Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Culture impact on behavior
Effects of culture on society
Influence of the media
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Culture impact on behavior
One of the most common questions to date is whether humans have free will, meaning do we feel as if we have the choice to do what we want with our lives. This thought has brought me to question whether humans are able to choose their own path or if we are subject to cultural norms that influence our actions. Having read three essays with similar views on this subject I have been able to shape a thought process about this issue. Cultural critic, Laura Kipnis concentrated her studies on sexual politics and gender issues, which can be seen in “Love’s Labor”. In her polemic she explained how perceptions of love have been shaped by beliefs that are propelled by the culture of our society. Feminist philosopher, Susan Bordo, focused her studies on …show more content…
In each of the writings all the authors discussed oppression in different perspectives, which can be understood as the state of being subject to unfair treatment or control. Foucault’s essay specified the panopticons purpose, which was to “induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” (187). This quote leads me to further believe for the fear of being disciplined individuals act accordingly to coincide with the higher authority. For instance when individuals have adopted cultural norms we act as if we are being watched at all times, whether it is through a surveillance camera, the government, or law enforcement. As these behaviors become standard, how we act in public will soon convert into how we act in private. Kipnis’ polemic is a great example of how cultural norms and the media come into play with oppression. It is clear that we are not born with love we are taught to love through the media constantly interpreting if they can love you should love. As stated by Kipnis “Consider…millions of images of lovestruck couples looming over us from movie screens, televisions, billboards, magazines, incessantly strong-arming us onboard the love train” (402). From this quote I can take away that the constant publicity of love as monogamy makes us identify monogamy as an essence of love.
The Bible which is seen as one of the most sacred text to man has contained in it not only the Ten Commandments, but wedding vows. In those vows couples promise to love, cherish, and honor each other until death does them apart. The irony of women accepting these vows in the nineteenth century is that women are viewed as property and often marry to secure a strong economic future for themselves and their family; love is never taken into consideration or questioned when a viable suitor presents himself to a women. Often times these women do not cherish their husband, and in the case of Edna Pontiellier while seeking freedom from inherited societal expectations and patriarchal control; even honor them. Women are expected to be caretakers of the home, which often time is where they remain confined. They are the quintessential mother and wife and are expected not to challenge that which...
Rupp shows the constraining nature of heterosexuality by revealing the increasing prevalence “atypical” relationships in the global context. Because of factors like traditional values and religious beliefs, people are married to the idea of a relationship involving intimacy between a man and a woman. However, the various narrative examples of lesbians, from China to South Africa, are evidence that homosexuality is normal in that it exists in numerous settings. The countries that have long ago allowed same-sex marriage and removed all stigma associated with this nontraditional practice serve as models for others to learn from. In the end, core values and beliefs are hard to change, but they can still slowly change and globalize with the passage of
The theory of Panopticon by Foucault can be applied in this poem. According to Foucault, there is a cultural shift from the old traditional discipline of inmates to a European disciplinary system (314). In this new disciplinary model, the prisoners always assume that they are under constant watch by the guards and they start policing themselves. Panopticon is the process of inducing inmates to a state of conscious and ...
However, there are other critiques that take a different approach on the oppression that exists in the novel. In "Urban Panopticism And Heterotopic Space In Kafka 's Der Process And Orwell 's Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Raj Shah argues that the way in which society in novel is oppressed is not an obvious oppression but one that focuses on constant surveillance. He uses Foucault’s arguments on panopticism to describe this. Shah states, “Foucault neologizes panopticism to describe a form of power relying not on overt repression, but rather upon the continuous surveillance of a population and the consequent strict regulation of the body” (703). He explains it is the constant surveillance that strips individuals of their rights and places them under oppression. He goes on to
Ever feel as though someone is watching you? You know that you are the only one in a room, but for some reason you get an eerie feeling that you are not alone? You might not see anyone, but the eyes of a stranger could be gazing down on you. In Foucault's "Panopticism," a new paradigm of discipline is introduced, surveillance. No one dares to break the law, or do anything erroneous for that matter, in fear that they are being watched. This idea of someone watching your every move compels you to obey. This is why the idea of Panopticism is such an efficient form of discipline. The Panopticon is the ideal example of Panopticism, which is a tool for surveillance that we are introduced to in “Panopticism.” Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," has taken the idea of surveillance one step further. The government not only observes everyone, but has complete control over society. The citizens of the United States cannot even think for themselves without being interrupted by the government. They are prisoners in their own minds and bodies. The ideals of “Panopticism” have been implemented to the fullest on society in Vonnegut’s "Harrison Bergeron," through physical and mental handicaps.
In the LGBT community, they develop intimate relationships in the same stages as heterosexual couples however they resolve conflicts more positively. Due to them being in a relationship with the same-sex partner, they approach roles in a relationship and marriage using egalitarianism. We all give and receive love differently. Knox & Schacht discuss the different types of loves styles a person’s desires from their relationships such as ludic, pragma, eros, mania, storge, and agape. These different love styles also express how lovers can understand and relate to one
Foucault once stated, “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance; under the surface of images, one invests” (301). By this, he means that our society is full of constant supervision that is not easily seen nor displayed. In his essay, Panopticism, Foucault goes into detail about the different disciplinary societies and how surveillance has become a big part of our lives today. He explains how the disciplinary mechanisms have dramatically changed in comparison to the middle ages. Foucault analyzes in particular the Panopticon, which was a blueprint of a disciplinary institution. The idea of this institution was for inmates to be seen but not to see. As Foucault put it, “he is the object of information, never a subject in communication”(287). The Panopticon became an evolutionary method for enforcing discipline. Today there are different ways of watching people with constant surveillance and complete control without anyone knowing similar to the idea of the Panopticon.
