Parenting, Conformity, and Self-Actualization: A Cultural Analysis

Parenting styles vary widely across cultures, shaping how individuals navigate self-discovery, societal expectations, and personal fulfillment. While some societies prioritize stability and practicality, others emphasize freedom or familial duty. The way responsibility is balanced with individuality has lasting effects on personal identity and the reconciliation of one’s shadow—the unacknowledged, often repressed aspects of the self.

By examining European, Asian, and American approaches, we can see how different cultures influence self-actualization, the ability to integrate personal desires with external obligations, and the extent to which conformity shapes one’s destiny.

The European Approach: Conformity, Practicality, and the Divide Between Authenticity and Destined Conformity

Many European immigrant parents emphasize security and stability, encouraging children to follow practical, conventional paths. Their own struggles—often rooted in economic hardship or displacement—lead them to prioritize education, career success, and social conformity as safeguards against uncertainty. While this structured approach ensures financial and social security, it can suppress individuality, creating an internal conflict between external validation and personal fulfillment.

However, a stark divide exists within European society. For the Parisian elite, the path to authenticity is paved with privilege. Access to prestigious education, intellectual circles, and financial security allows them the luxury of existential exploration. They are encouraged to engage with art, philosophy, and critical thinking, cultivating a sense of purpose beyond material gain. This environment fosters an authenticity rooted in self-awareness and freedom of choice, where personal fulfillment is as valued as external success.

In contrast, the working class—particularly immigrants living in the suburbs—are collateral damage in this system, destined for conformity rather than self-actualization. Their upbringing prioritizes survival over existential questioning, conditioning them to accept predetermined societal roles. While the elite are taught to embrace individualism, the laboring class is expected to comply with rigid social structures, ensuring the economic machine continues to function.

From an existentialist perspective, true authenticity arises when individuals confront the absurdity of societal expectations and take ownership of their choices. However, rigid upbringings discourage this self-exploration, training children to seek meaning in prescribed roles rather than forging their own paths. When self-worth becomes overly dependent on external markers of success, individuals may struggle to make choices that truly reflect their inner values.

For the working class, systemic conformity extends beyond childhood, as economic pressures limit their ability to redefine themselves. Repressing desires that deviate from social norms, they may delay or even resist the process of shadow integration—the acceptance of their hidden, often unacknowledged, aspects of self. Without this integration, they risk living in bad faith, conforming to roles imposed upon them rather than embracing their own agency.

In the end, European society maintains a dual system: one where the privileged are encouraged to seek truth and authenticity, while the marginalized are funneled into roles of necessity, their individuality sacrificed to maintain societal order.

The Asian Approach: Indulgence, Harmony, and the Inevitable Conformity

Certain Asian cultures, particularly in Cambodia, lean towards a more indulgent parenting style, especially with sons. Children are often granted greater freedom to explore their identities without the rigid constraints of societal expectations. This fosters individuality in childhood, as they are allowed to navigate their own desires and behaviors with minimal interference. However, the absence of structure can make it challenging to develop a strong sense of discipline and responsibility, leading to difficulties in societal integration later on.

Despite this early freedom, many Asian societies remain highly homogeneous, and a subtle but powerful process of conformity emerges during adolescence and young adulthood. As children transition into their teenage years, social expectations become more pronounced, often reinforced by peer pressure, communal values, and the necessity of fitting into predefined societal roles. The once-lenient upbringing gives way to an implicit expectation of integration, where personal expression must align with collective norms.

For men in particular, this shift is often accompanied by a profound restriction of personal autonomy. While childhood may have been filled with exploration and indulgence, adulthood imposes an expectation of duty—one that prioritizes family obligations over individual aspirations. A significant cultural expectation is the responsibility of caring for aging parents, often at the expense of personal ambitions or a sense of adventure. The pursuit of self-discovery or risk-taking, which might be encouraged in Western cultures, is frequently seen as immature or even selfish in these societies.

This burden strips men of the ability to fully embrace adventure, as their role becomes centered around financial stability and filial piety. Their personal dreams, whether in art, travel, or unconventional careers, often take a backseat to the immediate needs of their families. In this way, the early freedom they experience as children is paradoxically countered by the rigid expectations that define their adult lives, leaving many to navigate an internal struggle between duty and the longing for personal fulfillment.

Ultimately, while Asian parenting styles may initially foster individuality, societal pressures ensure that conformity prevails. Personal desires are often sacrificed in favor of familial and communal stability, reinforcing a cultural cycle where responsibility overshadows self-exploration.

The American Approach: Freedom, Reinvention, and the Conformity to Materialism

American parenting largely revolves around independence and self-expression, encouraging children to pursue their passions early on. However, even within this framework, societal and familial expectations can delay personal pursuits. A key strength of American culture is the belief in reinvention—the idea that it’s never too late to change careers, revisit childhood dreams, or redefine one’s identity. This philosophy suggests that responsibility and passion are not mutually exclusive; in fact, embracing responsibility first can provide the discipline and depth necessary to pursue passion with greater maturity.

