Report 2:
My Understanding
of the Unity Model of Marriage
By Emilee Patinio
Instructions for
this report are at:
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy23/409b-g23-report2.htm
I am answering
Questions 2,3, 5, 11 and 12
The Question I am answering is Question 2
(a)
Contrast the four views of gender relationships expressed by Tannen in Gender
Issues, Schlessinger in The
Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands,
Coleman in The Lazy Husband, and James in The Unity Model of Marriage. (b)
Your analysis should also include a chart or table that shows the differences
between the four books in a systematic way. (c) As well, give your personal opinion on the elements or
entries in your chart. (d) How do
your own views compare to whatÕs in the chart? (e) How are your ideas influenced by each of these four
three different perspectives on marriage?
(a) Compare and Contrast
(i)
Deborah TannenÕs views of
gender relationships in Gender and Discourse were along the lines of the dominance and equity
models. She is a linguist that
talks about the different ways men and women talk to each other in
conversations and how it varies between different cultures. A big topic she talked about was how
men in a work area team together to bring women down. It brings the men closer together. This shows the relationships of men and women
linguistically.
(ii)
Dr. Laura SchlessingerÕs The
Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands definitely
depicts a dominance model of marriage.
Dr. Laura has a belief that wives should be happy to have a man that
will provide for them. She
believes that the women are supposed to cater to the husbands and meet all of
his demands. A wife should just be
grateful that he is not cheating on her.
(iii)
The Lazy Husband by Joshua Coleman tries to aim for an equity model of
marriage throughout most of his book.
He does a pretty good job until he contradicts himself in the eighth
chapter toward the husbands. In
general, he believes that the wives should try to understand the man more and
lighten up, and by doing this she will see improvements around the house and
get more help from her husband.
(iv)
Dr. SwedenborgÕs Conjugial
Love relates to the Unity Model of
Marriage. He tells of how marriage
is conjugial and not conjugal. He
believes marriage last till eternity and that there is still marriage after
death. Dr. Swedenborg had the
ability to go into his spiritual mindstate and see how people lived after death
and he tells of his visions and what a great thing love is if people are united
through the sensorimotor,
cognitive and affective self.
(b)
Table
Man vs. Woman Conjugal vs.Conjugial Method
of
Model
(Equality) (Marriage after death) solving
arguments of Marriage
|
Tannen |
Man |
Conjugal |
Dominant wins |
Dominance/Equity |
|
Schlessinger |
Man |
Conjugal |
Man is right |
Dominance |
|
Coleman |
Man=Woman |
Conjugal |
Both listen to the others views |
Equity/Dominance |
|
Swedenborg |
Woman=Man |
Conjugial |
Man does what he can to make wife happy |
Unity |
(c) My
Opinion on Table
(i) In the Man vs.
Woman category it tells which sex is more dominant depending on the
theory. Tannen believes that we
live in a dominant society and the Man is the dominant species. Dr. Laura feels the Man is the head of
the household and brings home the money so he is dominant. Joshua Coleman feels that the Man is
the dominant person but the two can work toward equality together so they are
equal with the man leading.
SwedenborgÕs marriage shows the woman and man being equal as well, with
the lead of the woman.
(ii)
Conjugal marriage basically means that Òtill deathÓ does a couple part. Conjugial means that even after death,
a couple is spiritually married.
In Tannen, Schlessinger, and ColemanÕs view of marriage, it only last
till death. Swedenborg is the only
person whose theory involves spiritual marriage.
(iii)
In the ÒMethods of solving argumentsÓ category it shows how a couple solves an
argument. Tannen feels that when
arguments occur the dominant speaker will win. She believes that we live in a ÒmanÕs worldÓ so the winner
in most cases would be the husband.
Dr. Laura believes that in an argument the woman is always wrong and the
man is always right. So long as
the husband bring provides for his family, the woman has to do anything he
wants so she will lose. Dr.
Coleman aims toward an equity model of marriage so he believes that each
individual should give in to the other.
The woman has to understand that men are different and vise versa. Swedenborg feels that in an argument
the man does what he can to make his wife happy. The wife should not be hurt and always be happy because she
usually knows best so the husband follows her lead.
(d) My Views
on Table
The way my view coordinates with the chart would be along
the lines of Dr. Coleman and Swedenborg.
I really believe in equality in a relationship. I feel like my relationship is built
along these lines. However, I feel
like Dr. Swedenborg presents an awesome theory to marriage. Its very idealistic but seems rational
and very possible to accomplish.
(e) Influences
I am in the early stages of my
relationship right now so it is ok to follow the equity model, but hopefully it
can develop into a unity model because it seems like an awesome way of
living. I think that the dominance
model of marriage is out of the question and no woman should have to live
through that sort of relationship, we deserve better!
