ABSTRACT:

This article explores how the concept of intimacy can help us understand how societies change over
time, without just focusing on one country or culture. It argues that intimacy, which involves close
personal relationships, is important for understanding social changes happening around the world, not
just in Western countries. Even though different cultures might not always use the word "intimacy,"
they still have practices that involve close relationships. The article discusses how intimacy relates to
other similar ideas and how it's relevant for understanding changes in society, especially in a globalized
world where traditional face-to-face relationships might not seem as important. It also looks at how
intimate relationships can either reinforce inequalities (like those based on age, class, or gender) or
challenge them. Overall, it suggests that paying attention to intimacy can help us understand both why
things stay the same and why they change in society.

1.1
This article is all about intimacy, which means the close connection between people and how they build
that closeness. The word "intimacy" can mean different things depending on culture and history, but it
generally refers to the strong bond between people. Intimate relationships are personal connections that
feel close and are recognized as such by society. This closeness can be emotional and mental, like
feeling deeply connected and understanding each other. It can also be physical, like touching or
hugging, but it doesn't always involve sex. Intimacy is more than just knowing someone really well; it's
about the different ways people connect with each other, not just through understanding.

1.2
"Practices of intimacy" is a term that comes from the idea of "family practices" developed by
sociologist David Morgan. Instead of focusing on a fixed definition of "family," Morgan looked at the
various ways people actually behave within families, which can differ across cultures and history.
"Practices of intimacy" are similar but specifically refer to the actions and behaviors that help people
feel close and connected to each other. These practices make people feel special and tuned in to each
other. In cultures where families and intimacy are highly valued, these practices often overlap with
what people do within families. Essentially, it's about the actions and behaviors that create a sense of
closeness and special connection between people.

1.3
The concept of intimacy doesn't replace terms like family, friends, or kin; instead, it adds to our
understanding of these relationships. Intimacy overlaps with other ideas like love and is often used
interchangeably with phrases like "nearest and dearest" or "friends and family" in Western cultures. But
how relevant are these concepts outside of Western cultures? Even though different cultures might
idealize intimacy in different ways, is there still value in thinking about how people form close
connections across cultures? Essentially, the question is whether understanding intimacy and the
actions that create it can help us understand relationships and connections between people from
different cultural backgrounds.

1.4
Is our understanding of intimacy based on a specific Western idea of what it means to be an individual?
Western cultures have a history of seeing people as independent individuals who are in control of
themselves. This idea goes way back, at least to the 13th century in England. Sociologists in Western
societies often talk about how important it is to respect individual freedom, even though they also
recognize that people depend on each other. Some theories, like symbolic interactionism and
phenomenology, say that our social relationships shape who we are. Feminist scholars argue that this
idea of the independent individual ignores how gender and class affect people's sense of self. Despite
this, some kinds of close relationships might need people to believe in their own independence and
freedom before they can work well. So, while Western cultures emphasize individual freedom, it's not
the whole story, and intimate relationships might need this belief in independence to thrive.

1.5
At the end of the 20th century, some academics argued that there's a connection between intimacy and
the emphasis on making oneself, which means having the freedom to be who you want to be. They said
that in Western societies, people were becoming more focused on expressing their individual identities
because of the influence of global capitalism. Authors like Giddens, Bauman, Beck with Beck-
Gernsheim, and Castells talked about how intimacy is built through open and equal communication,
where people share their inner thoughts and feelings, creating a story about themselves. Many scholars
found these ideas interesting, but they also faced criticism. Some researchers said that focusing only on
sharing personal feelings doesn't capture all the ways people build intimacy, and that gender
inequalities can still exist even in close relationships. Critics also said that these ideas might not apply
to everyone, especially in other parts of the world where cultural norms are different. So, while these
authors sparked a lot of discussion, not everyone agreed with their views on intimacy and personal life.

1.6
Many researchers have challenged the idea that individualism is the main force driving changes in
personal life. They argue that this overlooks evidence showing that people still value close relationships
and rely on each other, especially within families and communities. For example, in Asian cultures
where there's been a lot of economic growth and consumerism, young people are often seen as finding
a balance between individual freedom and traditional values. They might choose their own partners for
marriage but still take care of their elders and ancestors, showing that they value both independence
and community ties. So, while individualism might play a role in personal life changes, it's not the
whole story, and people still value close connections with others.

