Lifestyle can be defined as a set of personal decisions related to diet, clothing, leisure activities, health care, relationships, employment and purchases. Although this definition seems appropriate, it does not address a major inconsistency. While individuals can make their own lifestyle choices; however, these choices are made in isolation. Preferences are developed based upon economic factors, cultural norms, technological developments, social interactions and commercially oriented environments. Therefore, in today’s world lifestyle is no longer simply a private manner of living. Lifestyle serves as a way for individuals to visibly express their identity by demonstrating who they are, what kind of person they wish to become, and where they feel they fit in.
The growth of social media has contributed to the intensity of this trend; since today people’s everyday activities (e.g. morning routine, workout, coffee run, shopping trip, vacation) can be documented, quantified, showcased, assessed and compared with other users’ posts. Therefore, a person’s everyday experience is also becoming a public expression of who they are. Also, more and more companies are selling their products based upon what types of lifestyles those products will allow consumers to lead. So while individuals may feel like they have complete control over how they live their lives, it is clear that contemporary lifestyles are being shaped by the constant interaction of individual choices and external pressures. Individuals can choose how they want to live their lives, but digital technologies, advertisements, economic disparities, and cultural norms dictate which types of lifestyles are seen as acceptable, respectable, or even feasible.
Lifestyle has been shown to be increasingly linked with identity, as a result of the ability of consumers to use consumption as a means of expressing their values, even if those values are not stated directly. Consumption, in the form of clothing, food, technology, travel and leisure activities, can also serve as social indicators. This does not mean, however, that consumption is merely superficial. The choices people make about what to purchase, or what to avoid purchasing, can demonstrate deep-seated moral and personal commitments. Martin-Woodhead (2022) studied the behaviors of minimalists, and determined that minimalists practiced limited and purposeful consumption, through buying fewer items, keeping and maintaining existing possessions, and placing more emphasis on items that were deemed important to them. Therefore, lifestyle offers individuals a way to incorporate their daily behaviors into their personal value systems.
Attempts to avoid consumerism have developed into distinct lifestyles (e.g., minimalists, sustainable consumers, fitness fanatics, etc.). Each of these categories has its own aesthetic, product selection, language and expectations. Callmer and Boström (2024) explain that avoiding consumerism is a process of negotiating one’s identity. This is because consumerism is a part of social interactions and the standard methods of showing concern for others. Gifts are bought, meals are shared, trips are taken, and special events are celebrated through purchasing goods. Therefore, when individuals choose to consume less, they are changing both their daily routines and their ability to interact with others. Therefore, making changes to one’s lifestyle is a collective decision rather than an individual one.
Digital culture adds an additional layer to how we create and share our lives with others. Through social media, users are able to selectively showcase aspects of their lives such as meals, outfits, travel experiences, accomplishments, daily routines, and special events. While a user’s social media profile may not be entirely inaccurate, it is certainly a selective version of who they truly are. This distinction is important because more and more people are experiencing the daily lives of others based on what has been “curated” (i.e., selected) by those individuals rather than what actually occurs in their everyday lives. As a result, many aspects of lifestyle have become somewhat performative; people may now judge their own lives based on whether or not an activity is visible, visually appealing, or can be recognized by others.
The effects of this digital world are not wholly bad. Zhang et al. (2023) showed that college students who use social media may have better mental health and overall happiness due to factors such as self-esteem and support received via the internet. Additionally, digital communities can help people stay connected to friends, find things they enjoy, get positive feedback, and feel like they belong somewhere. Therefore, the value of social media will depend on both what people do with it and the social context in which they are using it. If we think about technology as the problem, then we miss the distinction between having a true connection to others and constantly comparing ourselves to them.