...easily controls and manipulates the way individuals behave. Although there are no true discourses about what is normal or abnormal to do in society, people understand and believe these discourses to be true or false, and that way they are manipulated by powers. This sexual science is a form of disciplinary control that imprisons and keeps society under surveillance. It makes people feel someone is looking at them and internally become subjective to the rules and power of society. This is really the problem of living in modern society. In conclusion, people live in a society, which has created fear on people of society, that makes people feel and be responsible for their acts. Discourses are really a form in which power is exercised to discipline societies. Foucault’s argument claims discourses are a form of subjection, but this occurs externally not internally.
...e concept of panopticon is enough in our society to insure discipline when he says, “A real subjection is born mechanically from a fictitious relation. So it is not necessary to use force to constrain the convict to good behavior, the madman to calm, the worker to work, the schoolboy to application, the patient to the observation of the regulations. Bentham was surprised that panoptic institutions could be so light: there were no more bars, no more chains, no more heavy locks” (Foucault 289). Only thing that our society needs today to make it a better place is panopticon. This is exactly what Foucault is saying when he says, “panoptic institutions could be so light”. People in our society are just like the prisoners inside the panopticon. We think that some is watching from the tower and we behave properly similar to the traffic rules example that I talked about.
Judith Butlers book entitled ‘Bodies that Matter’ examines and questions the belief that certain male-female behaviors are natural within our society. The behaviors that Dr. Butler has distinguished between in this book are femininity and masculinity. She believes that through our learned perception of these gendered behaviors this is an act or performance. She implies that this is brought to us by normative heterosexuality depicted in our timeline. In which, takes on the role of our language and accustomed normalization of society. Butler offers many ideas to prove some of her more radical idea’s such as examples from other philosophers, performativity, and worldwide examples on gender/sex. Some philosophers that seem to be of relevance to her fighting cause are Michel Foucault, Edmund Husserl, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and George Herbert Mead. Her use of the doctrine of constitution takes ‘the social agent as an object rather than the subject of constitutive acts” (Performative). In other words, Dr. Butler will question the extent to which we as a human race assume the given individualism between one another. She has said that “this will constitute him-or herself” (Butler 13). She also wonders to what extent our acts are reputable for us, rather, by our place within dialect and convention. Dr. Butlers followings being of a postmodernist and poststructuralist practice, decides to use the term “subject” rather than “individual” or “person” in order to underline the linguistic nature of her position. This approach should be of credit to philosopher Jacques Lacan because symbolic order gives the system and signs of convention that determines our perception of what we see as reality.
Whether these authors, or their critics, can be taken for their word is left to each individual to decide. Tannen, Gray, and Page have endeavored to untangle the complex web of miscommunication between men and women. By the same token, their critics have worked to find fault in their arguments and perspectives. Nonetheless, their work has provided a basis from which all manners of people can begin to evaluate their own lives and relationships. Regardless of whether their advice is accurate or not, perhaps the words of these authors can be something to consider during that next fight with the significant other.
One view comes from Nancy Chodorow who defines the idea of love in feminine qualities. Mary Ryan suggests that love was feminized by the separation of home and workplace in the nineteenth century (522). Nancy Chodorow view was that at birth males and females have a strong attachment with their mothers. As both children grow differences take place in the male since they have to men they repress their capacity for intimacy but, in females they keep the connection for intimacy as they grow up to be women (522). Also Chodorow discussed that men see themselves as separate although women see themselves as connected to others and this cycle will continue if women continue to be the primary caretaker. Mary Ryan discussed that love began to be feminized as a result of the separation between men and women at home. Ryan’s perspective argued that both men and women were expected to work hard, be modest, and loving towards their spouse and children who basically stated that love was a reciprocal ideal (pg522 para3). Once capitalism came about money making left the household. The activities between men and women grew apart as the man worked all day to provide for his family while the woman stayed home with the children. As this separation grew more and more apart the world began to view the loving and personal environment at home as feminine and the powerful impersonal environment of the workplace to be masculine.
Gender is a socially constructed phenomenon, and how acceptable one’s relationship is determined by society’s view of gender roles. Because the majority of the population is characterized as heterosexual, those who deviate from that path are ...
Overall, we can see that 200 years later we are still attempting to escape from the gender line created through society’s image of men and women. Men and women still fail to communicate their feelings within their relationships, resulting in an overall unhealthy marriage. Today women and men attempt to challenge these gender stereotypes by taking on the roles of the opposite gender, but like in the “Yellow Wallpaper” are immediately met with “heavy opposition” and disapproval through the process. Although we may seem as though we are improving in escaping from the gendered stereotypes, the past will always be recurrent in a majority of relationships today if dominance within the relationship is not equally balance between both sexes.
How gender shapes the love can be seen from two different points of views, both exemplified in “The Power of Marriage”. The first is the aforementioned infidel identity of men. The second however takes a complete turn as it is the factor of how gender shapes love in regarding to the LGBT community. In many states gays are not allowed to marry and ultimately they are socially unacceptable. Due to their identity of being gay their love is shaped with complications that derives from the way most communities act towards the idea of same gender love. Due to their same gender love, some communities are shaped to be unaccepting whereas others are shaped to be accepting and supportive. The unaccepting communities will usually show hate which will ultimately affect the way the lovers feel as well. Another way how same gender love influences and shapes the community is when other gay couples gain the hope and confidence they need from the love of other supporting couples. Essentially, the love in a community regarding gender will either influence the community to be spiteful or the love will spread and create a type of haven for other same gender lovers in the