1.7
Towards the end of the 20th century, discussions about how society was changing started focusing on
global processes, often called globalization. This included changes in how capitalist markets work,
advancements in technology like fast transportation and digital media, more people moving around the
world, and global social movements. While these kinds of changes have happened before, the term
"globalization" became popular in talking about these shifts in the media. The media spread ideas about
intimacy that celebrate relationships between equals, affecting how people think about close
relationships worldwide. But these global ideas about intimacy don't necessarily replace other ideas or
erase the diversity of how people actually live their lives. Anthropologists are studying how new
expectations about relationships, influenced by media images of intimacy, clash with traditional ways
of doing things as people try to figure out what being "modern" means to them.

1.8
In the field of social science, researchers have looked at how people's personal lives are connected to
bigger changes in society, like globalization. For example, Castells talked about how global changes
can weaken traditional ideas of men having authority over women at home. He said that as global
markets and ideas spread, they can challenge traditional power structures. At the same time, he
recognized that women's movements also play a role in changing family dynamics. Giddens said that
personal relationships, like striving for more equal partnerships, can help spread ideas of democracy.
Bauman and Beck with Beck-Gernsheim, on the other hand, saw personal life suffering because of the
spread of capitalism, which they said encourages selfishness and consumption at the expense of close
relationships.
1.9
The discussion that follows is based on various research and doesn't support the idea that personal
relationships always lead to social change in just one direction. Intimate relationships can inspire
individuals to make changes in their lives and in history, but they can also serve as a source of comfort
and tradition during times of change. I believe this variety actually makes intimate relationships even
more important for understanding the complex changes associated with globalization. The next sections
of the article will explain in more detail what "practices of intimacy" mean and how they relate to other
concepts used in discussions about personal life. Then, it will go back to the bigger question of how
personal relationships connect to social change. The final parts of the article will discuss how intimacy
is involved in processes like social integration and passing on social norms, which are all part of the
changes we see with globalization.

2.1
Practices of intimacy are the things people do that help create and maintain a strong sense of closeness
and special connection between them. In psychology, researchers have tried to measure this closeness
by looking at how much people depend on each other or influence each other. In sociology, we study a
range of actions and behaviors that people engage in within different types of relationships, like
families, parent-child relationships, romantic partnerships, sexual relationships, and friendships. These
actions contribute to making the relationship feel close and special.

2.2
In looking at research from Europe and North America, I found that intimacy isn't just about sharing
personal information, as Giddens suggested in 1992. Instead, intimacy involves a variety of actions and
behaviors. These actions include giving to, sharing with, spending time with, knowing, taking care of,
feeling attached to, and expressing affection for someone. Each of these actions can help create
intimacy, but none of them alone is enough. For example, two people sharing a prison cell might spend
time together and know a lot about each other, but they might not feel close if they don't want to
develop that kind of relationship.

2.3
When it comes to building intimacy, certain actions like spending time together and knowing each
other take on a special meaning. For example, in Euro-North American cultures, spending time together
involves choosing to be with someone and having the privilege of being able to do so. This might
include certain types of time, like focused, high-quality time or being available whenever needed.
Similarly, knowing each other goes beyond just sharing information; it involves having access to each
other's secrets and personal information and having a unique understanding of each other. This
understanding doesn't always rely on talking; it can also come from shared experiences and memories
that create a sense of closeness.

2.4
In academic and popular discussions, there's often a focus on sharing personal information as the key to
intimacy, following the ideas of scholars like Giddens. However, research on relationships between
couples, parents and children, and friends shows that practical acts of care are also really important.
This means that actions, like helping out when someone needs it or taking care of routine tasks, can be
even more meaningful than just talking about feelings. When someone in an intimate relationship fails
to provide practical care when it's really needed, or when they don't offer routine care when it's
expected in their culture, it can damage the intimacy in that relationship.