However, there is also pressure from consumer markets for people to translate their lifestyle goals into purchasing behaviors. This is especially evident in what has come to be known as “wellness culture.” Eating well, working out regularly, sleeping enough, and having good relationships do not require any specific type of appearance. However, many aspects of today’s wellness are often associated with special clothes, vitamins/supplements, gym memberships, devices (e.g., smartwatches), vacations/retreats, products/goods, and environments that are specifically designed for people who are interested in being healthy. Karreman et al. (2026) state that the wellness industry should be viewed through the lens of commercial determinants of health, since companies that promote these products/services affect both the products/services available to consumers, as well as the meaning behind the value of well-being. Therefore, as consumers continue to take care of themselves, it may eventually seem as though they are buying proof that they are taking care of themselves.
The same paradox is also evident in how individuals make sustainable lifestyle choices. Environmental consciousness may lead individuals to buy ethically produced clothing, locally grown food, items that can be used again and again, or previously owned items. For example, research into Indonesian consumers has shown that their decision to buy sustainable fashion is linked to a number of variables such as social pressure, habit formation, self-perception, emotional response, cognitive processing and social media (Kurniaty et al., 2024). While making sustainable choices will result in significant positive effects on the environment, the idea of sustainability is undermined when consumers are constantly urged to acquire new products simply because the products have been marketed as being environmentally friendly. For instance, replacing single-use bottles with a single reusable bottle serves a functional environmental objective; however, acquiring numerous reusable bottles solely based upon the fact that they match different aesthetics reinforces the very same type of excessive consumption that the reusable bottles were intended to prevent.
In the current conversation about lifestyles, there is a large amount of focus on individual choice. Many people believe that all individuals have the ability to make choices regarding their lifestyle. People who give advice on healthy eating, exercise, sustainable shopping, work-life balance, self-improvement, etc., often present the individual’s choices as a direct reflection of their discipline or motivation. This way of thinking allows us to transform societal inequalities into personal failures. Bharati et al. (2024) discuss the importance of social determinants of health (social and built environments) in providing opportunities for individuals to engage in healthy behaviors. An individual cannot simply choose a healthy lifestyle if they do not have access to safe public spaces, nutritious food, affordable housing, leisure time, healthcare, or financial stability.
The inconsistency in modern-day living is that society encourages people to express their uniqueness, however, there are many examples of “the good life” being presented as a standardized model of how one should live. In essence, people are told to “do you,” however, the image of “the good life” is continually presented as a result of using the same types of products, traveling to the same places, living in similar homes, consuming similar things, and having similar daily routines. Therefore, the concept of individuality may become just another market segment.
This is not to say people do not have control. Individuals may choose not to participate in trends; limit what they buy; create supportive social groups; change the way they interpret cultural standards; and live a life based on their personal beliefs. There are two major differences between a lifestyle as a conscious action and a lifestyle as a continuous display. One difference is whether a behavior contributes positively to an individual’s physical/mental well-being, relationships with others, value system, group membership/community, or the natural world. The other difference is if a behavior is effective at communicating a positive image/identity to others. In many ways, modern society has caused individuals to confuse these two types of lifestyles.
Lifestyle is neither completely personal nor completely predetermined. It develops through interactions between individual values and the social, technological, economic, and cultural conditions surrounding them. Contemporary digital culture has expanded opportunities for self-expression and connection, while simultaneously increasing comparison and making everyday life more visible. Consumer industries have similarly provided useful products and services while turning identities such as wellness, sustainability, and minimalism into profitable markets.
A meaningful understanding of lifestyle must therefore move beyond the simple language of personal choice. People certainly make decisions about how they live, but the choices available to them, and the value attached to those choices, are shaped by forces larger than themselves. The strongest form of lifestyle agency may consequently be neither unrestricted consumption nor complete withdrawal from modern culture. It is the ability to distinguish between habits that genuinely support one’s values and habits adopted primarily because society has made them appear necessary. In an age where almost every way of living can be branded, photographed, and sold, living deliberately has become a form of critical judgement.
By: Aliifah Najwa Khaalishah
Write and Win: Participate in Creative writing Contest & International Essay Contest and win fabulous prizes.
About the Author
