Relationship between Class, Gender, Sexuality or Race and Taste Today - Essay Example

Relationship between Class, Gender, Sexuality or Race and Taste Today Name Course Name and Code Instructor’s Name Date Introduction Over the past recent years, the concept of boundaries among people and different social groups has been the focus of influential study agendas in anthropology, history, political science, social psychology, and sociology (Corrigan, 1997). In exploring the same idea, different relationships have been discovered with regard to social and collective identity, racial and ethnic group positioning, commensuration, census categories, cultural capital, cultural membership, group rights, scientific controversies, professional jurisdiction, and contentious politics. Boundaries between different social groups can well be described by extensively looking at Social and collective identity; inequalities in class, race, sexuality and taste; professions, knowledge, and science; and communities, national identities, and spatial boundaries. This paper seeks to discuss the relationships between class, gender, sexuality or race and taste today. The paper will also explain theories as to how taste works drawing examples from media text, and cultural phenomena. The key and main relationship between class, gender, sexuality or race and taste is that they create boundaries between different social groups. For instance, they facilitate the identification of the theoretically illuminating similarities and differences with regard to how boundaries are created across different contexts and types of groups, and at the social psychological, cultural and structural levels (Corrigan, 1997). In general, in understanding conceptual distinctions, interpretive strategies, and cultural tradition particularly in creating, maintaining, contesting and dissolving institutionalized differences, class, gender, sexuality or race and taste play a vital role. Social boundaries are social differences that are manifested due to unequal access and distribution of resources and social opportunities. Boundaries both symbolic and social help particularly as a thinking tool as it captures the fundamental social process with regard to relationships. Vast literature has been written on class, race, and gender inequality analysing closures among different social groups. Earlier researchers focused specifically on closure and social boundaries, however with time, symbolic boundaries has been the centre of the study. In this case, class boundaries mainly focus on cultural consumptions, class makers, and class production and how an individual is shaped by class inequality (Milner & Browitt, 1996). Ethnic and racial inequality discusses the institutionalization of classification systems, threats to group positioning, and ethnic racial identity. Gender or sexual inequality describes how gender and sexual categories shape expectation and work life. These three elements discuss the same fundamental social process at work, which is mainly the relational definition of identity and social position (Muggleton, 1997). Class The world over there exist different social classes that in one way or another are defined based on norms and practices that bind them. Through studies it has been established that minimal academic performance of working class children is not as a result of lower ability but rather institutional discrimination against them (Adomo, 2003). For instance, schools evaluate children basing on their cultural capital, the familiarity of the dominant class and hence penalizing lower class students. Students from higher social background have ease access to the fundamental educational resources from their home environment; extensive vocabularies, wide ranging cultural differences, together with the command of high culture are elements that are highly valued by school systems (Milner & Browitt, 1996). In lower class environs, students are strenuously selected by the school system. Lower class students unknowingly blame themselves for their failure, which at times culminates into their dropping out, or sorting themselves into lower prestige educational tracks. They are completely unaware and hence they remain under the spell of the culture of the dominant class. Social boundaries are virtually created by direct exclusion, over-selection, self-exclusion, and lower educational tracking. These factors are generated by symbolic class makers or symbolic boundaries that are mainly evident in French educational system. Understanding tastes and cultural practices can expound this argument further. In most instances, a specific class struggles to extend its taste and lifestyle where symbolic classification significantly plays a key role in the production of class privileges. Furthermore, dominant social groups have advantage over minority groups and hence they often succeed in legitimizing their own cultures (Bourdieu, 1984). In line with this, they exercise symbolic violence by imposing and legitimizing specific meaning while concealing power relations. Further, they use their legitimate culture to create a cultural boundary thus monopolizing privileges and exclude to recruit new members to their high status position. An individuals’ self is shaped by class and produced through boundaries and differences. There are significant differences in childhood socialization across different social classes. Lareau (2000) identified that black and white upper-middle class parents covet concerted cultivation and the pursuit of self-actualization for their children contrary to natural growth that mainly advocated for by working class parents (Thornton, 1997). Consequently, Milner and Browitt (1996) described how the identity of poor