2.5
Morgan (2011) explains that "practice" can involve both new behaviors and actions that follow
established patterns. When it comes to family practices, people often enter into a set of behaviors that
are already influenced by laws, money, and cultural norms. So, many family practices support
traditional ways of partnering and parenting that are backed by laws, money, and culture. Similarly,
practices of intimacy are often influenced by cultural norms and expectations. There's a lot of research
on how culture shapes how people behave in romantic and sexual relationships. Institutional rules also
affect intimacy by recognizing and protecting certain types of relationships as legitimate, like married
couples and two-parent families. Even though there's diversity in how people live their personal lives in
Europe and North America, there are still rules that favor certain family structures, and images of
intimacy often reflect these traditional family forms.

2.6
Intimacy is created through various actions that aren't only about intimacy. This makes the concept of
intimacy kind of blurry and it can be similar to other feelings and attitudes like trust, empathy, and
respect. To understand why some combinations of these actions are enough to keep intimacy going, we
need to study real relationships closely.

2.7
Existing research shows that certain aspects of intimate practices can sometimes replace others. For
example, in heterosexual couples in Europe and North America, showing love and care for each other
can make up for inequalities in practical care. Even if couples believe in equal parenting, they often fall
back on traditional gender roles after having a child. Women usually end up doing most of the
caregiving, but if men express love and occasionally help out, it can make up for the inequality.
However, if there aren't enough compensatory gestures, the sense of inequality can become too much.
Then, the unequal division of labor is seen as a lack of care, and other intimate practices seem less
meaningful. This helps explain how a relationship can seem good even if it lacks some intimate
practices.

2.8
Breaking down how intimate relationships are formed into specific actions and behaviors could help us
understand why certain environments encourage certain behaviors more than others. It could also help
us think about what happens when this support changes. This approach allows us to include discussions
about intimate practices in broader social theories about people's identities, social connections, and how
society keeps going. It could help us understand things like how communities are built, how people
form social bonds, and why some people might be left out.

3.1
Let's dive into the idea that when we analyze relationships, "intimate relationships" can be different
from or similar to family, relatives, and kin, depending on the culture and time period. Family,
relatives, and kin are usually defined by traditional or legal rules that recognize and protect certain
partnerships, parenting roles, households, and inheritance rights. However, in reality, how close people
feel to each other may not always match these formal definitions. Intimate relationships might involve
friends or romantic partners who aren't considered family or kin, unless we change the rules to include
them. Some family members or relatives might never feel like close intimates. Nowadays, in Euro-
North American cultures, there's an expectation that both friends and family should provide love and
intimacy.

3.2
Anthropologists have found evidence of love and intimacy reported by people all around the world.
There's a belief that romantic love between couples is almost universal. However, whether friendship is
universally seen as a form of intimacy is debated. Some researchers in Britain suggest that friendships
are becoming more important than romantic relationships for adults. They argue that friendships are the
purest form of intimacy because they're freely chosen and based on mutual enjoyment of the
relationship. But not everyone agrees with this Western view of friendship. Different cultures have
different ideas about autonomy, privacy, and how emotions should be expressed, so the idea of
friendship as a personal and private relationship might not be universal. Still, examples from Europe,
China, East Africa, and Brazil show that friendships involving intimacy and shared emotions are found
all over the world.

3.3
In our everyday language and in academic discussions, "love" and "intimacy" are closely related
concepts. People often use these terms interchangeably. However, love is usually seen as an emotion, a
feeling that someone has, and it's often thought of as something that belongs to an individual. Even if
love isn't returned or there's no real relationship with the person someone loves, they can still feel love.
On the other hand, intimacy is always about connections between people. It's about the pattern of
interactions between them over time, and both people in the relationship recognize it. Expressing love
is one way to create intimacy, and when people declare their love for each other, it can help build a
sense of closeness. But in many cases, just saying "I love you" isn't enough to create intimacy. It needs
to be supported by other actions and behaviors to feel genuine and meaningful.

3.4
The importance of love in intimacy becomes clear when we see examples where they're separate.
Sometimes, relationships between clients and professional caregivers or service providers involve
intimate actions like sharing personal information, physical contact, or providing practical care, but
there's no love involved. These relationships are seen as professional or commercial, not personal.
However, the absence of love can cause problems. For instance, people who rely on professional
caregivers often say they appreciate those who treat them more like friends or family. This is also true
for vulnerable children and young people who talk about their support workers in the UK. Similarly, in
the literature about sex workers and their clients, there are stories about clients wanting emotional or
love-like services along with sexual ones, blurring the lines between personal relationships and
business transactions.

