gernsheim,E 2012, `RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS IN THE CONTEMPORARY FAMILY:RETHEORIZING INDIVIDUALISM, FAMILIES AND THE STATE: From Rights andObligations to Contested Rights and Obligations: Individualization,Globalization, and Family Law`, TheoreticalInquiries In Law,13, p. 1

Dempsey,D, &amp Lindsay, J, 2014, Families,relationships and intimate life,n. p: Oxford University Press: South

Kruske,S, Belton, S, Wardaguga, M, &amp Narjic, C 2012, `Growing Up OurWay: The First Year of Life in Remote Aboriginal Australia`,QualitativeHealth Research,22, 6, pp. 777-787

O`Brien,J 2015, `Individualism as a Discursive Strategy of Action: Autonomy,Agency, and Reflexivity among Religious Americans`, SociologicalTheory,33, 2, pp. 173-19

Rubin,M, &amp Morrison, T 2014, `Individual Differences in Individualismand Collectivism Predict Ratings of Virtual Cities’ Liveability andEnvironmental Quality`, JournalOf General Psychology,141, 4, pp. 348-372

Zorc-Maver,D 2002, `Individualization: Institutionalized Individualism and itsSocial and Political Consequences`, ActaSociologica (Taylor &amp Francis Ltd),45, 2, pp. 172-175

Close Menu