young black men and how they account for their distinctive social position in relation to other social groups. Owing to these facts, symbolic boundaries create social boundaries particularly when they are drawn in opposition to one group as opposed to multiple and competing groups. Race Boundaries have been at the centre stage with regard to ethnic and racial inequality studies as an alternative to static cultural or biological theories of ethnic and racial differences. The relational approach to ethnicity emphasizes shared culture where feelings of communality are defined in opposition to the perceived identity in relation to other racial and ethnic groups. The nation or state plays a crucial role in the creation of racial differences while acting as an internal homogenizer of population. The production of racial and ethnic classification of people by states provides grounds for studying shifts in social boundaries. In the US for instance, the polarization of the whites and non-whites has in most instances culminated into violence. Immigrants identify themselves with the white population in order to defend their privileged status. Racism results from threats to group positioning (Muggleton, 1997). Consequently, the individual’s pre-occupational feeling to belong to a specific racial group and relate with it, is a collective process through which a racial group defines and redefines another racial group. Self-interest is the foundation of ethnic conflicts and how these conflicts are associated with closure that demands protection of the acquired privileges. The relational aspects of racial and ethnic identity are because of a process of self-definition and the creation of symbolic boundaries and assignment of collective identities by others. Bourdieu, (1984)observed the white opposition to affirmative action when he studied how middle class and working class whites developed their experiences in labour market comparing them to those of blacks. Accordingly, Lamont (2000) observed the moral view of workers leads them to create racial boundaries; for example white workers viewed blacks to be poor lacking work ethics; while on the other hand, blacks associated white workers with middle class egotism. Gender and Sexuality Here, wide ranges of boundaries are defined: physical, social, ideological, and psychological boundaries that are essential in establishing the similarities and differences between women and men, among women, and among men that shapes and constrains the behaviour and attitudes of each sex. Owing to social psychological level, Ridgeway (1997) describes gender inequality in terms of interactional process and creation of boundaries. She eluded that through gender humans are automatically and unconsciously categorized to specific groups to whom they must relate. When occupational roles are activated with regard to a specific person, they are nested within the categorization of that person as either male or female and thus taking on a slight meaning. In this case male workers are claimed to be more competent that their female counterparts (Adomo, 2003). It has also been established that those who undermine and violate gender boundaries with respect to norms of time management for example are susceptible to experience punishment and stigmatization in the workplace (Fletcher, 1997). Gender based social boundaries are eminent in organizations and professions. Boundary sustainability and maintenance is usually analysed through the rules and regulations that are imposed on men and women working in occupations that are strongly gendered. For example, in nursing men are given more opportunities than women and hence their rate of ascending the professional ladder is higher (Adomo, 2003). Male and female categories are used in various instances by dominant groups to deny marginalized ones access to resources. Exploitation and opportunity hoarding are the main mechanisms used by dominant groups to gain advantage over the minorities. In some instances, gender inequality results from cumulative, individual and sometimes unnoticed organizational processes. Gender and sexual boundaries are essential in the study of boundary crossing and boundary shifting together with institutionalization and diffusion of boundaries. Taste Taste is an acquired character to differentiate and appreciate; it is establishing and marking the difference through the process of distinction that is not necessarily a distinctive knowledge as it ensures recognition of object without applying knowledge of the distinctive features that define it (Manza, 1992). The issue of taste is tied together with subcultures that have been on the rise in the recent past. Subcultures have predominantly defined social boundaries between youths. In essence, youths choose styles, or element of styles, with regard to constant creation and recreation of identity (Bourdieu, 1984). A taste culture is a group of people with shared system of preferences and dislikes with its own logic or criteria or bad quality or taste. Taste cultures are related to but not fully determined by social class, gender, ethnicity, media preferences, and academic performance (Gans, 1999). Despite being influenced by factors like race, gender and family upbringing, consumer lifestyles like taste play an invaluable role in youths with regard to maintain a stable sense of coherence with which these factors can interact. It is evident that young people no longer rely on their original cultural affirmation in order for them to create their own identities but instead create lifestyles that are adaptable and flexible to the world around them. Generally taste cultures are described in two complementary ways; that is, all tastes can be interpreted as a preference