3.5
Anthropologists have pointed out that practices of intimacy are similar across different cultures, which
challenges the idea that love and intimacy are only Western concepts. For example, Cole and Thomas
(2009) argue that the lack of study on love in Africa is due to the mistaken belief that love is only a
Western thing. Even when researchers find differences in how love and intimacy are practiced in
different cultures, they also see some basic similarities. For instance, when discussing the Lahu people
of Southwest China, Du notes that intimacy is not just about private emotional attachment between
couples, but also about how well they work together in their family and community responsibilities.
Even though their cultural celebration of intimacy might be different from Western ideas, the emotional
closeness and harmony that couples experience in private are still important. This shows that couples
share similar ways of building intimacy, even in cultures that don't emphasize individualism as much as
Western cultures do.

3.6
Intimacy isn't only found in relationships where couples choose each other. In some cultures, like
among the Makassar people of Indonesia, parents or other relatives choose partners for marriage.
R�ttger-R�ssler's research shows how the Makassar people create paths to love and intimacy for
young men and women who have little prior knowledge of their future spouse. The process involves
finding suitable couples before the marriage and going through a series of rituals designed to trigger
appropriate feelings and practices of intimacy. One important ritual involves the couple becoming
"speaking partners" ten days after the marriage, and another involves them being placed in bed together
and being encouraged to get along 40 days later. These traditions have weakened over time, and some
couples even choose to marry each other without their families' involvement. However, R�ttger-
R�ssler found that both arranged and "self-made" marriages could lead to intense feelings of intimacy,
where couples feel like they're always thinking about each other. Even though intimacy in arranged
marriages might start with rituals rather than mutual attraction, some Makassar couples end up feeling
just as close as couples in Western cultures who choose each other.

4.1
In early 20th-century sociology, scholars focused a lot on how our close relationships shape who we are
and how we fit into society. They looked at how our interactions with family, friends, and other close
people influence our sense of self and our understanding of the world around us. Different theories, like
symbolic interactionism, phenomenology, and psychoanalysis, all explored this idea in different ways.
For example, symbolic interactionism suggested that our interactions with others shape how we see
ourselves, while phenomenology focused on how our experiences shape our understanding of the
world.

Giddens, a sociologist, talked about how our relationships, especially with our parents when we're
young, give us a sense of security and order in the world. He said this feeling of being secure and
knowing where we fit in society starts in childhood and continues into adulthood. Another sociologist,
Pierre Bourdieu, also talked about how our close relationships affect our behavior and our comfort
level in different social situations. He called this idea "habitus," which means the patterns of behavior
and thoughts that we develop based on our experiences with others.

Overall, these early sociologists emphasized how our close relationships play a big role in shaping who
we are and how we navigate the world around us.

4.2
Some recent theories suggest that our close relationships might not play as big of a role in shaping who
we are and how we see the world. One influential thinker in this area is Michel Foucault, who focused
on how power, knowledge, and language shape society. Critics argue that his ideas don't always explain
why things happen, but they do highlight the importance of language and ideas in shaping our
understanding of ourselves.

According to Foucault and his followers like Rose, our sense of self is heavily influenced by the ideas
and language we're exposed to, rather than just our personal relationships. They argue that concepts like
psychology and therapy, which focus on individual self-improvement, are part of a broader system that
regulates how we think about ourselves.

However, even though these theories downplay the role of personal relationships, they don't completely
ignore them. They acknowledge that our interactions with friends and family still play a role in how we
regulate and understand ourselves, even if broader social forces also shape our identities.
4.3
A Foucauldian approach to understanding society is appealing because it emphasizes the influence of
language and ideas, which feels relevant in a world where digital technology and global media are so
prevalent. This approach suggests that our sense of self and our connections to others are shaped by the
stories and images we encounter in the media and online.

Another way to think about this is through the idea of "imagined communities," coined by Anderson.
This idea suggests that even though we may not know everyone in our community personally, we still
feel connected to them through shared ideas and identities. Calhoun builds on this concept, suggesting
that these imagined connections not only help us feel connected to society but also shape who we are as
individuals.

