(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.

Deborah Tannen in Gender & Discourse discusses gender relationships in terms of linguistic styles and cultural implications, emphasizing the importance of the interdisciplinary. nature of studying gender. She asserts that male-female relationships can be explained through examining conversational strategies and balances of power as determined by cultural expectations and ethnic influences. Her studies range in terms of its application to the dominant and equity models as presented in The Unity Model of Marriage as developed by Dr. Leon James.

Dr. Laura Schlessinger in The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands is writing specifically for married women, instructing them in the way to relate to their husbands in order to achieve happiness and fulfillment in marriage. She emphasizes that men are simple creatures - they need sex and food. Her definition of a good husband is one who brings home a paycheck and doesn’t cheat. In relation to The Unity Model of Marriage, Dr. Schlessinger supports the dominance model in her examples of how to attain a successful marriage.

Dr. Joshua Coleman in The Lazy Husband also writes to women to instruct them on the appropriate ways to handle their men. He suggests strategies for wives to employ on their husbands in order to attain a more equitable shift of responsibilities and relative power in a marriage. Dr. Coleman emphasizes the importance of equity in relationships. In this way, his suggestions follow the outline of the equity model as proposed in Dr. James’ Unity Model of Marriage.

Dr. Leon James in The Unity Model of Marriage lecture notes describes the concept of spiritual unity in terms of the three-part self - the sensori-motor, cognitive, and affective. The Unity Model of Marriage is said to progress in maturity from the least mature stage of dominance, to an intermediary stage called equity, and finally to the enlightened (most mature) stage of unity. The desired state is unity between a man and woman. At this level, the man is said to be spiritually enlightened. He accepts the woman’s inner intuition thereby allowing him access to the eternity that only she can inherently possess.

(b) Your analysis should also include a chart or table that shows the differences between the four books in a systematic way.

