Youths are associated with social class, race, gender, and sexuality, for they are influenced under the umbrella of their parental guidance in childhood and have seen the traces of subcultures and youth cultures to the relation between the class ‘parent culture’ and hegemony in the socio-economic structure. This involves a material as well as an ideological dimension that we present to our younger generation in terms of cultural deficiencies, alterations, and following class differences. These issues are discussed in context with application to children and involve the community and the local economic system, class-based cultures and values, and traditional class problems experienced generationally at particular historical moments.
Youth is conceptualized as a particular generational response to a wider class problem involved with structural elements such as housing, employment, future prospects, and wages which further escorts us towards understanding why class differences exist? Since these problems emerged, other issues like racism and sexism, having other dimensions for subordinate groups which are in addition to class, have potential across class lines, but any collective solution will ultimately be complicated by class.
One problem for Canada has been its sense of national identity, due to its historical links with Britain and France, and its proximity to the United States, which, particularly in the eyes of the outside world, has confused the sense of national identity and has remained unable to provide a sense of individuality to its youth culture. Indirectly this has been the main factor reflected in Canadian youth culture, which is held responsible for the creation of other issues relating to youth like racism, gender, and sexism.
Canada sees youth as largely derivative and uses elements of borrowed culture, and any oppositional force is highly muted for the liberalism it uses to equip its adolescents is genuinely found in Canada, with its very different traditions of conservatism, based on small-town and rural communities, has engulfed opposition amongst youth. Obviously, there are exclusions, which serve particularly among native youth, where a much deeper sense of oppression and opposition exists in youth culture. For example, youth is never taught a ‘Canadian’ identity in Canada. Youth is never taught the significance of distinct national flavor to cultures, which are usually based on the styles of a borrowed tradition rather than built on the indigenous forms of local traditions.
If an outcome in such situations ends up in racism, there is a tradition of resistance in Canadian youth culture. It is at an individualistic rather than a collective level. Cultures are borrowed from other subcultures, traditions are no longer significant to our youth for the reason that Canada does not prefer to receive any distinct yet common themes, as in the folk devil traditions of Britain, or the specific ethnically developed subcultures in America. Evidence suggests that traditions are borrowed in the larger cities, but these make no widespread media impact with consequent societal reaction and furthermore at a more banal level, the long and severe winter which covers most of Canada localizes youth cultures to the cities, and even there public spaces tend to be shopping malls, which do little to generate collective gatherings and are easy to control.
Gender intensification acts as a prominent feature of modern industrial socialization that escorts young males and females into the gender ideology and locks them into a lifetime of ‘desegregating’ in terms of private and public spheres. Gender has become central to the process of transforming youth culture towards unnecessary modernity, and gender and class, working together, have brought some sections of working-class youth to a complicated acceptance of themselves as manual laborers.
Though the concept of gender holds importance to our youth but to focus only on a particular gender is what is being done with our youth, they only see a single direction and are intended towards ‘biasism.’ Our youth is limited to pursue to be blamed for it personally since it is difficult to imagine how a young male could achieve the familiarity with girls’ worlds that he achieved with boys.’ Being an odd consequence of male power that young females being inconsequential find it easier to analyze males, but men and masculinity are not set constant. They are formed and reformed all the time in relation to women and femininity.
Gender biasism is the flip side of one other where one young male or female cannot argue to understand one except in relation to the other fully, that means here feminist criticism arises. But the point to contemplate is that not the normal young feminist underestimates the effect of gender. Paradoxically, he overestimates it but specifically, he mistakes for gender, for masculinity, what are, in fact, phenomena of class. Let it consider in another manner. When a young male understands boys, his views are based on insiders, and his ideas about femininity are formed solely on the basis of how girls seemed superficially in relation to boys. However, when it came to young females, the declaration among working-class girls of the contradiction between being sexually desirable but not sexually experienced leads to behavior that takes the form of romanticism readily fed by teenage magazines.
Many young women experience their early adolescence as troubling because of their innate experiences in working-class teenagers, which attempts to understand those teenagers who are ‘ordinary’ as well as those who are not. It is also different in that gender specification is not simply a role of boys, nor is it only of girls; it attempts to look at the experiences of both girls and boys, which is different in one other important aspect. With regard to equal opportunities, youth culture must offer and take into account opportunities irrespective of gender that would attempt to break down gender stereotypes by the Government policies. Introducing a note of caution, the Government must not blame youth alone responsible for such a biased culture, and too much should not be expected from such attempts because it is the society that shapes youth and not youth that transforms society.
Youth culture must be understood at a local level so as to make necessary attempts to transform the next generation and because of the very nature of schemes like these, attempts inevitably only scratch the surface and not the real cause. Age groups must be considered while forming gender identities that are fragile. Therefore, what is most wanted by Canadian society is an adult identity and adult status. The world of cultural organizations holds the promise of this, gender relations, and at this point in youngsters’ lives, ask them to reject and challenge traditional roles and relations of work is perhaps asking too much. It would work well if they are given training which is relevant to them and which may afford them a point of entry into the world of work and if nothing else, youth must give importance to celebrating their own financial independence.