4.4
Toward the end of the 20th century, many authors started using the idea of networks and flows to
describe society, inspired by Castells' work. This metaphor suggests that our connections to others are
like a web, where we're linked to both people we know well and those we don't know personally.

Wellman and others talked about "networked individualism," which means people are less tied to
traditional loyalties like family or local communities and more connected to diverse social networks.
Some critics, like Illouz and Bauman, think that in a society focused on consumption, relationships
become less emotional and more transactional, influenced by messages from the media.

4.5
Theorists who focus on the impact of language and ideas might not pay much attention to actual
research on people's personal relationships. However, studies on intimate lives often recognize how
media portrayals of romance, like those in movies, affect our ideas about love and relationships. These
portrayals, found in Hollywood, Bollywood, and beyond, aren't limited by borders. They shape how we
think about romance, even influencing how we act it out in our own lives. But these ideas from media
are just scripts; we can change them to fit our own experiences. Even though media and imagined
relationships are important, they don't erase the importance of real, face-to-face connections with
others.

4.6
It's not helpful or necessary to ignore the importance of close relationships when we talk about how
media and other types of communication affect our identities and how we see the world. Kids don't just
learn from what they see on TV or in movies; the quality of their relationships with family and friends
plays a huge role in shaping who they become as adults. Plus, researchers have shown that the people
we're close to can influence how we understand and react to things we see and hear in the media, like
TV shows or news broadcasts.

4.7
Studying how mass media influences personal relationships makes more sense than seeing media
messages as the sole cause of behavior. Some researchers, like the social psychologist Hewitt and the
feminist sociologist Smith, combine ideas from symbolic interactionism with an understanding of how
media affects us.

Think of it like this: When we're exposed to media messages, we might start thinking about them and
incorporating them into our sense of self. But this doesn't happen in isolation; our internal thoughts
about media are influenced by our past conversations and experiences with the people we care about.
It's like a back-and-forth interaction: media affects our personal interactions, and our personal
relationships also shape how we understand media. In places where media is everywhere, these
influences are always present, affecting how we see ourselves and how we interact with others like
friends, partners, parents, and so on.

4.8
To truly understand how intimate relationships affect individuals and societies, we need a theory that
explains how people develop their identities, including their gender, sexuality, and physical selves. This
theory must also consider the importance of feeling secure in one's identity, which comes from being
recognized and receiving adequate care while growing up.

But here's the catch: this theory can't just focus on one culture or nation. It has to recognize how
different social systems—like culture, economy, politics, technology, and the environment—interact
and shape people's sense of self on both local and global scales. In simpler terms, we need a theory that
looks at how intimate relationships affect who we are, while also considering the broader social
influences that shape us.

5.1
In both Western and Asian cultures, there's a perceived change in how parents interact with their
children. Traditional strict discipline is giving way to more affectionate and lenient relationships. This
shift is often linked to concerns about global influences, like Western values, affecting traditional Asian
values such as respect for elders and family loyalty. For example, in China, the one-child policy is
thought to contribute to a shift where older generations have more power over younger ones.

5.2
The reality revealed by research is more complex. Across Asia, studies suggest that while there's a
trend towards being more lenient with children, there's also a reaffirmation of traditional values like
caring for elders. Parents are spending more on their kids not just out of love, but also as a way to
ensure their children will take care of them in the future. This reflects a shift from relying on authority
to nurturing close relationships, although these relationships are often portrayed as devotion rather than
the open intimacy seen in the West.

5.3
Moving towards more intimate parenting doesn't always mean parents give up their authority. They
find other ways to control their children, often with the goal of benefiting the family. For instance,
some Chinese mothers move to Singapore with their child to give them better education opportunities.
This decision involves significant sacrifices. The mother leaves behind her partner, job, and much of
her identity to prioritize her child's education. The child faces challenges in a new school environment,
relying solely on their mother's support. This is a risky decision led by parents, where practices of
intimacy play a role in aiming for success.

5.4
In Western societies, Giddens suggested that parents and children might seem like equals as parents
tried to be friends with their kids. However, this idea has been challenged because it overlooks the
continued differences in age and parental authority. Studies in the West have also found that what
parents see as bonding with their children through conversation, their children often see as surveillance
that restricts intimacy by controlling them.