Excerpt from the literature	DOMINANCE	EQUITY	UNITY
Tannen, Deborah. Gender & Discourse
“Power governs asymmetrical relationships where one is subordinate to another...” (p. 22)	In the traditional sense, power is assumed as the male trait. The women is then subordinate to him.	The equity model works against asymmetry towards symmetrical balance of power and influence.	In the unity model, the power is still within the man’s realm; however, he chooses to subordinate himself to the woman in an effort to achieve spiritual union.
“... simultaneous speech can be ‘cooperative overlapping’ - that is, supportive rather than obstructive, evidence not of domination but of participation, not power, but the paradoxically related dimension, solidarity.” (p. 62)	Tannen suggests that interruption can be seen as overlapping; however, depending on the subject of the conversation, interruption is an indicator of domination.	In terms of the equity model, Tannen might argue here that solidarity through simultaneous speech (overlapping) on behalf of both male and female signifies a linguistic strategy that signifies an effort to establish solidarity.	It seems that simultaneous speech has no place in the unity model since the woman’s wisdom is given credence over the man’s.
“... their cooperative metastrategy is to avoid recognition of their deep differences and dissatisfactions - while maintaining the illusion of open communication and rapport.” (p. 143)	The maintenance of an outward compatibility while inward differences exist is prevalent in the dominance model.	Essentially, in terms of equity, differences and dissatisfactions are acknowledged and rationalized. A couple merely negotiates to try and maintain peace.	Differences and dissatisfactions are not compatible with the unity model. Conjugial love is attained when partners move beyond their differences to a spiritual union.
Excerpt from the literature	DOMINANCE	EQUITY	UNITY
Schlessinger, Laura. The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands
“... beneath individual variations in constitution and temperament, men and women are different. Compatibility and harmony are best served when that difference is respected and, yes, even enjoyed, instead of denied or degraded.” (p. 27)	While men and women are different, in the dominant model, the differences possessed by the woman is neither respected nor enjoyed.	This quote is perhaps more so an appropriate fit for the equity model. The equity model strives for harmony in the face of individual differences.	While men an women are acknowledged to be inherently different, this does not mean that they cannot be compatible. In the unity model, differences are dissolved by abandoning traits that are incompatible.
“The truth is that wives generally overwhelm their husbands with communication.” (p. 95)	In the dominant sense, husbands feel like their wives “overwhelm” them with communication because one of the premises of this model is that the man maintains his independence and therefore does not care about his wife’s feelings and thoughts.	Dr. Laura would say that the equitable situation would be for the woman to acknowledge that she overwhelms her man with communication. Furthermore, Dr. Laura would advise the woman to make changes.	In the unity model, a husband would not feel overwhelmed by his wife’s efforts to communicate. Instead, he would appreciate the opportunity to be in communication with her.
“The destructive anti-male subtext of the modern feminist agenda is to blame for some of this because those folks argue that catering to or deferring to a husband is slave-like submission to the male.” (p. 149)	Catering to or deferring to a husband is expected in the dominance model. Dr. Laura condemns those that would see it as submissive and slave-like, but her negative bias prevents her from viewing this behavior as anything but appropriate.	In the equity model, there is less submission to the male in terms of a woman’s traditional roles. Interestingly, I believe most feminists find themselves in relationships of this sort. Clearly, Dr. Laura is anti-modern feminism, so it can be inferred then that she is anti-equity as well.	In the unity model, the female’s inner wisdom is deferred to over a husbands external intelligence.
Excerpt from the literature	DOMINANCE	EQUITY	UNITY
Coleman, Joshua, Ph.D. The Lazy Husband
“Sometimes a man’s lack of participation has less to do with his partner’s gatekeeping than with his unwillingness to get involved under any circumstances.” (p. 24)	In the traditional sense, a man is allowed to not participate in certain duties (i.e., household chores), since his duty is mainly to bring home a paycheck.	Dr. Coleman makes suggestions to wives to use different methods to encourage husbands to participate despite initial displays of unwillingness.	The notion of gatekeeping is not part of the unity model because it insinuates the independence of both man and woman remain. In the unity model, the man and woman are completely interdependent.
“While she should absolutely work to get Mark to do more, she may have to accept a somewhat higher degree of household clutter regardless of whether he jumps in to help or not.” (p. 40)	In the dominance model, Mark would make choices based on his own prerogatives, not his wife’s.	This quote most appropriately matches the equity model that promotes shared duties, but also an exception of lower standards.	I think the unity model would suggest that a woman not have to lower her standards, rather a man should help to maintain her standards wherever they may be.
“Giving advice, challenging, or making suggestions allows men to feel like they’re in a position of equality, if not superiority.” (p. 161)	I do not think a woman giving advice, challenging, or making suggestions would be permitted in the dominant model unless it were intended to make the man superior.	This advice would be appropriate in the equity model because the woman and man are moving towards cognitive reciprocity in that they challenge one another to try and find commonality and agreement in thought.	The unity model assumes that the woman’s advice is superior to the man’s.
Excerpt from the literature	DOMINANCE	EQUITY	UNITY
Swedenborg, Emmanuel. Conjugial Love
“... people also have a general perception (which is the same thing as saying an influx of heaven into the inner faculties of their minds), which causes them to perceive truths inwardly in themselves and, in a way, to see them, and especially this truth, that one lives as a person after death, happily if he has lived well, and unhappily if he has lived ill.” (Section 28, Marriages in heaven)	Inward perception may be a trait the wife possesses at this level, but not the husband.	The husband may be more aware of his cognitive self in the equity model and if he continues to mature will become more inwardly realized.	If the man, during his lifetime is able to become inwardly aware of himself and his partner’s inner wisdom, this quote indicates that he will live happily after death.
“A natural person loves and wants only external conjunctions, with the physical pleasures arising from them, while a spiritual person loves and wants an internal conjunction, with the states of spiritual happiness resulting from it.” (Section 37, Marriages in heaven)	The natural person is the person involved in the dominant model relationship.	There is movement from the natural persona towards the spiritual person.	Once the transition from natural to spiritual is complete, the person only seeks internal conjunction.
“It is different in the case of people who are spiritual. In their case, the first state of marriage is an introduction to continuing states of happiness, which advance as the spiritual rationality of the mind and consequently the natural sensuality of the body in one partner join and unite with these same qualities in the other. But people like this are rare.” (Section 59, Truly conjugial love)	Since spiritual people are rare, it is assumed that those who exist in the natural realm are more prevalent. I would assert that most natural people exist in the dominant model.	It might be inferred that there are many in this transitional state of equity. I think, in terms of numbers, the equity models has less than the dominant model, but more than those in the unity model.	Since people like this are so rare, I think the negative bias towards this unity model will prevail.

