As individuals in a social society, we are confronted with people that are variations of ourselves on a daily basis. Our identities within these groups of people vary slightly for each group that we classify ourselves in. Each group classifies themselves into subsection of society, creating a sense of competitiveness towards other groups. Personally, we do this as well. We protect our worst characteristics of ourselves as we take part in society. Our desire to be successful in society causes us to form multiple identities of ourselves in which one is a personal identity and the others are shared with society.
Psychologically, we form our identities based on our self perception but also on our social memberships. As I discussed in my previous notebook entry, our self-perception is created as we discover who we are in a personal sense. In contrast, our social identity is determined by how we present our personal identity to our membership in society. This concept is known as the Social Identity Theory. In an article published by Simply Psychology written by Saul McLeod, he writes that “Social identity is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s). [...] Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world.” Belonging to a group helps us to form a community of like minded or similarly developed individuals. By congregating, individuals in the group have a sense of belonging. This of course leads to competition between groups. This creates an “in” group and an “out” group. McLeod shares this when he writes “The central hypothesis of social identity theory is that group members of an in-group will seek to find negative aspects of an out-group to enhance their self-image.” Because of our human competitive nature, we are constantly comparing ourselves to the world around us. We look for guidelines to how we should behave and represent our identities from the society that we are a part of.
Henry David Thoreau set out to determine what it takes to be a thoroughly independent soul in a socially dependent society. In his novel Walden, he writes:
“It is a ridiculous demand which England and America make, that you shall speak so that they can understand you. [...] there were not enough to understand you without them. As if nature could support but one order of understandings, could not sustain birds as well as quadrupeds. [...] I fear chiefly [...] (I) may not wander far enough beyond the narrow limits of my daily experience, so as to be adequate to the truth of which I have been convinced.”
Thoreau is suggesting that our identity is adapted to the identity of society. In order to fit in, we change our beliefs and our justifications in the world when we are social. It is through our social societies that this exists. This means that a creature in nature has no necessity to model different behaviors because nature sustains different cultures and actions without classifications. Whereas in a social complex, one must model similar behaviors to those around them to be accepted and classified into the ‘majority’ group.
Classification is a major reason behind why James Baldwin struggled to determine his sexuality. As a part of the Social Identity Theory, it is a natural occurrence to our social identity to classify and assign stereotypes to groups. McLeod suggests this when he writes “We categorize objects in order to understand them and identify them.[...] We define appropriate behavior by reference to the norms of groups we belong to. [...] We adopt the identity of the group we have categorized ourselves as belonging to.”
As Baldwin was discovering personal aspects of himself such as his sexuality, he was contemplating his feelings in regards to the large group, society. In his interview published by The Village Voice, he says “I simply feel it’s (homosexuality) a world that has very little to do with me. [...] Even in my early years in the Village, what I saw of that word (gay) absolutely frightened me. I didn’t understand the necessity of all the role playing.” Baldwin recognized the LGBTQ group in NYC but didn’t consider himself to fit into that category because of their appearance, actions, etc.. Therefore it was frightening for Baldwin to consider himself a part of the subcategory.
Although categorization still exists today, it has been suggested by both Thoreau and Baldwin that in a perfect society, one would be able to represent their personal identity in a social context without fear of criticism. As a society we oppress individuals that are a part of a minority group. Throughout America’s history, our society has imposed a fear of being different in several contexts including race, sexuality, appearance, and religion. Baldwin describes his opinion on society’s thoughts towards difference in an interview when he says “It’s a way of controlling people. [...] They care that you should be frightened of what you do. As long as you feel guilty about it, the State can rule you. It’s a way of exerting control over the universe, by terrifying people.” Later in the interview, Baldwin moves on to describe what the world should be like without the fear of individuality. To this he says “No one will have to call themselves gay. [...] It answers a false argument, a false accusation. Which is you have no right to be here, that you have to prove your right to be here. I’m saying I have nothing to prove. The world also belongs to me.” This concept is shown in Walden as Baldwin suggests that he must move away from society to become a true version of himself. Both Baldwin and Thoreau suggest that individuality is frightening in the society that we live in and that every single person is oppressed by society in one way or another, but it doesn’t need to be that way.
If society were to eliminate that categories that construct our membership in the world, there would be more individuality. There would be less reason to be afraid of who you are and more reason to portray your personal identity. It is through our society’s social identity that we must oppress people who are different from the majority because we are unable to relate to the individuals we are oppressing. As we continue to oppress people different from ourselves, we will continue to rarely see an individual’s personal identity. We will be living in society’s context rather than our through individual beliefs.
No comments:
Post a Comment