Definition Essay: Can People In Society Be Normal?

How can people in society be normal? Ordinary is desirable, and anyone else is a social misfit (C.M., 2013). Catharine M, a journalist for magazine Teen Ink, explains normal as “Normality is an impossible and improbable dream that we strive for all our lives. We strive for it, because it will give us that ego boost that we need to reassure us we fit in. Normal is perfection. Normal is the exception.” Normality is a universal struggle for society and what is “normal” changes with changing societal standards. Since the term “normal” varies with society, the question “Can normal be defined?” arises. Normal cannot have one exact definition because of social stigmas, the influence of culture, and the power of mass media. Social stigmas define as the societal disapproval and judgment of
a person or group of people because they do not fit their community’s social norms (Boundless, 2015). Beneficial to gaining acceptance by society, people conform to ordinary. The public shows that it is uncomfortable with an abnormality. If a character is perceives as abnormal, society labels them a number of negative tags, such as mentally ill or the invidious term psycho (Boundless, 2015). Stigma labels lead to discrimination, downgrading and isolation of character; society has the labels ingrained over years. With the rising awareness that mental illness affects so many people globally, more people break the mold to reduce the stigma associated with illnesses. For example, language emphasizes the individual’s humanity and defines them as a person first, rather than defining them by their illness. “Referring to someone as ”the anorexic girl“ has a different impact than ”the girl with anorexia.“ In the first example, the individual is entirely defined by the disorder; in the second, anorexia is a characteristic, but not a defining one,” coming from Dave Hood, an author of Writing Creative. “The student with ADHD,” “the child with autism,” and “the mother with depression” each are less stigmatizing than “the ADHD student,” “the autistic child,” and “the depressed mother,” all these examples show the difference of impact depending on where the word in located. Social stigmas vary on culture and what the individual believes in. The culture a person lives determines what is normal and abnormal (Hood, 2013). A person’s values, attitudes, beliefs, behavior, and dreams are understood by others inactive in the culture. The culture socializes the person to embrace established values, beliefs, social stigmas, and laws. Furthermore, the idea of morals, desirable or undesirable, are relative to the culture. (Hood, 2013). For instance, in most Islamic countries, expected women are to cover their faces and bodies with a veil, but deciding to not wear the veil is sinful and disrespectful. However, women who wear the veil in western democratic countries view the women as oppressed, subservient, backward, and abnormal. Another example would be the “normal” eating habits of Asia. Thousands of people in East and Southeast Asia eat insects with delight, something considered disgusting and horrid in the West and South Asia. “Insectivorous behaviors may be getting more popular in North America, though; high source of protein and fiber apparently,” coming from Meenakshi Nandhini, a contributing author for the website Quora. Why is eating bugs getting popular in North America? Many factors point to the answer; the mass media. “What’s the secret to Salma Hayek’s (an American actress) curves? One hint: they crawl on six legs. ”Look, I’m salivating,“ Hayek, 43, told David Letterman Monday night about her taste for grasshoppers. ”They’re delicious.“” a snippet of a People’s, an entertainment magazine, article. Articles like this influence people to eat bugs. Hayek comes from a Spanish origin, so consuming bugs is the opposite of extraordinary. In the United States, that abomination was unheard of until six months ago; the mass media enforce what behavior is desirable or undesirable. When a public figure or celebrity breaks the law, violates expected social conduct, does something that breaks the social norm, or makes a stupid comment in public, the newspapers, television, magazines, and radio report on what the public figure said or did for weeks on end (Hood, 2013). Embarrassed by the media, the famous character will change their wrongful behavior to the accepted. What if those people that went out of society’s norms and broke the word “normal?” In many ways, normal needs to follow social norms, but those like Steve Jobs or Wolfgang Mozart showed each separate person that normal is factitious and fraudulent.
Those individuals broke the mold of normal, and showed others that it is okay to break the status quo. Without those few brave souls that broke the social norms, society today would not have: the iPhone, evolving music to dance to, medicine that saves lives on the daily, and new fashion senses to name a few. In society, creativity and living outside the box are normal. Since everything happens within social means, who is normal? A better question would be: what is normal? Society has various definitions of normal. Individuals would try and say something in such of a way of the status quo, but then they are contradicting themselves. Normality goes in circles. Normal contains the same meaning as status quo, but status quos vary from culture, media, and stigmas. If someone does something outside the means of their culture, media, and stigmas, that action aspires acceptance. So, the question remains: is there a set definition of
normal?