We can begin by looking generally at the Interactionist theory suggested by Mead. In the Interactionist perspective, the identity, “who we are” or “who we believe ourselves to be” is a reflection of what others think about us. So they consider the socialization to be an interpretative process, where meaning is allocated in two ways. One of them is try to understand it by yourself, another is that try be told by others’ behaviours. However, this view can be criticized according too the following factors: Firstly, it is difficult to understand others, as we do no simply believe whether the others’ behaviours are true. Secondly, other people also rarely tell directly what they are thinking. Next, as some people in our social life is highlighted and special (like close friends which are different from the stranger we don’t know), the effect of their behaviours will be different. The final point is that, to concern about the selves, we also try to manage our behaviours, which can be exemplified by the people’s impression management.
On another extreme side compare with Interactionist perspective, the Structural sociology argue that the people gain identity as the structural forces make them behave in certain more or less predictable ways. They consider the socialization process as the means, which societies shape the beliefs, understanding and behaviors of individuals. Due to this, the socialization, which is considered to be a powerful guiding force, create self-awareness of the people, as well as that category the people into particular forms of identity. Particularly in the Functionalist perspectives, the people will be forced to acted more or less predictably, because of that the social institutions can be seen as the only solution in order for individuals to survive or meet their needs. The Marxist is different from the Functionalist as it considers the class as the most important factors affecting the individual’s identity in the process of socialization. The Marxist argues that other factors of identity are mainly determined by the class factor. It is mainly because that the owner of the means of productions, in order to maintain their ownership, created certain identity for the people, who are not the owner but sometimes try to seek the ownership. Due to this, the process of socialization can be seemed to be a process of giving self-image and social identity to certain people who are in the different economic situation.
The evaluation given by the Interactionism and Structuralism could be seemed to be clear enough, however, they are both criticized by the Feminist for paying insufficient attention to the importance of patriarchy. According the Feminist perspective, people in different gender are treated and experienced different in the process of socialization. Since a new member of society is born, the person’s gender is labeled whether male or female according to their biological differences, which male can represent masculine and the female represent the feminine. In the later stages of the process of socialization, certain characteristics are given to the children according their gender. For example, the male is seemed more likely to have more leadership, making the decisions and being active, worldly, unemotional and aggressive where on the other hand the female are expected or experienced to be physical dependency, lack of control, passive, family-orientated and behave emotionally and so on.
Unlike the Feminist, which criticized both Interactionism and Structuralism, the Gidden’s concept of structuration bring the these two approach together. He argues that neither structure nor action can exist independently; both of them are closely linked. In his view, the interactions of the individual members of the society create the identity in the process of socialization and at the same time the structure offer a place for the identity to make it meaningful, and functional or beneficial for certain roles of society.
In this article, we have evaluated how the members of society acquire identity through the process of socialization, by using different perspectives. The Interactionism, which emphasize on the understanding, creativity and self-development of individuals in the process of the society. On the other hand, the structuralisms argue in the way that the individuals are shaped by the structure of the society. In addition, the article has state other perspectives’ (i.e. Feminism, Concept of Structuration) view on this issue. Due to the research, we won’t simply obey or judge any perspective. Instead of that, now we could be noted more about what are the general differences in different sociological theories by doing those researches.
