Social Constructs

The values and mechanics of a society – its beliefs, concepts, behaviours and rules – are formed through continual negotiation between its members, rather than existing as external, self-defined entities. Social constructs like fashion, justice, and nationality are not universal truths. They are ideas that represent the values of a society, influenced by social conventions and structures, learned through observation, imitation, and modelling.

Consider the example of money. Coins and notes are not actually worth the value we prescribe to them – they are a symbol or representation only. Its value is what we decide to give it because value is an arbitrary and subjective concept that constantly changes. In the same way, society decides a value of behaviour that it agrees with and constructs imaginary rules, collectively called ‘the Law’, to regulate the favoured behaviour.

There are many examples of social constructionism, either categorising – as in the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ behaviours we consider ‘polite’ – or agreed upon values that create consistency and continuity in a society. Language is an example of the latter, as are numbers and even the concept of measurement. A centimetre does not exist in the natural universe and you cannot find a litre lying on the ground. The clear evidence of the construction of measurement lies in the strangely American habit of using an imperial rather than a metric measuring system.

What is the law if it is different from country to country? What is power, gender, race? More importantly, why do we give so much importance to these things that are so obviously made up?

Social constructs begin by people externalising their inner world – basically interacting with the rest of society; writing ideas down, talking to people and making stories about the ideas they have. They tell stories about the relationship between people and nature, stories about what humans aspire to, even stories about who they are as individuals.

The more people hear and pass on the stories, the more the idea becomes an ‘object’ in the individual’s mind, leading them to believe the idea is an objective truth. As an objective truth, the idea becomes internalised, shared in the social consciousness, and reinforced by every new generation taking truth for granted just because their society had already adopted the idea as such. It takes time to realise these constructs – most people usually experience the vertigo of realisation as a child when a word is repeated until it becomes nothing more meaningful than a collection of sound. This is the opposite of déjà vu, where something new feels like it has been seen before, called jamais vu, where something familiar seems as though it has never been seen before. 

While this is a lovely moment in developmental psychology, being aware of social construction is not the same as challenging them; something which takes generations and dependent on advances in ideas or the rejection of old attitudes.

Many people dismiss social constructivism as a way of saying “nothing is real” or “all things are relative”, but this is a simplistic and superficial interpretation. Social constructivism illustrates what is important to a society through the manifestation of a concept into reality. It is a form of transubstantiation that requires as strong a belief as any Catholic at Mass, but it is a belief that is often unconscious.

It wouldn’t be much of a short-cut if one had to consciously consider what is considered as ‘childhood’ or ‘motherhood’ every time the words were spoken. In order to get on with the practicalities of life, we ignore the literal meanings of the symbol, its vagueness and contradictions, and see it only as the thing it represents if we notice it at all.

In drama this mental feat of ignoring the literal, logical and realistic in favour of what it represents is called metaxis; the suspension of disbelief between the real world and the fictional world that is necessary to lose yourself in a good film, book, or fiction. If your prefrontal cortex constantly reminded you the impossibility of the fiction ever being true, you would never fully engage with the story you were watching. It would be hard to believe, just like it is hard to believe in Santa once you understand he is a symbol and not a person, or hard to believe in democracy when its practice contradicts its intention.

Likewise, people who do not articulately speak this social language of symbols, assumed cultural knowledge and behaviours (i.e., those of us that have difficulty politely interacting), would be confused as to why a shop assistant would ask how they were if they weren’t expecting a response, or that the command to have a nice day was said for no purpose apart from completing a social contract.

However, we use these symbols for more significant ideas than polite conversation. The misinterpretation of words, the concepts of nation, race and religion have led to horrific wars, the welfare of entire nations hinge on numbers on a screen and, more personally, the safety of other drivers on the road depend on my understanding that, while a white line doesn’t physically stop me from driving on the wrong side of the road, I should stop myself because my individual freedoms have more serious social repercussions.

The problem is, of course, that we make assumptions that everyone understands these concepts in the same way and if not, then by living among people their whole lives, they will be close enough to work it out. But we have seen that this is not the case at all, particularly with the great big ideas that we used to leave to the Gods – fate, morality, justice, authority, purpose, and our position in the universe. 

These beliefs become so individual and subjective in that time, meaning there will always be some friction between the individual and society. We respect the individual’s right to develop their own belief, so long as it is mostly like ours. If not, the individual falls into other socially constructed categories – insane, fanatic, immoral, criminal, unintelligent, low-class etc.

In this way the majority control the minority through social contracts, ensuring ways of behaving and beliefs that grease the friction of human interaction. These unspoken rules are taken for granted to the extent that most people barely consider that they are artificial, or if they do, that they are too entrenched to change or do anything about. Society accepts and finds benefit in some of these constructs like law, government, money, measurement. However, it finds more overt manipulations like consumerism, fashion, nationalism, and the zeitgeist (what is considered ‘cool’… a word that I acknowledge is probably no longer considered ‘cool’) at times unpalatable, but beyond the individual’s control, so accepted.

Again, the contradiction lies between the individual and the social. Society would deem a person who believes in something that doesn’t actually exist insane, however individually we believe in concepts like ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and that the white line in the middle of the road will stop people from head on collisions. What is sane and insane? Where do we draw the line?

Like everything else, where we collectively decide to draw it at that time.

Because most of our social interactions are based on concepts represented as symbols, and because these symbols have been created to have specific meaning for that society at that time, there is a lot of inference, assumption and so-called ‘common knowledge’. Meaning is fluid, ambiguous, time-, place- and culturally-specific and when it is deconstructed, often seems illogical or nonsensical to someone outside of that society.

Children believe Santa Claus is real, then they discover it is merely a symbol. As they grow older, they see how the symbol has become important to society and, through collective belief, become real. Like democracy, fate, or any other social construct, the question then becomes “Just because something is not real, does that necessarily make it untrue?”

Examples of Social Constructs

Age Knowledge Success Taboos

Authority Landscapes Time

Art Language Tradition

Beauty Standards Lateness Travel

Borders Laws Trendiness

Bullying Leaders/ship Tourism

Capitalism Marriage Trust

Censorship Masculinity Urbanisation

Childhood Media Values

Citizenship Modernity Violence

Clothing Money Virtue

Coolness Morality Wealth

Competition Motherhood Work

Communication Nationality Work-life balance

Communities Neurotypicality Welfare

Customs Neutrality Youth

Countries Norms

Citizenship Objectivity

Culture Oppression

Crime Peace

Decency Patriotism

Democracy  Patriarchy

Disability Places

Discrimination Politics

Diversity Power

Economy Public Opinion

Education Privacy

Employment Privilege

Ethnicity Professions

Expectations Property

Family Qualifications

Femininity Race

Friendship Religion

Gender  Rights

Gender Roles Sanity

Globalization Satisfaction

Government Sex

Happiness Sexuality

Hierarchy Social Class

Humility Social Roles

Identity Socialisation

Immigration Society

Individuality Status

Inequality Space

Intelligence Sports

Justice Stereotypes