for a group of cultural objects like books, clothes, or even television programs (McAdam, et al., 2001). Taste as aforementioned is also a style that be clearly defined and captured in a more elaborate manner; in this context it is visible, through wearing, reading, using, and proclaiming an individual’s preference for these objects, as in people always show their tastes (Bourdieu, 1984). However, it is not strict that taste cultures to correspond to visible preferences because similar objects can be appreciated for different taste cultures. With regard to this, taste is just but a way of looking at a system of preferences and criteria that is within people’s minds. Studies have also indicated that the media not only actively respond to subcultures but they also help in the creation of coherent subcultures (Hebdige, 1979). For instance, the media is involved in the formation of cultures through micro media, niche media and the mass media. In post sub-cultural theory, significant attention is given to the role of music in creating the taste style or sub-cultural style. For example the British hop group Oasis together with their fans have an exclusive image that they promote consisting of training shoes, football shirts and duffel coats that are designed mainly to display their collective sense of working classiness (Adomo, 2003). With regard to this it essential to note the difference between taste/lifestyle and the mainstream cultural interpretation of social life. Lifestyle or taste defines a person as an active consumer, whose choice shows a self-determined notion of identity, while mainstream culture supposes an individual to be locked or tied into specific ways of being that are determined by conditions or rules of class. In most instances, relationships between taste cultures are in some instances impacted by the differences in status and power (Bourdieu, 1984). With regard to this, different cultures get different status. High status taste culture is not only a taste appreciated by people with high social status; such status difference is only bordered within the taste itself. High taste status is normally less accessible, difficult, and expensive as compared to low taste status. High taste status is also referred to as the legitimate taste; thus, it comprises of standard for good taste and quality and hence it can be presented in museums, taught in schools and or subsidized by governments (Bourdieu, 1984). Theories For a clear understanding of how taste is related and work, this section will describe Intersectionality theory, post-modern and poststructuralist theories. Intersectionality theory is a feminist sociological theory that was first developed by Kimberley Crenshaw (1989). This theory examines how various social and culturally created categories like gender, race, and class, together with other aspects of identity interact and contribute to systemic social inequalities. In essence, intersectionality claims that classical conceptualization of oppression and marginalization within the society including racism, sexism, homophobia and religion based bigotry do not act independently but instead they interrelate thus forming an oppression system that comprise of multiple forms of discrimination (Scruton, 1998). With regard to this argument, the cultural patterns of oppression within the society are not only interrelated but also are bound together and influenced by the intersectional systems of society. Intersectionality is a significant for sociological and cultural studies; however, it is faced with a myriad of challenges in utilizing it exhaustively (Gans, 1999). The complexities that come with creation of multidimensional conceptualization that are tasked with explaining how or which socially constructed groups of differentiation interact to create a social hierarchy. For instance, the theory holds that if an individual lives in a sexist society is not enough to describe her experience/taste; however, it is paramount and necessary to understand her race, sexual orientation and class, as well as her society’s attitude towards these factors. Consequently, intersectionality theory, also suggests that discrete forms and expressions of discrimination shape and are shaped by one another. In line with the same argument, for any person to understand fully racism among the oppressed groups, he or she must investigate the different ways through which racializing structures, social processes and social representations are aligned with gender, class, sexuality and taste (McAdam, et al., 2001). Although, intersectionality theory was designed to investigate oppression among women within the society, the current sociologists are applying it to all people and to different intersections of group membership. According to feminist’s argument, it is important to have in-depth understanding of intersectionality in order gain both political and social equality and improving the democratic system within the society. Intersectionality can be applied in social work, psychology, and in the labour market. In social work, it is argued that if service providers do not take intersectionality into account when delivering their services, they are likely to affect negatively to various segments of the population (Hebdige, 1979). With regard to this, service providers in the social work are obligated to understand the unrelated factors that can affect a person’s life experience and response to the service while adapting their methods. Postmodern and Poststructuralist Theories specifically refer to different theoretical approaches that have been developed since the late 1960’s. These theories demonstrate the dependence of entirely all structures on that which they attempt to remove or