Sociology Questions & Answers

1) Is there such thing as a Canadian culture? What are it’s defining elements?

It should be quite clear to all Canadians that this nation is a cultural mosaic, where newcomers are encouraged to preserve and retain the traditions of their ethnic heritage, and at the same time, foster a sense of Canadian values by identifying and understanding the rich history that this country contains. The term ‘culture’ usually entails what people do, how people dress, what they celebrate, and the rituals they practice on a daily basis. Since Canada is a multicultural nation, it becomes increasingly difficult to try to argue and justify that a single Canadian culture exists, even though a large percentage of Canadians are of European decent and are predominantly Christian. As of late, the largely influenced European cultures and traditions introduced to Canada more than a century ago, is becoming increasingly globalized, as massive immigration bashes open the rigidly guarded borders of the past. This unique blend of customs, languages, beliefs, and traditions is largely influencing Canadians, especially those of Anglo-Saxon decent, to celebrate these differences as a new-age way of thinking. Some argue that the ‘Canadian culture is regional’; that is, there is a Québécois culture, Prairie culture, Newfoundland culture and all of the new cultures that arrive here (Phipps, 2009). I do not think anyone could argue against the existence of a Newfoundland culture, or an Albertan culture, or Québécois culture. For instance, a Québécois is very different from someone living in Ontario or British Colombia. It is not just the language; it is the idea of French culture – a European-based culture (Phipps, 2009). This is one defining element that makes Canada’s multicultural society different, than, say, Sweden’s multicultural society, because even though Canada embodies several different cultures, like Sweden, these cultures are uniquely separated and preserved due to the vast amount of land Canada possesses; countries as small as Sweden do not have the land, let alone the history, to be able to have these distinct regional cultural differences. Thus, one can argue that Canada’s culture is one that is shaped by all cultures that form it; this is what I think is the most compelling component of it, that due to its regional complexity, the Canadian culture means different things to everyone, making it unique among other multicultural nations.


2) How might the acceptance of gay marriage in Canadian society be explained from the point of view of functionalism or Conflict Theory or Symbolic interactionism?

A person or group seeking social order due to inequality and power imbalances of dominant political or social ideologies will often be bombarded by people of higher social rank or more privileged groups to see that no competition for resources arise, thus causing conflict (Teevan, et al., 2006). Due to the pluralistic nature of society and the differential distribution of power among groups, the conflict is most richly demonstrated in the acceptance of gay marriage movement in Canadian society. Some groups use their power to create rules particularly laws to serve and promote their interest. That is what the government has been doing with the issue of gay marriage. One could argue that those of higher power opposing gay-marriage are predominantly Christian-based groups, especially those funded by the Catholic Church which opposes gay marriage and the social acceptance of homosexuality and same-sex relationships, but teaches that homosexual persons deserve respect, justice and pastoral care. Although not particularly Canadian, another infamous group that opposed the legalization of gay marriage, was the Bush Administration, where former American President George W. Bush referred to gays as 'sinners' and was looking at the legislation for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage while he was in office (Gay Leaders Attack Bush Marriage Comments, 2003). Generally, conflict theory requires the adoption of a new set of beliefs and the giving up of current beliefs. In order to convince those of higher power that homosexuality should be accepted, it often argued that denying these marriages is a form of minority discrimination or that it is more hardwired – that is, it is an accepted lifestyle with a proven biological cause (Mefford, 2009). Moreover, according to the Conflict Theory, members of underprivileged groups may retaliate against the violence with violence in an attempt to improve their circumstances (Teevan, et al., 2006). This is often seen when supporters of same-sex marriage gather at Parliament Hill to support and protest their cause. Consequently, this social phenomenon fits the assumptions of the modern conflict theory: competition, structural inequality, revolution, and to some extent, war (protest) (Victor, 2006).