©) As well, give your personal opinion on the elements or entries in your chart.

I agree with the elements of this chart in that I think each author represents a certain prevailing way of thinking. Certainly, Swedenborg and Dr. James are rare and unique in their assertions. However, I accept their ideas as a scientific method to understanding marriage and relationships. Moreover, I think the idea that unity is about internal spirituality is appealing.

I disagree on certain terms with all authors except Swedenborg. Specifically, I disagree with Dr. Laura’s suggestions on the appropriate behaviors, thoughts, and feelings of men and women in marriage. Dr. Laura seems to be extremely one-sided and bias in favor of the man. I think Deborah Tannen and Dr. Coleman represent contemporary thought regarding gender and relationships. I see their ideas as a shift towards equity. In terms of enlightenment, I think Swedenborg is the only enlightened of the four authors studied.

(e) How are your ideas influenced by each of these four three different perspectives on marriage?

Since becoming familiar with the four texts studied and the lecture notes, I have shifted from a negative bias to a positive bias. It was not always apparent to me the many subtle ways in which men are able to dominate and subjugate women. I think Dr. Laura helped me recognize how popular literature and media perpetuate male dominance. Dr. Coleman reinforced my assumption that modern-day relationships emphasized equity. Dr. James and Swedenborg helped me see beyond the external relationship, to the internal unity. I believe that marriage can be happier and eternal beyond death.

Like most of my peers, I think the unity model is ultimate goal. I do believe, however that negative bias will remain strong as long as traditional roles in relationships are perpetuated..

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.

According to the Lecture Notes (found at: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy23/409b-g23-lecture-notes.htm), this couple is conjoined at the sensori-motor level. Section 5 of the lecture notes state, “sensorimotor conjunction is the mental state of husband and wife in which their sensations and movements are mutually and reciprocally interdependent.” Outwardly, this couple seems to be happy in sharing everyday activities. Inwardly, this couple disagrees in terms of goals, perceptions and feelings. They are not affectively conjoined.

It appears that like most relationships, this couple vacillates between the equity and dominance models. The husband resists affective interdependence remaining fixed in his thinking. He wants the wife to think on his terms instead of her intuitive self that strives for conjunction at the inmost level. In arguments, this couple disagrees because the wife is striving for affective conjunction while the husband resists her. If he is unable to give up his affective independence, they cannot be spiritually conjoined.

According to ennead Table 1a, this couple probably moves between zones 3 and 4 depending on the husband’s resistance level to his wife. If he chooses to remain resistant to his wife’s thinking and striving, the couple remains at the dominance level (approximately, zone 3). If the husband allows negotiation in arguments with his wife, they move closer to cognitive conjunction (approximately, zone 4). However, if in the disagreement they show hatred and disrespect, they regress into the traditional attitude of dominance.

In this example, it appears that the wife tries to demand equity from her husband but is ultimately denied. This is why she shows hatred and disrespect. She strives for unity and he resists despite her inner wisdom.

(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.

Married partners can reverse this flip flop cycle - the dominance-equity shift - and continue towards affective unity by increasing the exposure of the husband to modern ideas in terms of relationships. Also, if the husband agrees to go along with some of the wife’s demands or request, he will begin to see that she is spiritually intuitive and deserves respect. As the husband becomes motivated by his wife’s inner wisdom, the couple can move towards affective unity.

In terms of the threefold self, this married couple often disagrees with one another and is therefore inhibited from maturing into the equity model. At the sensuous cognitive level, they must learn to find ways of maintaining peace in order to make progress to a more affective, more mature level where perhaps they can take turns giving in when there are disagreements. In this way, they can become closer in their mental intimacy though still maintaining a comfortable distance until the husband can move up in the unity model of interaction.

The “conjoint self” will be the result of the achieved unity if the husband and wife continue to grow in reciprocity. They both make changes necessary to achieve this state. They become conjoined in not only external activities, but also in thinking and feeling. All three interconnected domains must be united.

©) 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.

I conducted a survey among five women varying in age from 25 to 56 in which I asked about their experiences with men’s resistance to mental intimacy. The following is the checklist I compiled based on their responses.