eliminate from their systems. They were developed in i1980s by French theorists Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Jacques Lacan, Julia Kristeva and Ronald Barthes. Although these theories are divergent to each other in various aspects, they both try to reveal the factors that hide social and disciplinary norms that are specifically manifested philosophy (Derrida), history (Foucault), psychoanalysis (Lacan), and literary studies (Kristeva and Barthes). They both agree with each other across disciplines as they all use variants of rhetorical studies to expose the constructed nature of the least considered objects and concepts of humanity, history, the body, the self, experience, and the co-dependence of opposing objects like power and resistance or masculine and feminine. From this explanation, this section will discuss Barthes and the need for metalanguage. Metalanguage as advocated by Barthes is a systematized way of talking about meaning and grammar regardless of traditional constraints like first order language; for instance, symbols replace words and phrases. In essence, metalanguage theory was focused to replace first-order languages. With regard to this theory, Barthes reveals how structuralist system is oppressive and regressive; orders of language depend on metalanguage by which it is explained thus deconstruction itself is in danger of transforming into a metalanguage. This discloses language discourses to scrutiny. Further, Judith Butler and Gender Trouble also explore post-culturalism. Butler is recognized of her feminist theory and the founder of Queer Theory (Storey, 2001). The continued biological sex in feminist theory was observed as the cause of inequalities in women and their status. For instance, importing Foucault’s ideas of power and subjectification in discipline and punish together with linguistic theories, she argued that sex was an effect rather than the foundation of social gender differences, and also that the fiction of a stable core gender identity was preserved across socially coerced performance of gender. In addition, Butler persistently argued that the repetitive coerced gender performances are meant to replicate a normative gender ideal thus producing the sexed gender identity (Storey, 2001). Consequently, Butler embraces the fact that there is no oppression, and that resistance takes the form of failed imitations of social norms where the failures of structures of power that are at times regarded as natural. The se ideas have been extensively embraced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals as it re-imagines sexual and gender non-conformity (Lamont, 2000). Conclusion The primary relationship that can be derived from class, gender, sexuality or race and taste is that they create boundaries between different social groups. For instance, they facilitate the identification of the theoretically illuminating similarities and differences with regard to how boundaries are created across different contexts and types of groups, and at the social psychological, cultural and structural levels. Over the past recent years, the concept of boundaries among people and different social groups has been the focus of influential study agendas in anthropology, history, political science, social psychology, and sociology. Inequalities between classes, sexuality, race, and tastes virtually explain the current world social boundaries. Social discrimination and oppression across the globe have been nurtured by the greed; dominant social groups have advantage over minority groups and hence they often succeed in legitimizing their own cultures while oppressing the minorities. Various theories have been put forward to describe the causes of different tastes that exist today across the globe. Intersectionality theory examines how various social and culturally created categories like gender, race, and class together with other aspects of identity that interact and contribute to systemic social inequalities. Bibliography Adorno, T. W. 2003. The Culture Industry: selected essays on mass culture. London: Routledge Fletcher, J. 1997. Violence and civilization: an introduction to the work of Norbert Elias. Cambridge: Polity Press Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: The Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge Corrigan, P. 1997. The Sociology of Consumption: An Introduction. London: Sage Gans, H. 1999. Popular culture & high culture: an analysis and evaluation of taste. New York: Basic Books Hebdige, D. 1979. Subculture: the meaning of style. London: Routledge Jones, P.L. 1991. Taste today: The role of appreciation in consumerism and design. Oxford: Pergamon Lamont M. 2000. The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press. Lareau A. 2000. Contours of childhood: social class differences in children’s daily lives. Work. Pap., Center for Working Families, Univ. Calif., Berkeley Manza J. 1992. Classes, status groups, and social closure: a critique of neo-Weberian social theory. Curr. Perspect. Soc. Theor. 12:275–302 McAdam D, TarrowS, Tilly C. 2001. Dynamics of Contention. New York: Cambridge University Press Milner, A. and Browitt, J. 1996. Contemporary Cultural Theory: An Introduction. London: Routledge Muggleton, M. 1997. “The Post-subculturalist” in Redhead, S. (ed.) The Club Cultures Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Scruton, R. 1998. An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Modern Culture. London: Duckworth. Storey, J. 2001. Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction, 3rd Ed. Harlow, Essex: Prentice Hall Thornton, S. 1997. “The social logic of subcultural capital” in Gelder, K. & Thornton, S. (eds.) The Subcultures Reader. London: Routledge Read More