**6. "Everything for the children": love as a life organizer**

We want to depict in this section the role of maternal love whose main and practical objective is to guarantee the children's present and future as much as possible. It is one of the fundamental features of the fracture, the fold, and the hiatus of the politics of sensibilities that the world-of-no education, nutrition and work—builds as socialization axes in segregation and expropriation spaces.

In the heyday of the Welfare State, a political economy of morality was consolidated and deepened based on work as an everyday life organizer: time to wake up, time to leave and go back home, having a credential to belong to a group—labor unions or associations-, among others. In this way, work organized the personal and familiar past, present and future: vacations, births and retirements. The central axes of socialization processes were the way adults dealt with the juggling of actions according to their work, their learning at school of capacities to get and keep a job, and their sharing with friends their first experiences of "earning money."

In the crisis of the welfare models, the capacity to organize the everyday life differentiated those who still had a job—though unstable—from the ones who had to accept State's assistance as a supply to reproduce their material conditions of existence. Within this framework, the social policies competed against work regarding their distinguishing impacts in the structure of the routine. Since 2000 mainly up to now, the social policies imply the creation of new guidelines in the economy of the moral where the receptors "adopt" a set of "feeling practices"; it is in their cognitive affective facet that they draw guidelines and color their everyday life. Thus, social policies, on the one hand, involve a hidden curricula and a pedagogic ambition; on the other hand, they involve methodologies of "working-as-a-beneficiary" which shape the everyday life organization of millions of people and hence becoming new ways of socialization.

It is precisely in the interstices of these last practices that maternal love is produced and reproduced as hiatus of the set claim for totality installed in the politics of sensibilities that involve social policies of resignation, propaedeutic to some extent.

Love is a fold that disputes resignation, as it turns the Me-You-Other relation into an object of desire. Our point of view here is based on the social approach of W.I. Thomas on desire as an organizer of social relations. In this light, the logic of response appears when the Me-You-Other relation is within the "energy" of desire. Love is a response structured in the intimacy and contact, which dialectically intertwines exteriority and interiority. A logic of response is made, between what is biological and what is social, as a structuring desire, as an action of wanting to get consent. That desire of being answered is part of a logic that has to do with the reproduction of the self and the reproduction of the surroundings. The key to answering and being answered is, as a result of the energy of desire, the potentiality that originates in the breaking with abandonment.

In the same way that the sociodicy of frustration implies impotence as a feature of what is social, love as an interstitial practice involves the energy of knowing oneself with others in the world as a springboard for action.

of large social groups as an inevitable end. Indeed, this perspective originates a side of the socialization sometimes underestimated of the aforementioned contexts. Thus, in the last section we will address *love* as one of the practices that "organize" children's and adolescents'

We want to depict in this section the role of maternal love whose main and practical objective is to guarantee the children's present and future as much as possible. It is one of the fundamental features of the fracture, the fold, and the hiatus of the politics of sensibilities that the world-of-no education, nutrition and work—builds as socialization axes in segregation and

In the heyday of the Welfare State, a political economy of morality was consolidated and deepened based on work as an everyday life organizer: time to wake up, time to leave and go back home, having a credential to belong to a group—labor unions or associations-, among others. In this way, work organized the personal and familiar past, present and future: vacations, births and retirements. The central axes of socialization processes were the way adults dealt with the juggling of actions according to their work, their learning at school of capacities to get and keep a job, and their sharing with friends their first experiences of "earning money."

In the crisis of the welfare models, the capacity to organize the everyday life differentiated those who still had a job—though unstable—from the ones who had to accept State's assistance as a supply to reproduce their material conditions of existence. Within this framework, the social policies competed against work regarding their distinguishing impacts in the structure of the routine. Since 2000 mainly up to now, the social policies imply the creation of new guidelines in the economy of the moral where the receptors "adopt" a set of "feeling practices"; it is in their cognitive affective facet that they draw guidelines and color their everyday life. Thus, social policies, on the one hand, involve a hidden curricula and a pedagogic ambition; on the other hand, they involve methodologies of "working-as-a-beneficiary" which shape the everyday life organization of millions of people and hence becoming new ways of socialization.