The
Question I am answering is Question3
A
husband and wife seem to get along real well together, enjoying the same
activities, having fun, being popular with friends, etc. Then they have a fight
over some disagreement and they show disrespect and hatred for each other. (a) Explain why this turnabout can
happen and what is its cause. Be sure to use some aspect of the theory
given in the Lecture Notes. (b) Discuss how married partners can reverse this
flip-flop cycle so that it never occurs again. In your explanation be sure to
apply the unity model, the threefold self, and the conjoint
self, as explained in the Lecture Notes. (d) The unity model says that men are resistant to mental
intimacy and to conjugial unity. Collect data to either confirm or disconfirm
this prediction. Interview several women of varying ages (to the extent
possible). Make up a checklist consisting of 10 to 20 items that highlight what
the women have said about their experiences with men's resistance to intimacy.
Discuss the list and what it can be used for. (e) Anything else you have to say.
(a) It is easy for a husband and wife to get along by enjoying
the same activities. A couple will
find this out in the early stages of their relationship. That is the reason they keep the
relationship going. This is part
to the sensorimotor level that everyone can witness. It is when the couple physically has fun together. When working toward Unity and becoming
harmonious with each other they begin to come closer cognitively and
affectively as well. That is how a
turnabout can happen. They lack
the cognitive capacity to think like their partner or for the husband to have
aligned his thoughts and feelings with his wife. If the couple were in the Unity model they would handle the
situation much differently. This
sort of couple reason under societies exploitative motivations, and
misinterpret the intentions of their partner. By doing this, they tend to use a stereotyped, inaccurate
and prejudiced way of thinking that will hurt the partner.
(b) The way to handle the situation so that it does not
continually repeat is to follow the Unity
Model.
ÒAccording to the "unity" model of marriage,
the perfection of unity in a marriage increases through differentiation and
reciprocity of behavior in the threefold self of the two partners, and is a
spiritual union that lasts to eternity. In a unity marriage, the husband and
wife develop a conjoint self, while their former individual self recedes into
the background and no longer operates.Ó
(James)
When a husband and wife become a conjoined self in all
parts of the threefold self: sensorimotor, cognitive, and affective, they can
fully be united and will lose their societal way of thinking. They know each other externally and
more internally now and will know what bothers the person and what doesnÕt so
they will know how not to hurt the partner. Arguments may appear time and again but it is how the couple
handles the situation that lets them grow!
The
Question I am answering is Question 5
(a)
Select six student reports on marriage from Generation 20 and/or 21 (in any
combination), as listed in the Readings section of the Lecture Notes. (b) Summarize each of the six reports.
Be sure to put a link to the students' reports. (c) Add a General Conclusion Section in which you discuss
your reactions to what each student did and said – (i) their ideas,
(ii) their
method,
(iii) their explanations.
(d) What did they gain from doing their reports? (e) How do their ideas influence what
you yourself think about these issues?
(f) Anything else you have to say.
Generation 20
Brigitlynn Duclos
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/duclos/report1.htm
(b) Summary
(i) Brigitlynn is a Generation 20 student completing her
Report 1. In the report, she focused
on Gender and Discourse issues which was the main focus of the class. She summarized ten articles and chose
different concepts from them and shared her opinions. The articles she wrote about dealt with differences between
genders. It spoke of differences
in aggression, emotions, arguments and daily conversations.
(ii)
When
comparing men and women, Brigitlynn found that men are genetically more
aggressive than women.
Testosterone is associated with aggression, and men carry a lot more
than women biologically. Another
factor to aggression is frustration.
Men tend to have more feelings of rage, distraction and anger, which is
associated with frustration. Frustration usually occurs when a person thinks that
they are being prevented from achieving a goal. Biologically men are said to be more goal-oriented than
women so when prevented from achieving a goal, they become more frustrated.
(iii)
The second
difference Brigitlynn compared was emotionality. While men tended to be more goal-oriented, women are more
compassionate and less angry. A
good reason to show these differences between sexes is to show the relationship
between married couples. Most
arguments between couples arise because the two are totally different people
and are not a like in anyway. Both
genders need to understand the other in order to cope with the others feelings
and thoughts.
(iv)
The last concept
had to do with differences between gender conversations. There are five elements to discourse:
topic, argument, sequence, relationship, and setting. These are all factors to the way we talk with other people
in a conversation. The reason we
have conversations is to interact and communicate, to bond in relationships,
and maybe the most important, to influence our control of power. This is where dominance in speaker
comes into play.
(c) General Conclusion
(i)
The ideas that Brigitlynn
came up with are pretty logical and seem to go along with what we are taught in
class this semester. The focus of
her generation is a little different in that they focus on aggression in
driving which is something we really did not touch up on in my generation. It does make sense though that me do
have more aggression because they have more testosterone than women. The only idea she kept repeating is how
men are more goal-oriented than women.
We never really touched up on that in class and when I listen to that
fact I feel disagreement. I feel
that women are just as goal oriented as men, itÕs just that their goals are
different than men, but doesnÕt make them any less oriented.
(ii)
The method she took in
writing the assignment was to choose concepts and ideas from articles and
briefly explain them. As a whole
she focused on comparing the differences between genders. I felt she did a good job at this. The only thing was that it might have
been a little too brief.
