Sociology Of Attachment Analysis

The universal process of attachment is conducted through out the individuals life cycle. Objects, bodies and things, play a important role in mediating that attachment. But how much do we know about attachment? What it is and how it is constructed. Sociology attempts to answer these questions, by defamiliarising attachment by viewing it through a broader sociological lens. In this essay we will use the 'Sociology of Attachment', in its two orientations, practical mechanism and emotional investment, as an enquiry into the study of social connectedness, to evaluate to what extent objects and material techniques mediate attachment and how other processes of social practice, culturally shared social meanings play an equally important role in mediating
Social constructionists see attachment as socially constructed, something that is mediated through social practices and meanings. Whilst material approaches do not disregard the importance of social meanings and practices but remind us that these processes have to be considered in relation to the materiality of the body and non human objects. Both serve in their own way as an enquiry into the study of attachment. This however does raise the issue of what is the relation between material and the social, is matter more important than mediation? This is unclear – matter is a mediator, as your discussions earlier demonstrate. The question should be: is matter more important than meanings? We can argue bodies have inherent properties, that can determine what kind of relationship is forged between the parent and the child, which can have a materialised effect on the social world. We also need to point out how the social can shape the individual or how the individual relies on the social, as illustrated by the parent and child attachment, something not naturally given but in more terms constructed. The process of attaching is constructed, attaching something to something involves medium, through which attachment comes into existence. Attachment needs mediation in order for it be mobile. Mobile? I don’t understand. What you have presented here is a comparison of perspectives, but it is not really an evaluation. An evaluation requires examination of the strengths and limitations of particular approaches. So, for example, you might have pointed out that constructionists do not deny that matter is important in processes of mediation. Social practices always involve matter; it is, for instance, through learning to read, dressing in gender-specific ways, playing with gendered toys, imitating parents, etc, that we internalize sets of expectations about what is normal and