It is precisely in the interstices of these last practices that maternal love is produced and reproduced as hiatus of the set claim for totality installed in the politics of sensibilities that involve

Love is a fold that disputes resignation, as it turns the Me-You-Other relation into an object of desire. Our point of view here is based on the social approach of W.I. Thomas on desire as an organizer of social relations. In this light, the logic of response appears when the Me-You-Other relation is within the "energy" of desire. Love is a response structured in the intimacy and contact, which dialectically intertwines exteriority and interiority. A logic of response is made, between what is biological and what is social, as a structuring desire, as an action of wanting to get consent. That desire of being answered is part of a logic that has to do with the reproduction of the self and the reproduction of the surroundings. The key to answering and being answered is, as a result of the energy of desire, the potentiality that originates in the breaking with abandonment.

social policies of resignation, propaedeutic to some extent.

**6. "Everything for the children": love as a life organizer**

life in society.

132 Socialization - A Multidimensional Perspective

expropriation spaces.

Resignation is another side of love as an affective state that turns the Me-You-Other relation into a main goal, that is, when "being with other(s)" becomes the goal of daily life production and reproduction, not only in reflective ways but also, and mainly, as an "unnoticed" component of the life we live every day.

We could say, from this perspective, that in the same way that there is a libidinal structure of capital, there is also an erotic processuality of the resistance. That erotic processuality of the resistance is crossed by the recognizing ability, as the first choice, and by the main goal that involves an affective state focused on the Me-You-Other relation. This, in turn, finds helically its interstitial abilities in the folds of the "non-human" necessity (sensu Marx).

Let us review now, in a preliminary and schematic way, that love consists of an interstitial practice. The complex and contradictory parent-child relations represent the first scenario where the actors grasp and reproduce the "practices of wanting." Care, protection, safety and continuity are some of the manifestations of these practices. The asymmetry between children and parents establishes, among many other things, the social and genetic mandates of the reproduction of human species. Within the framework of the current structuring, we must emphasize that the practices that we want to conceptualize do not depend only on the genetic or blood relations. Care is one of the most basic practices of the wanting where by attending and assisting we relate to each other. Protection relates to shelter and safeguard. Continuity relates to persistence and lengthening. It is this way that, within the context of neo-colonial religion that involves the experience of millions of individuals from the sociodicy of frustration and from the world of "no," the only thing they (we) "have left" is family. We cannot insist enough on the fact that we understand this as a "trench," as a small leaking point where the oppressive totality is not structured or makes no sense: the "practices of the wanting" are a shelter from where hope is daily exercised. Precisely, this is so because filial love means, in any case, care, protection and continuity. These are what parents and children give each other, including, of course, parents and children without blood relation—that is to say, among all those who play the role of parents and children. Care has a lot to do with what future means. Why? Because that is what we care about. What is the bourgeois logic? It is misuse and acetic consumption. What does taking care mean in the You/Me/Other relation? It means to protect from harm. It means to protect in order to avoid getting hurt and hurting others. It is that pore that "stays there" and that resignation that does not manage to go through entirely. In other words, there is a point where the constitution of filial love works as a pivot point, as a platform where the relation "jumps" to another state as "practice of the wanting."

Filial love, as an interstitial practice that "moves" toward a collective practice, is what Goffman calls "turns" in the dramaturgy of life experiences.

Yves Winkin, in its introductory study of "Erving Goffman Moments and their men," holds that one of the events Goffman uses to exemplify his concept of "turning point" is "Love intervenes in a moment of people's crisis and 'redirects' all its conduct. 'Reorientation that love conducts can be called 'turn'" [39].

Most mothers, fathers, wives, relatives, and friends we refer to in the studies mentioned in this work said that their loss-situations "have changed their lives": their everyday interactions, their bodily hexis, and the material ways of reproducing their existence have changed, in some cases, radically.