1) To avoid mental intimacy, my husband does not pay attention to me when I’m talking about a subject that is of no interest to him.

2) Simply, the man is only interested in physical intimacy and he avoids mental intimacy unless he sees a physical reward attached to it.

4) My husband makes the television louder when I try be mentally intimate with him. He drowns out my voice with the tv.

5) The man’s male-to-male interaction is more important to him than his interaction with his spouse or significant other.

6) To resist mental intimacy, my husband brushes me off with “you should know by now that I don’t do the touchy-feely stuff.”

7) My husband begins to answer curtly with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ when he senses that I’m seeking some kind of mental intimacy. He doesn’t elaborate on his answers and eventually stops responding all together.

9) The husband manipulates the discussion by changing the topic to something that interests him or repulses his wife in order to distract from the mental intimacy she wants.

10) He complains about how much work I’m demanding by insisting on mental intimacy.

Unfortunately, the survey I conducted is indicative of a relationship in the dominance model. This confirms the assertion that men are resistant to mental intimacy and conjugial unity. Surprisingly, even the younger respondent admitted that in her relationship to her boyfriend, she recognizes his resistance to mental intimacy. The exposure to modern ideas regarding reciprocity and equality in relationships hasn’t influenced his thinking.

This list can be used to exemplify a man who’s traditional beliefs motivate his behavior. It seems that the older participants in my survey were neither shocked nor surprised that their peers shared the same experiences with their spouses. The older women nodded in agreement when one woman said, “men are different, they don’t want the same things we [women] do and there’s nothing we can do about it.”

The scientific process of moving towards unity is especially interesting as it seems that modern thought is maturing along the outline of the threefold self model. I think Swedenborg was ahead of his time. Additionally, I think if society continues to move towards equity and women are given more opportunities to share their inner wisdom, the world will be a more spiritual, happy place.

(a) Select one or more techniques explained in the Lecture Notes in the last section called Making Field Observations

I decided to observe couples in conflict. Specifically, I watched to see if the man got mad and yelled or pouted. I observed his initial reactions and his resolution (if any). I tried to keep track of the resulting behavior and inferred the model that govern the relationship.

(b) Do a mini-experiment in which you use the techniques to analyze interactions between couples – either yourself in a couple relationship, or some other couples you know.

To perform this field observation, I drew from examples in my own relationship an from two other couples I know - my parents’, and my brother’s.

©) Describe what you did, what you found, and how you explain it. Be sure to use the unity model in your explanations, but you can also give alternative explanations, in addition to your explanations with the unity model.

Over the duration of this course, I have performed numerous informal observations since I know that the couples I’d be observing often find themselves in conflict. For example, my parents often argue about economical issues. My brother and his wife argue, though less frequently than before, about my brother’s need to hang out with the guys. Finally, in my own relationship, most of the arguments are centered around my husband’s lack of respect for my feelings and interests.

It is my observation the my parents interact in accordance with the equity model. My mother is the primary breadwinner of the family as my dad has long since retired from his job. My mom is not responsible for the traditional duties of the household, including but not limited to cleaning, cooking, and caring for the children. Rather, she goes to work and brings home the paycheck.

Interestingly enough, despite this apparent shift in duties, my mother’s feelings and often ignored by my father who resists giving up his independence affectively. Since my parents share the same religious beliefs and educational background, they seem to be in cognitive agreement, but my dad consistently reinforces his independence. The arguments are stimulated usually by economical issues like my dad’s excessive spending habits on items like power tools.

In an argument with my mom, he often resorts to yelling. Then, he leaves the situation to do something alone or with his friends. My mother retreats, often crying or becoming completely silent and sullen. In this way, my parents would seem to be in the dominance model, but it only applies to certain aspects of the relationship rather than governing all of their interactions.

When my sister-in-law and brother argue about how my brother spends a lot of his free time with his friends, it usually results in both parties yelling and swearing. The fights begin with my brother coming home late from his time out with the guys and my sister-in-law, tired from work, waiting up for my brother to arrive often until early in the morning. The following behavior ensues.

