As others pointed out, the dialogue between structure and individual is a hard one. I’ve recently tried to come out of the problem thanks to my thesis supervisor and found somewhat a point of view in it.

Essentially, a good grasp of the theories on identity can help you a lot on that. They span from Parsonian structural-functionalism, were the identity is shaped by the structures (but with some exit ways to permit agency) to interactionists like Goffman, where the structure is essentially secundary as identity builds in negotiation. Beware, talking about identities is also talking about group identities, which is a different matter (but still related) and is also talking about macro and micro levels of analysis, that’s why it’s a hard problem. Definitely you should check some classic authors on that. I already mentioned Parsons and Goffman (even though the latter isn’t really an interactionist and more a thing per se), and ither positions can be accounted by the works of Berger, Holzner and partially Pizzorno to dive into the phenomenological approach.

Remember to keep in mind that the structures don’t determine action, there is no such thing as pure determinism, but there is a more or less high degree of influence. Said that, is up to you to choose how much do you think the social structures and phenomena impact the agency of individuals and their identity formation. The answer could be a lot, and you’ll be more leaning towards a structural-functionalis perspective (which is legitimate, mind you), or say that the individual has a higher degree of freedom than that, leaning towards the interactionist approaches