In this context, to round up our paper on socialization, we want to present briefly some results about a set of interviews held in Buenos Aires, Argentina to women that receive some kind of State assistance. These interviews (29) were conducted in 2014, 2015 and 2016 with mothers

Socialization, Poverty and Love: Contributions from the Sociology of the Body/Emotion

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.74391

135

When we analyze the women's answers, we find a recurrent connection across ages, nationalities, number of children, and marital status; it is the living by the precept of [doing] "everything for the children." What we propose here is one of the axes of socialization that children who live in poverty and undergo diverse types of exploitation "have in common": the corpo-

Beyond the fact that it is the moralization of the performed role of maternal care imposed by current social policies, the ones that complete the panorama of these complex politics of sensibilities, it is love as an interstitial practice the one that reorganizes the everyday life of millions of children, adolescents, and young people who see and realize how their mother does "everything for them." Reciprocity, being free of charge, generosity in terms of achieving the minimal practices, shelter, clothing and food are, at least, seen and felt by the social subjects who, as we have shown in the previous sections, participate in expropriating

As we can see in **Table 2**, the connections between feeling practices, love and features of socialization from an interstitial view occupy a specific places in mothers and their children's

The filial love identifies and acts by breaking and re-establishing a network of practices of feeling characterized by: Need, Suffering, Gratitude, Danger and "The best for them." Mothers give their children and by giving them they teach how to give, mothers provide and by providing show them how to provide. Mothers shelter their children's and given shelter sharing

Patterns of feelings start forming in children in such a way that, perhaps, just like their mother, these actions are the only ones that they "repeat" while remembering their mother's love.

Returning to the initial quote of Giddings, and re-thinking the processes of socialization in the current contexts of global restructuring continues to be a central mission for sociology.

In the particular spaces that we have defined as "Global South," this task nevertheless acquires specific features that lead us to problematize the paradoxical situation from which millions of subjects live the tensions constituted between two apparently antagonistic forces. On the one hand, the inertia that drives various forms of association between individuals, and on the other, the expulsion forces that question not only the social nature of the subjects, but also

that live in different slum areas in the city [41].

socialization practices.

modes of action to care.

**7. Conclusion**

their own individual existence.

everyday life.

ral mark of their mothers' love who give everything for them.

Filial love is extra energy that manifests as a result of the tensions among the family's instituted features: legitimacy of the unequal gender trafficking, reproduction of private property, instructive process to the basic components of the political economy of moral principles, and material reproduction of the bodies/emotions.


**Table 2.** Feeling practices, love and features of socialization from an interstitial view [40].

In this context, to round up our paper on socialization, we want to present briefly some results about a set of interviews held in Buenos Aires, Argentina to women that receive some kind of State assistance. These interviews (29) were conducted in 2014, 2015 and 2016 with mothers that live in different slum areas in the city [41].

When we analyze the women's answers, we find a recurrent connection across ages, nationalities, number of children, and marital status; it is the living by the precept of [doing] "everything for the children." What we propose here is one of the axes of socialization that children who live in poverty and undergo diverse types of exploitation "have in common": the corporal mark of their mothers' love who give everything for them.

Beyond the fact that it is the moralization of the performed role of maternal care imposed by current social policies, the ones that complete the panorama of these complex politics of sensibilities, it is love as an interstitial practice the one that reorganizes the everyday life of millions of children, adolescents, and young people who see and realize how their mother does "everything for them." Reciprocity, being free of charge, generosity in terms of achieving the minimal practices, shelter, clothing and food are, at least, seen and felt by the social subjects who, as we have shown in the previous sections, participate in expropriating socialization practices.

As we can see in **Table 2**, the connections between feeling practices, love and features of socialization from an interstitial view occupy a specific places in mothers and their children's everyday life.

The filial love identifies and acts by breaking and re-establishing a network of practices of feeling characterized by: Need, Suffering, Gratitude, Danger and "The best for them." Mothers give their children and by giving them they teach how to give, mothers provide and by providing show them how to provide. Mothers shelter their children's and given shelter sharing modes of action to care.

Patterns of feelings start forming in children in such a way that, perhaps, just like their mother, these actions are the only ones that they "repeat" while remembering their mother's love.