My sister-in-law begins by blocking the entrance to the door when my brother arrives. This way, he has no choice but to confront her. She asks a series of questions of which he has already prepared answers. Then, she tells him that he’ll be sleeping on the couch until he stops this pattern of behavior. He becomes very quiet and seemingly apologetic, complies for a while, but by the next evening is having his own form of a tantrum realizing he still must sleep on the couch.

He starts in on his wife by apologizing, insincerely, I might add. She sees right through the apology and resists giving in. This is when the yelling starts. He starts bringing up old arguments, trying to find a way to make her feel like the guilty party. She usually fights back and ends up locking herself in the room until my brother either falls asleep or stops yelling. Then, both go for a day or two without talking. After a few days have gone by, it’s as if the argument never happened.

There’s definitely a cyclical pattern that is painfully evident in my brother’s marriage. It is my assumption that until my brother begins to put his wife’s desires (i.e., spending more time at home with his family instead of with friends) before his own, their relationship will never mature beyond the dominance phase. Furthermore, I think my brother lacks respect for his wife and her views. He exhibits signs of maturity in that the yelling is becoming less and less in these situations, but the initial behavior, the going out, has yet to change.

In my own experience, this semester proved to be quite traumatic for my own marriage. For five years, my spouse and I have argued about his lack of respect for my feelings and interests. I have made changes including finding a new job, changing majors, and even abandoning friends in the interest of my marriage. Despite all this, my husband continued to verbally abuse me by telling me my job wasn’t good enough, or my college major wasn’t stable, and my friends were bad influences.

Our arguments usually began by a hurtful comment he’d make. I’d get upset and stop talking to him. He’d become sarcastic and often expressed that I never learn. If I didn’t respond to his sarcasm by expressing my willingness to change, he’d get upset and leave, often to smoke. He dealt with his anger in several ways - smoking, running, or going out with his friends. All of these tactics were counter-productive and anti-unity. Additionally, all of these activities excluded me often because I don’t smoke and I can’t leave the house because someone must tend to my son - that someone usually being me.

It was not until I separated from the relationship that I was able to recognize how abusive the situation had become over the years of marriage. Even my husband now realizes how hurtful he had become. In fact, the separation is proved to be helpful in terms of our individual maturation. While I do not think that the maturation is somehow a movement of us to coming together again, I do think our relationship as parents to our son will exhibit a more equitable situation. Without the separation, I believe the relationship would have remained consumed in the dominance model.

This exercise was helpful in relating the concepts of the unity model to relationships of which I am very familiar. In all of my observations of couples since this class, I find examples that go hand-in-hand with the design of the unity model. My observations indicate that achieving unity is indeed a rare thing.

(a) Analyze the book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands by Laura Schlessinger, summarizing its perspective, and discussing the author’s philosophy or psychology of relationships between men and women.

Dr. Laura’s definition of a good husband is one who provides for his family by bringing home a paycheck. He is good to his wife by not seeking out relationships with other women. He is good to his children by proving stable income with which to support their basic needs.

The book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands is Dr. Laura’s plea to all women to support the ‘good’ men in their lives by providing food, sex, and understanding. A woman must boost her man’s ego, she must tolerate his activities outside of the home (as long as it remains within Dr. Laura’s definition of a good man), and she must try and make him happy even if it means abandoning her friends and support network. A wife must continuously praise her husband in order to motivate him to support her.

Dr. Laura uses guilt and sarcasm as tactics to get her female listeners to comply with her philosophy of what constitutes a successful relationship. She promotes and perpetuates the notion that a woman must fulfill traditional roles in order to find happiness in her marriage even if it means being dominated by the motivations of her husband. In fact, Dr. Laura believes that the motivations of the husband, if acknowledged and praised, will serve to ultimately benefit the relationship.

In terms of the unity model, Dr. Laura’s assertions are anti-unity. She places men on a pedestal and disregards, even mocks, women who would try and insert their own motivations and intuition into the relationship. She believes that a woman should be happy if she is privileged enough to find a good man to support herself and their children. Her duty then is to be continuously grateful to the good man for performing this role. Dr. Laura’s psychological technique is governed mostly by the dominant model. In contrast to the unity model, her beliefs are counter productive.

