-
@IsasV I think multigenerational homes were more common 20 years ago than now. They still exist, but they're less common than before, for a mix of reasons. Some is a decline in willingness to care for elderly parents, definitely. (That's been a growing crisis here for decades.)Permalink On twitter.com
Mood +2 🙂
-
@IsasV But also, how shall I say this, there's differences of opinion in how kids should be raised between generations. People in the 80s and 90s were more willing to tolerate that than people today, I think. (For example, gender favoritism or physical discipline of small children.)Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV You do see a certain proportion of elderly people who aren't put into a home, but are instead given an apartment and left to live "independently" until they can't anymore. There are community centers that cater to them, and churches tend to provide their main social outlet.On twitter.com
-
@IsasV But to return to the original point: the whole "collectivist" vs. "individualist" dichotomy is... it can be useful, but it's somewhat misleading as a basic characterization of each society.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV I think of it more as the difference between porous and less-permeable social boundaries. Supposedly "Collectivist" societies can be profoundly atomized and profoundly focused on competition and exploitation of one's fellow nationals, etc.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV Meanwhile, members of "individualist" societies often are very much enmeshed in cooperative organizations, in community groups, in charities, and so on. "Collectivist" and "individualist" are really more like myths we like to tell about our own societies.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV But one thing we can say most "collectivist" societies do have is very porous personal boundaries. People are encouraged to self-identify with organizations, and to go to great lengths to fit in and mesh with expectations. You can be different, but you MUST NOT stand out as such.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV I would guess it's enough pressure for a larger proportion of people with (universal) subclinical mental issues to kind of keep them under wraps and avoid talking about them. Which also feeds a cycle of people avoiding talking about mental health issues. Which...Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV ... also leaves people less-equipped to recognize them, which is a pattern I've noticed. Stuff that stands out as clearly "something's wrong with this person" doesn't seem to come up on most people's radar as quickly here. At least that's been my repeated experience.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV But you also get fewer people who're just immediately and obviously bananas because there's such a strong incentive to fit in, and because fitting in creates a feedback loop reinforcing a limited number of channels for kooky people to act out in.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV Conformity is highly, highly reinforced here in most institutions, from schooling to military service to social clubs to work. It's one reason you have so incredibly many crazy cults here, I'd argue: that's one area where people have more freedom to choose to be different.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV I mean, I think North Americans are way more conformist than they realize. Look at their slang, look at their music taste, look at their hobbies. Narrow band. But I think "individualism" is celebrated. We have tons of narratives that celebrate "mavericks" and "iconoclasts."Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV (And I think that's enough to sort of force wider the range of things that pass for normal, in a positive way... but also, as we're being rudely reminded these days, in a negative one. People literally "feel no shame" for rebuking consensus reality.")Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV The key is that really a balance between the two is probably better, but societies seem to often go to extremes one way or the other, and this leads to differing social ills depending on which pattern you're stuck in.Permalink On twitter.com
-
@IsasV Anyway, maybe all that is more of a tangent: I think it's maybe more easily summed up as, "It's less collectivism vs. individualism than high-conformity-enforcement + weak personal boundaries vs. lower-conformity-enforcement + stronger personal boundaries."Permalink On twitter.com