Yet, despite the emphasis on individualism, American society enforces its own form of conformity—one rooted in materialism and capitalism. From an early age, success is often measured by financial achievement, social status, and the accumulation of possessions. The pursuit of passion is frequently overshadowed by the pressure to secure wealth, leading many to equate their self-worth with their economic standing. As a result, reinvention is often framed not in terms of self-discovery, but as a means to achieve greater financial success.

This material-driven mindset fosters a culture where debt and consumerism become inescapable. Many are encouraged to take on credit from a young age—whether through student loans, mortgages, or credit cards—tying their futures to a system that demands constant economic output. The promise of reinvention is often constrained by the weight of financial obligations, forcing individuals to navigate a paradox: the freedom to redefine oneself exists, but only within the boundaries dictated by economic survival.

In this way, the American ideal of self-expression coexists with an underlying pressure to conform to a system where money remains the highest value. The pursuit of fulfillment is often contingent upon financial stability, shaping not only career choices but the very definition of personal success. While reinvention is a powerful concept, it remains tethered to economic realities, revealing that even in a culture that champions freedom, conformity to materialism remains an unspoken expectation.

Conformity is the norm, creation the exception

Creativity, in its most expansive sense, has only become a more prominent part of human life in the last several thousand years. For much of human history, survival and the need for stability dominated daily life. In prehistoric times, our ancestors focused on practical tasks like hunting, gathering, building shelter, and ensuring safety. These necessities left little room for the kind of creative exploration and self-expression we see today.

As early civilizations began to emerge, particularly in agricultural societies, the need for order and consistency became more pronounced. People were required to adhere to strict roles within the community to ensure collective survival—whether that meant farming, trade, or religious observance. The focus on conformity in these societies was paramount, as stability and cohesion were necessary for survival. Creativity, in this context, was largely limited to religious rituals, basic art forms, and the occasional invention designed to improve efficiency in daily life.

It wasn’t until more recent times—especially with the advent of writing systems, the rise of ancient philosophy, and the development of complex cultures—that creativity began to be more systematically fostered. The ancient Greeks, for instance, elevated creative thought through philosophy, art, and science. They celebrated the individual thinker and innovator, though only a select few had the means to express their creativity within the confines of a rigid societal structure.

The Renaissance period in Europe, beginning in the 14th century, marked a turning point in how creativity was valued. It was during this time that a cultural revolution took place, one that placed great emphasis on human potential, exploration, and artistic expression. This era ushered in an understanding of creativity not just as an exception but as an important force for societal progress. Yet, even at this point, creativity was largely confined to certain classes or intellectual circles, and was not universally accessible.

Fast forward to the modern era, particularly the 19th and 20th centuries, and the industrial revolution further altered the relationship between creativity and society. With the rise of mass production, urbanization, and the spread of education, creativity began to be more widely promoted. However, even in these contexts, creativity was often seen as something reserved for artists, scientists, or innovators—those who could break from the norm and offer new ways of thinking, but only within certain established frameworks.

In the last few decades, especially with the advent of digital technology and the internet, creativity has become more accessible to the masses. Platforms like social media, YouTube, and digital design tools have democratized creative expression, allowing people from all walks of life to share their unique ideas with the world. However, despite these advances, creativity is still often viewed as exceptional because it requires individuals to think outside of mainstream expectations and challenge societal norms.

In this historical context, creativity is a relatively new phenomenon in the sense that it has only recently been viewed as something everyone can engage with and cultivate. While some cultures and societies have celebrated creativity and individuality throughout history, the idea that creativity is an essential part of every person’s life and development is a more modern construct, emerging largely in the last few centuries. It is still often viewed as an exception, a break from the standard, because it requires a level of freedom, risk, and personal agency that isn’t always readily available in societies built around conformity and tradition.

Conclusion: Conformity as a Universal Force

Despite their differences, all three cultural approaches ultimately impose conformity—whether through social class structures in Europe, communal expectations in Asia, or material pressures in America. While some societies emphasize security and stability, others promote reinvention or harmony, yet all create systemic barriers that influence how individuals navigate their personal journeys.

True self-actualization requires confronting these cultural constraints, integrating one’s shadow, and making choices that align with one’s authentic values. However, this path is rarely straightforward. Whether one is raised in a Parisian intellectual circle, an Asian family bound by filial duty, or an American system that equates success with financial gain, the challenge remains the same: to carve out an identity that transcends imposed expectations while remaining grounded in reality.

The question is not whether conformity exists—it does in every culture—but rather how individuals choose to navigate it, and whether they can reclaim their agency in a world that constantly seeks to define them.