Behaviors today sociologically




People are human beings with the capacity of thinking, in other words, the rational, intellectual animal. Judging is part of our nature, but we can use our brains in order to make the right choices for our own lives, not by observing the other’s decisions and comment on them. As far as I have seen, some people talk about the others not only when they achieved something or have a good and happy and normal life, but also when they assumed some risks and got lost (e.g. drug addictive, alcoholics, smokers, even divorced adults or who let their children in orphanages). The question would be, why some of us are so bad, haters, envier, as long as there are so many rights, and we are supposed to be equal one with each other and leave in heavenly peace?

Even Sigmund Freud, the german thinker talks about judging others, in his book “Civilization and Its Discontents”, published in 1930:

“First of all, humans have certain typical instincts that are undeniable. The most notable ones are the desires for sex, and the inclination to violent aggression towards respected  people and towards sexual competitors. There are many human traits that all of us have so we should not judge others but instead satisfy our needs. All of us are ruled by pleasure and the pleasure is satisfied by the instincts. 

Therefore we must not be judging others because we have the exact same traits that are the cause of our problems. In my book Civilization and Its Discontents, it gives an outline of all of our character traits and what causes those actions that we do. Therefore we should not judge others because all of us have the same origins for our problems and we should find those origins to solve the problems instead of criticizing others.

However, some of these problems are unfortunately inevitable. Many times, all we can do is accept that this is who I am and do our best to accept these. Thus, we should let everyone be who they truly are and never judge anyone including ourselves. Accepting inevitable issues will help us stop judging people.”

I used to judge the others as well, until I realized it makes no sense, and usually, judging the others, it defines us; that’s why some are more judgmental than the others.


When we hear the word ‘label’ we might think of a product or an object that we want to buy. Labels help us to distinguish and recognize different objects. But in sociology it is a metaphor, ‘labeling people’, which is in fact a method derived from a general way of perceiving members of a certain nationality, religion, ethnicity, gender or some other group. When a majority of people held a certain point of view towards a certain topic, that point of view becomes a stereotype. In most of the cases, those stereotypes are more harmful than helpful.

For example, when we see a dirty man or woman, with ugly clothes, with a horrible smell and maybe asking for help or money, we say ‘oh, another homeless gipsy’. The same thing happened to me when I saw Ms. Maria, the old lady that lays all day on the benches from Hasdeu Campus: a big fat old fashioned lady, with short grey dirty hair, wearing long dress and snickers, without socks, and an interesting small childish purse where she had two cigarettes and a bottle of juice. At first I thought she was a homeless and I also gave her cigarettes and some food; but after several times, I tried to talk to her, and I found out that she was a great woman, with decent job and nice social life. The problems appeared after she discovered the taste of alcohol, then got ill, and now is receiving the monthly pension with which she pays the rent and medicines, that’s why she haunts the campus because the students are kind-hearted and help her.

My question would be, is it normal to judge and label a person only by his or her appearance? Well, I think that I found the answer in Emile Durkheim’s book about the normal and the pathological, where he says that ‘crime is normal, it is found in all societies, societies become higher forms over time, in more civilized societies crime goes up. Crime is normal and inevitable: an integral part of all healthy societies. Also, crime is normal as a society without crime is impossible; offends collective sentiments that would have to exist in all people the same degree and intensity. And regarding the social change, morality and law have to change or society stagnates and does not progress, tradition stands in the way of progress. Individual originality must be able to express itself and moral conscience must not be excessive. Both the idealist and criminal will express themselves, one can not occur without the other.’

As an ending, I would like to add that it is important not to judge the others before you begin to know them, and moreover to label a person, because in this way we will never escape of stereotypes that sometimes conduct to hatred and discrimination. So, let’s first start to discover ourselves, then try to understand the rest and maybe trying to help them.



Mother as a role model

This little girl is going viral on the internet. Of course is because she`s cute, funny and sweet in explaining why she has gone into her mother`s makeup. Generally speaking, little girls do this because of reasons they are not conscious of. I will further try to explain the entire social and psychological phenomena of this action.

Little girl’s identification with the mother takes place in an early age and plays an initiative role in the formation of their femininity.

Sigmund Freud, known as the father of psychoanalysis, notices that the little girl`s game with dolls is an action of “identification with her mother with the intention of substituting activity for passivity”. The girl`s identification with her mother also leads to her learning of taking care of children, therefore it is conceivable that her mother, as her role model of woman and her identification with her mother is critical to the formation of femininity. The identification is compatible with women`s social status and its influence on psychical development. Having this in mind, it is much clearer why little girls get into their mom`s makeup and as the girl from the video says: “want to be pretty like you” (her mother).

Another psychoanalyst, Jean Laplanche, best known for his work on psychosexual development argues for the primary role of others, especially others within an intimate socii (plural of socius) with us, in our gender formation; rather than the little girl picks up her mother to identify herself with, it is her parents and close relatives who assign to her her gender, and identify her with her mother.

We can relate this to George Herbert Mead, (philosopher, sociologist, and psychologist) and his definition for the “significant other”. Significant others are those persons who are of sufficient importance in an individual’s life (family members and close friends or mentors) to affect the individual’s emotions, behaviour, and sense of self. Through interactions with significant others, and perceptions of their responses to one’s behaviour, an individual gains a sense of who he or she is, and comes to understand how to act in a given context and role. Self-concept is based largely on our perceptions – whether accurate or not – of whom we are in the eyes of those whose opinions matter to us.

Harry Stack Sullivan (psychiatrist and psychoanalyst) and G.H. Mead) suggest that socialization relies upon a person’s considering the other’s view of himself or herself as important. Having positive feelings toward another will greatly increase the chances that this person will become significant, and thus serve as a reference for belief and behaviour. Mead was among the first to recognize the role of important others in the development and maintenance of identity.

To conclude, we go back to Freud and assert that not even femininity, but understanding of group identities, such as sexual, gender, racial, and cultural identity, may all be inspired by Freud`s dynamic perspective of ego formation and consideration of family as the primary source.


Written by Ana-Maria Gulin





Are we humans, or are we dancers? Socialization 101.

By Diana Cristolţean

Leaving the philosophy of The Killers’ music aside for the moment, it is surprising to me how it gets more and more confusing over time to write a description of oneself, even for 3rd year Journalism students. We all reacted kind of disappointed when we heard that we need to introduce ourselves (again). Of course, since we love living dangerously we also pushed the deadline a bit. Then, we found ourselves struggling to choose the proper words to convey the uniqueness of each of us, over thinking and hyper analyzing, until frustrated, one mindlessly types “human being”, “creature” or “individual”. “I’m just a human being, after all, why such a big fuss?.”

Being human is being able to reason, having a set of values as guidelines and being capable of developing emotions. We shape a personality, a self-identity in the process of socialization. Thankfully, this does not refer to socializing on Facebook, since we’re all  sort of specialized in that and this post would be pointless.

The act of conforming ourselves to the society’s norms and values, of behaving accordingly, is called socialization and it can be done with the interference of some agents: persons, groups and institutions and last but not least, the school, the family, the media and the church or other significant groups. Socialization refers to learning rules of conduct and thought in order to live inside a given society and it’s a way of surviving. It’s also a form of passing some cultural habits and aspects, this being the reason why the content of socialization taught in different parts of the world differs, but not the way of teaching it. (take for example eating). Even more strikingly different are our experiences with some subcultures like ethnicity, religion, gender, etc.