5.5
In Western societies, research shows that how parents interact with their children varies based on social
class and ethnicity. For example, working-class parents often emphasize the importance of teaching
their children that they can't always get what they want, reflecting their own life experiences. On the
other hand, middle-class and upper-class parents tend to prioritize negotiation and avoid using strict
rules, reflecting their own backgrounds. Middle-class British mothers, for instance, are observed to
negotiate with their young children as a way to maintain control, which might seem like a form of
democracy but isn't entirely genuine. This emphasis on negotiation can both encourage and complicate
intimate practices like sharing personal feelings and being open about oneself.

5.6
Practices of intimacy can be tangled up with how power is passed down between generations. They can
also play a role in keeping class differences alive. For example, studies in the US by Lareau and in the
UK by Gillies have shown that wealthier parents often use praise to make their kids feel special and
privileged, while less privileged parents focus more on teaching their kids to fit in and avoid trouble.
So, practices of intimacy can either help keep inequalities going or challenge them.

6.1
The idea that intimacy, especially the kind where people share their personal thoughts and feelings, is
becoming more popular around the world is supported by studies in anthropology. However, it's not
clear if this trend is actually making men and women more equal, as some experts like Giddens and
Castells thought it would. Looking at what anthropologists have found, Padilla talks about how there's
a growing trend away from traditional ideas of family, which focused on social duty, towards more
globalized models where love is seen as personal and authentic. This shift from focusing on institutions
to focusing on relationships has been talked about since the 1940s in the US. Trying to have more
intimate relationships is seen as a way for people to feel modern and connected to social changes
happening globally.

6.2
In different places and cultures, traditional gender roles in families and personal life still exist, with
men often having more authority over women. But these roles are changing and sometimes being
challenged through practices of intimacy. For example, among young Pakistani people living in Britain,
there's still more control over young women than young men, even though parents equally support their
education. Despite this, there's a desire for love and closeness in relationships, even when arranged
marriages are common, with families helping to find partners. Some young British Pakistanis are happy
to have their parents' support in finding a partner they can love for life, even if it's arranged.

6.3
Shaw and Charsley (2006) show how Pakistani families in Britain balance emotional needs, like
staying close to family, with practical considerations when arranging marriages. They've also started
bringing husbands from Pakistan, which changes the tradition where the wife moves to the husband's
family home. This makes men less able to control their wives.

6.4
Practices of intimacy alone don't always make relationships more equal or break down traditional male-
dominated structures. Some argue that same-sex relationships have an easier time achieving equality
because they aren't tied to traditional gender roles like heterosexual relationships are. There's an old
saying that "it starts when you sink into his arms and ends with your arms in his sink," which means
that heterosexual love often leads to women doing more housework. Research shows that even though
many people believe in gender equality, women still end up doing more household chores in
heterosexual relationships.

6.5
Research shows that the connection between intimacy in relationships and maintaining male privilege
is complicated. In Mexico, for instance, there have been changes in what people want in marriages over
generations. Nowadays, there's more focus on trust, intimacy, and enjoyable sex. But even with these
changes, husbands might still expect their wives to ask for permission to leave the house or bring them
things when they ask, showing that traditional gender roles can still be strong.

6.6
Even in situations where traditional gender roles are challenged, practices that maintain intimacy with
children can still reinforce these roles. For example, when a father is away from home, which is seen as
more normal than a mother being away, simply providing financial support is often enough for children
to feel his love. But when a mother is away earning money, children need to hear expressions of how
much they are missed and see her sadness to feel secure in her love. Even though mothers may also
engage in other intimate practices like regular phone calls and sending gifts, these actions may not be
enough to reassure children of her love. Interestingly, fathers who stay behind and only provide
minimal care, often leaving the bulk of household chores to daughters and other female relatives, don't
face the same doubts about their love. This is because societal norms dictate that providing financially
is enough for men to show their love, while women, especially migrant mothers, are expected to juggle
multiple forms of intimacy to maintain their connection with their children from afar.