(b) Find 10 brief quotes from what the husbands wrote, analyzing each one, showing the character of their threefold self. Use the unity model in the Lecture Notes to characterize the threefold self of the husbands that wrote to her.

Quote 1: “‘As a man, I can tell you our needs are simple. We want to be fed, we want our kids mothered, and we want lovin’.’” (p. xiii)

In accordance with the threefold self, this man is motivated affectively (at the deepest level) by self-serving thoughts. He is making a short list of demands on women in general, suggesting that he thinks his needs are superior. He does not mention a need to reciprocate and provide any support to the woman.

Quote 2: “‘My experience tells me that since men seems to be afflicted with prurient thoughts about sex about seven times a day, the right hussy with the right words and the right moment and... need I say more?’” (p. 66)

It is an assumption of the male dominance model that men need more sex and wives should provide it or else. This man exhibits a certain self-righteousness, using his maleness as an excuse for promiscuity. This statement is a threat to women, it is used to blackmail women into believing that they must provide sex or lose their man. This man is motivated by feelings superiority. At the core, he has no respect for women. He seems them as objects of conquest.

Quote 3: “‘Basically... it’s her priorities that matter. She’ll have the whole weekend planned, while I’d love to have some downtime together. She’ll say that I’m not supporting her.’” (p. 73)

This man is complaining about his wife’s habit of planning weekends in disregard of his feelings. In this case, both husband and wife are being counter productive. Neither is tailoring their habits towards a more cohesive unit. In relation with the threefold self, it is unclear what the wife’s motivation may be but it is clear that the husband is motivated by solely by his desires. It can be said, however, that at the affective level there is not agreement between husband and wife. This is evident because apparently the wife is motivated to do something that the husband does not want to do. Their strivings differ.

Quote 4: “‘Despite our rugged outward appearance, most men tend to have delicate psyches. I know four very happily married men. In each case their wives make a point of stroking their egos and making them feel that they approve of them. Consequently, these men practically worship their wives.’” (p. 73)

It seems that this quote was given by a man whose behavior is governed by the dominance model. Affectively, he probably feels that the wife should be held responsible if her husband is unhappy. There’s no mention of reciprocity. No mention of him stroking her ego and helping her feel validated. Consequently, this man’s perspective does not allow for unity much less equity.

Quote 5: “‘Husbands should be encouraged to share their feelings without being accused of being insensitive and stupid. Let us talk. Be supportive. Permit us to have opinions, feelings, and thoughts that do not agree with yours.’” (p. 79)

While this quote may not exhibit outright male dominance, it still is counterproductive to unity where a man must give up his affective independence to seek thoughts and feelings that are aligned with his wife. The man who provided this quote may affectively be motivated towards equity, but has not yet realized a more spiritually enlightened plain. He does not seem to recognize his wife’s feelings and thoughts as more intuitively conjoined than his own.

Quote 6: “‘If a man tells you he isn’t thinking anything, he probably isn’t. Can’t see how that is so hard to understand.’” (p. 95)

The above quote comes from a listener who is trying to explain to women the dilemma men find when trying to communicate with a woman. I disagree with the statement because I do not believe that any human being alive and breathing is experiencing, at any given time, no brain activity. I think this man is trying to manipulate and confuse women into believing that this is true. I think this man is affectively motivated by his own agenda and he probably says he isn’t thinking anything because he is trying to resist mental intimacy.

Quote 7: “‘When she prepares to tell me something, she reminds me that she doesn’t need anything fixed or solved - and that cues me that I’m just supposed to listen, which is what she really wants.’” (p. 97)

This quote suggests that a wife’s ‘unloading’ on her husband is a call for him to help to fix or solve something. The man who was quoted here, however, recognizes that this is not always the case for his wife. As long as she makes the distinction, he responds appropriately. I think this husband affectively is trying to be respectful of his wife’s desires. This signifies a movement towards unity.

Quote 8: “‘Women need to realize that we are just going to do stupid stuff. That doesn’t make it malicious or a personal attack on them. When we do these stupid things, we don’t need retaliation. We are usually embarrassed enough on our own. We need forgiveness.’” (p. 100)

It appears that this man is resolved in the fact that all men will do stupid things. While I am inclined to agree, I do not think that women need to accept this behavior if it’s continuously repeated. I think repeat ‘stupid’ behavior is a personal attack, particularly if the woman has to continuously tolerate it. If it’s repeated, it means the man is motivated by some self-centered precept that disregards the fact that the woman finds the behavior unacceptable.

