Gay and Lesbian Marriage in Europe and North America - Essay Example

Social Theory: Gidden's Theory of Structuration and Gay/Lesbian Marriage in the Europe and North America Social Theory Social theory helps not only to define a current social situation, but also to help explain the various views and concepts surrounding the issue. Contemporary society is full of debate and disagreement about hot topics. One of the many hot topics in contemporary society is that of gay/lesbian marriage. While here in the U.K. gay marriage has recently been accepted, it is still a matter of great debate throughout the world, and most especially in the United States. Why is this issue of such great debate While many issues focus on social ideas and normative behavior, there are few that so closely look at human behavior, and how social hierarchies and beliefs impinge upon natural human actions. This is clearly a situation where, while actions are happening on the micro level of society, the response is being created by the macro level of society. Gidden's Theory of Structuration looks in detail at how all levels of society interact and help to create the responses of the other levels. Gidden's suggests that no social structure is permanent; rather it is built upon the actions of those who reside inside of it. While society can not be explained from the macro level, it can also not be explained without it. By reviewing the concept of gay/lesbian marriage from through Gidden's theory, a clearer view of society emerges. Gidden's argues that there is a duality to social structure. While it is created by those who live in it, they are also bound to follow its' rules (Fuchs 1). While it is clearly ever changing, there are also certain areas which remain static, based upon the culture that is being reviewed. Gay/lesbian marriage is an issue that is currently affecting all cultures, causing slow changes to the status quo. In European nations, gay marriage is slowly gaining in acceptance. However, it still meets with strong disapproval in the United States. A key difference between the two societies is the religious factor. While most European countries claim Christianity as their religion, there is also a certain lax feature about religion. It is accepted that a person may or may not be religious, and that therefore not all people should be bound by religious ideals. At the same time, the United States claims o religious alliance, and yet bases many laws upon Christian beliefs. By having no set state religion, it is easy for the current president to force his own beliefs upon the people. Because social structures are based upon those who live in them, the current religion of choice for the country (a social structure in and of itself) plays a major role in determining whether or not a structure will change to accommodate new ideas and beliefs. Giddens puts forth the belief (much like Habermas) that society is still in a thoroughly modernist time. He does not believe that society is becoming increasingly individualist, but rather that classic social theory is no longer valuable in defining society. Rather, society has changed, but only in context, not in how society actually works (Vanicek 1). Throughout history there have been issues which the general public can not agree on, and eventually, over time, subtle changes to the social structure changed the social conscious, and when the social conscience began to change, so did the current belief system. Gay/lesbian marriage is becoming increasingly accepted simply because society is getting more used to the idea. Like most social issues, it must first become common, and then it will slowly become more accepted. Divorce is a great example. While at first it was completely rejected as sinful and unacceptable, over time it has become common place. The rapidity of the change is directly related to how each society is run, and what that society values. With gay/lesbian marriage especially, it is interesting to note that while the United States claims to be a progressive society, it is one of the most backwards on the issue. Spain, a Catholic country is very progressive on the issue, while they are generally considered to be a more conservative society. It is clear that the written ideas and beliefs of a country do not accurately portray the actual beliefs and actions of the country. Gidden's theory of structuration is particularly apt and helpful in this example, since it recognizes that while the social hierarchy and foundation are what people build their thoughts and beliefs on, it is also those thoughts and beliefs that build the social hierarchy and structure. Simply put, there is nothing simple about social construction. Recognizing that social theory is cyclical in nature and that all changes take time, the slow changes to the acceptance of gay/lesbian marriage make sense. Countries (such as Spain and the United Kingdom) are already particularly aware of the need for people to be able to be recognized for who they are, and accept that not all people desire to be religious in their nature, or that not all traditionally bound rules are successful. Countries such as the United States, while claiming individual freedom, maintain a hierarchy that is based solely on who is in office. The election of a conservative means that the entire countries politics will become more conservative. This inequality of power slows down the cyclical nature of social change, and does not allow change to happen in its own time. Eventually, the government will change, and so will the politics, but it will happen at a much slower rate than places that require their government to be balanced. Studying this particular theorist has truly been an eye opener. It is hard to recognize that change comes from both the structure and those who utilize the structure. While it is a simple concept, it is truly quite revolutionary to say that when a person strives to change a system of thoughts and beliefs, they are also operating within that system of thoughts and beliefs. I truly believe that change is necessary, and that eventually, gay/lesbian marriage will be commonplace in almost all nations. The United States is particularly backwards on this issue, but their current political state can clearly be blamed. The actual social structure there does not in any way match the social beliefs that they have written down, and are far to open to biased interpretation. The cyclical nature of social change is best respected by a group that allows all different groups some say in change of theory, so that it is moderated to meet the needs of the society, and not the fanatic few. Overall, this module has allowed me to see that there are many ways to look at social theory and change, and that there is no one correct way to understand what is happening around us. Gidden's theory of structuration suggests that we can have our cake and eat it too, which is a unique idea, and one that bears further study. It seems obvious that change is cyclical, and that we create the structure that rules our behavior. At the same time, it is difficult to acknowledge that even our striving for change is relegated by the structure that we built around ourselves, and that the unwavering beliefs that we hold are no more than someone else's ideas of what is right or wrong. Recognizing that social theory is no more than us accepting that our standards of behavior are made up by others around us helps to put the need to change society into perspective. Studying social theory is also studying behavioral theory, since it asks that we attempt to understand why humans create the social hierarchies and structures that we do. Gay/lesbian marriage will eventually become an accepted part of society, although it will take time. It needs time to be normalized, and then it will just become commonplace. Gidden's theory allows us to see that all changes are based on slows changes both to people's beliefs and understandings, and also to the structure that we use to uphold society. In this way, social theory defines society, and allows for a clearer understanding of human actions, thoughts, and behaviors. Works Cited Charles Camic 1999.Anthony Giddens: The Last Modernist.The American Journal of Sociology105,no.2(September1):536-538. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 20, 2006). Christian Fuchs 2003.Structuration Theory and Self-Organization.Systemic Practice and Action Research16,no.2(April1):133. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 22, 2006). Christiane Bender 2000.Anthony Giddens: The Last Modernist. Contemporary Sociology29,no.4(July1):677-678. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 22, 2006). Gregory Pappas and Adnan A Hyder and Mohammad Akhter 2003.Globalization: Toward a New Framework for Public Health.Social Theory & Health1,no.2(September1):91+. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 20, 2006). Crowley, John. 2000.Utopia, realism and the search for politics.Innovation13,no.2(June1):141-153. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 19, 2006). Little, Daniel 1996.The Elements of Social Theory / Politics, Sociology, and Social Theory: Encounters with Classical and Contemporary Social Thought. The American Political Science Review90,no.3(September1):619. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 20, 2006). Marilynn Larkin 2001.Pop culture perspective on social theory.The Lancet358,no.9291(October27):1469. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 22, 2006). Neocleous Mark 2000.Conversations with Anthony Giddens: Making Sense of Modernity. Contemporary Sociology29,no.2(March1):433. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 19, 2006). Tucker, Kenneth H Jr 1996.Cultural criticism in the late twentieth century -- Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order by Ulrich Beck, Anthony Giddens and Scott Lash / Critique of Modernity by Alain Touraine, translated by David Macey. Contemporary Sociology25,no.1(January1):10. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 22, 2006). Vancek, Vit. 2005.Anthony Giddens: The Consequences of Modernity (Dusledky modernity. Perspectivesno.24(July1):73-75,90. http://www.proquest.com/(accessed August 18, 2006). Read More