(iii)
Again, I believe
BrigitlynnÕs explanations of the article were good but she could have gone a
little more in depth to the article.
Each idea had only about two sentences about it. It seems like it needed a little more
substance.
(d) Completing Assignment
From completing this assignment Brigitlynn gained a better
understanding of the differences between cognitive and biological of men and
women. She also found that the
assignment helped her see how she could better control her daily emotions. She felt she like this because she
would rather live her life on the positive side of the spin cycle. Also, since
she is aware that there are many gender differences she can better understand
and use it as a reference toward her future relationships.
(e) Influence
Brigitlynn did have a small influence on how I view the
issue of gender differences. I
feel I agree for the most part with her.
Her statements seem to be factual and have validity that I can
understand to be true. I wouldnÕt
say that she influenced me too much but more like she reinforced my own
thinking.
Suzanne Howard
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/howard/report2.htm
(b) Summary
SuzanneÕs report focused on the threefold self
mainly. She gave a definition of
it and went on to show examples in some articles. The three main elements included: sensorimotor, cognitive
and affective. She used the
articles to show examples of how it is used and can be applied to everyday
things and not just gender relationships, which she focuses on in this
particular report.
In
the second part of her Report she goes on to show in dept examples of
categorizing interactions in her own gender relationship. She wrote down journal entries she had
and showed the sensorimotor, cognitive and affective parts of the events that
she listed.
(c) General
Conclusion
(i)
I believe that SuzanneÕs
ideas were pretty rational. She
seemed to have a pretty good understanding of what the threefold self was and I
believe that that is an accomplishment in itself. She also has a positive bias outlook to this class so even
though she does not fully agree with everything she does not make the article
sound too dry which makes it easier to read.
(ii)
I really liked the journal
entry method she used. She had
taken a journal she wrote when she was with her previous boyfriend and analyzed
different events that occurred using the sensorimotor, cognitive and affective
techniques. Her examples really
made sense to me because it put things more into perspective for me where I
could relate it to my own relationships.
(iii)
SuzanneÕs explanations were
pretty straightforward and easy to comprehend. She would take say an argument and analyze it. For example, she would list that her
and her boyfriend got into an argument, talked it out and made up. She would list the sensorimotor as they
physical argument, cognitive as she knew that they should talk it out because
the argument was minor, and the affective was that she hates it when they fight
so they both agree that they should not be mad with each other anymore. I really found her explanations to be
helpful.
(d) Completing
Assignment
In completing this Report Suzanne found that she gained a
lot of knowledge about the threefold self and the types of gender
relationships. It was pretty
critical for her to gain this knowledge in order to relate it to her own gender
relationships. From the beginning
to the end of the semester she had a change in the way she viewed the Unity
model. She came into the class
believing the Equity model was the best way to have a relationship and the
Unity Model was not possible for a man to accept. She has not fully converted to the Unity Model but feels
that you definitely need the aspects involved in it. She feels that the best relationship could come out of a
mixture of the Equity and Unity Model.
(e) Influence
I believe that Suzanne did have some sort of influence on
me. I agree with her feelings
about gender relationships. I also
feel that it would be really awesome to have a Unity model but would be hard to
accomplish because it does involve the manÕs participation. I also feel that a marriage with the
aspects of Equity and Unity models could be a very happy one.
Chris M.
(b) Summary
(i) In the first half of ChrisÕs Report 2 he describes
different topics in oral presentations in class. He chose topics from the orals and analyzed it by showing
agreements and disagreements. He
focused mainly on the threefold self and on different topics pertaining the
unity model of marriage and gender unity.
More in depth he took phrases used of quotes to analyze and wrote his
opinion on it.
(ii) The second
part of the Report was dedicated toward AUVÕs or Anti Unity Values. Chris chose three TV shows that he
watches and showed how television views relationships. He gave a brief description of what
happened in the episode and rated the couple on how united or close they were
to attaining the unity model of marriage.
He also gave his opinion on the couples and their compatibilities or
flaws.
(c) General
Conclusion
(i)
I really felt like the tone
of this report was pretty negative.
It was like Chris had a negative bias on his outlook of the class and
what it focused on. In the Report
Chris asks a lot of questions that he does not find answer to so it leaves his
argument to seem invalid. He
states that he disagrees with something but does not give his reasoning for it. I did not find his ideas to reliable
because of this. It seemed he had
a moderate understanding of what he was presenting but had a hard time
accepting them.
(ii)
The methods used were
comparing and contrasting topics presented in oral presentations, and TV reviews
on AUVÕs. I thought that his
agreements and disagreements toward the Unity Model really set the tone of the
report. In the disagreement
portion he really brought down the unity model and gave a negative vibe to the
reader. However, his tone was mutual
when he wrote the section on AUVÕs.
He detected the AUVÕs with ease while watching his television programs
so it showed he had a good understanding of the concept.
(iii) ChrisÕs explanations were pretty good if it cam