6.7
The research shows that people sometimes find ways to accept relationships that might seem
unsatisfactory by emphasizing the modern aspects of intimacy. For example, women in heterosexual
relationships may focus on the intimacy they share rather than the traditional gender roles they may still
adhere to. In China, women working as Xiajies reject the label of "sex workers" because they see their
relationships as more than just sex. Similarly, some Taiwanese women whose husbands have second
wives find solace in online forums where they support each other and focus on rebuilding their own
lives. Some also turn to their children or religion for comfort. These women are finding ways to
reclaim their dignity by blending traditional and modern forms of intimacy to cope with their situations.

7.1
Intimacy is about the deep connection between people and how this connection is formed. In various
parts of the world, more and more researchers are talking about intimacy, suggesting it's part of the
changes we're seeing due to globalization. I've tried to bring together different ideas about what
intimacy is and what research says about it to help us understand it better. This meant looking at
whether the idea of intimacy is too focused on Euro-North-American ideas and whether we can use it
without just looking at things from one country's perspective. I've talked about what intimacy involves
and how it relates to other similar concepts. Even though the term "practices of intimacy" isn't
commonly used, I've shown how it can help us analyze relationships and social changes worldwide.

7.2
Love and intimacy are closely connected, and relationships where people love each other usually
involve intimacy. In some cultures, intimacy is seen as sharing emotions and opening up to each other.
But in other cultures, love can be shown in quieter ways without much talking. It's important to
remember that intimacy can look different depending on culture and history.
7.3
I've proposed that intimacy is created through actions that happen in many relationships, regardless of
cultural or historical background. For instance, when a parent takes care of their child by giving,
sharing, spending time, and showing attachment, they're building intimacy. Even if a culture doesn't
openly express affection or share personal details, these actions still contribute to intimacy, even though
they might not be celebrated as much in certain Western cultures.

7.4
I agree that intimate relationships are crucial for individuals to feel secure about themselves, which is
essential for participating in society and making history. Additionally, I recognize that there's a back-
and-forth interaction between intimate relationships and the messages spread by mass media
worldwide. This interaction helps us understand how intimate relationships relate to social changes in
the age of globalization.

Moreover, when we look at how intimacy connects with parental authority and gender inequality, we
see that intimate practices can either reinforce or challenge existing inequalities related to age, social
class, and gender. Therefore, focusing on intimate practices can help us explain both the things that stay
the same and the things that change in society.

7.5
As of 2011, Beck-Gernsheim pointed out that a lot of the writing about families and personal life in
Europe and North America was limited because it only focused on individual countries, ignoring the
broader global context. This narrow perspective, often called "methodological nationalism," was
criticized for not considering the interconnectedness of families and personal relationships across
borders.

Beck-Gernsheim highlighted Hochschild's analysis, which showed how middle-class mothers in the
USA relied on migrant workers from other countries, often leaving their own families behind, to take
care of household tasks. This arrangement revealed an exploitative relationship between different parts
of the world.

However, Beck-Gernsheim's criticism didn't fully acknowledge the extensive research in social
sciences that already looked at families and personal life beyond national boundaries. Sociology, in
particular, had recognized that society isn't confined to national borders, given the global connections
and systems that span across countries.

7.6
It's worth considering that research conducted in a specific location isn't always limited by
"methodological nationalism." Many studies of personal life in one place recognize that they're
influenced by global and transnational factors. For example, the local economy might be shaped by the
global economy, and local welfare policies might be influenced by organizations like the EU or the UN.

Some researchers advocate for exploring how different aspects like economies, welfare systems, gender
dynamics, and life stages intersect and affect each other. For instance, one study looked at how people
use their homes for intimacy and consumption. While it focused on homes in the UK, it considered
broader theoretical concepts and global changes in technology, social systems, and consumption habits,
which aren't limited to just one country.

7.7
Comparing different cultures and going beyond national boundaries doesn't automatically make our
analysis deeper or free from biases. Historically, there's been a tendency to collect information from
around the world in a way that's influenced by colonialism. The information we've used here tries to be
mindful of Connell's idea that we should respect analyses from the global south and Mohanty's idea
that we should recognize both differences and similarities. By understanding how people form and
maintain connections and important relationships in their daily lives, we can better address important
questions about equality, justice, inclusion, sustainability, stability, peace, order, and other significant
issues. This requires a well-informed and nuanced understanding of personal relationships, especially
intimate ones, and how they're shaped by practices of intimacy.