Quote 9: “‘If wives really want their husbands to understand them, they’re going to have to acknowledge what they instinctively know and actually tell us what we need to know. Wives need to tell their husbands what they are thinking, feelings, and wondering about in simple, declarative sentences using one- or two- syllable words.’” (p. 107)

This quote might seem to be evidence that his man is seeking some mental intimacy; however, he is misguided in that he is putting the responsibility solely on the women to make the intimacy work. The wife has to tell the husband what he’s feeling, she has to share her own feeling, and she has to keep it simple enough for her knuckle-dragging excuse of a husband to understand. Seriously! This man is motivated, like the other men used in Dr. Laura’s book, by his selfishness. He doesn’t seem to actually want mental intimacy with his wife, because he’s not making any real effort to achieve it. He simply complains.

Quote 10: “‘Every authority in interpersonal relations says if you have a problem with your spouse, confront them with it. Talk to them and let them know how you feel. Whenever I try this, my wife responds with a very clear explanation of why I should not feel this way. She will share with me every reason why I am wrong to think the problem has anything to do with her!’” (p. 108)

It seems that this man would be better directed by Swedenborg and Dr. James instead of “every other authority.” If his wife is clearly explaining why his feelings are misguided, instead of retreating into his independence, he should follow Dr. James’ advice and one, never do anything she does not want him to do, and two, always do what she wants him to do. The problem is probably that he wants to maintain his independence because he feels he’s earned it after so many years of marriage, kids, and work. He needs to understand that the husband must continuously place his wife’s feelings above his own to gain eternal happiness.

Admittedly, Dr. Laura’s book was the easiest and most difficult read in the class. It was easy to understand the examples and the language used. It was difficult in the sense that many of the examples used angered and frustrated me as a woman with a liberal education. I saw her writings as counter productive and one-sided. I find most of her assertions repulsive and degrading. Furthermore, when I made connections between my own relationship and the ones I read about in the book, I was saddened by how similar the situations seemed.

Dr. Laura’s website is located at: http://www.drlaura.com/main/. It would be interesting to email her about the Unity Model to see if she responds. I doubt this she’d have a response. She embodies the negative bias. I can’t believe she’s so damn popular!!!

(a) Consider Tables 1a, 1b, 1c in the Lecture Notes, which is in the Section called Sensorimotor, Cognitive, and Affective Conjunction It shows how to construct an ennead chart using the threefold self and the three levels of mentality creating the preference for each model. One illustration is given in the area of sexual behavior.

(b) Explain what has been discussed in class and the Lecture Notes as "sexual blackmail." Describe the development of your thinking regarding this concept, from initial reaction to now. Collect some data on how others you know react to this concept when you explain it to them. How do you interpret their reactions and comments?

Sexual blackmail is a man’s dominance perspective regarding physical, external intimacy. This blackmail tactic is used to subjugate a woman beneath her common human rights of dignity, self worth, freedom, and sanity. This is a traditional notion that promotes sexual slavery of women.

Initially, I didn’t see all the subtleties of this blackmail technique. Once reading the lecture notes, Swedenborg’s Conjugial Love, Dr. Laura’s Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands and online articles from Dr. Phil and other relationship “help” sites, I see that this technique is so pervasive in society.

I explained this concept to a few colleagues at work. They range in age and experiences in relationships. Some women revolted from the idea that men purposefully use this tactic. One woman said, “men are just like that, they can’t help it!” Yet another said, “women use the same tactics to get what they want.”

I think that most women are so used to the traditional idea that a man needs sex because of internalized oppression perpetuated in the popular media. Any idea that challenges this notion is going to be difficult to accept. I think with older women, specifically, it is difficult to accept the fact that this is indeed blackmail. Perhaps they deny that it there is such a tactic to deny feelings of subjugation and pain. This only further internalizes the problem and the abuse.

©) Copy Table 1c and replace the characterization of each illustration (in each cell) into an example of your own. Think of a couple you know in reality or from TV. The three tables should cover these three topics:

(I) HOUSEWORK - Raymond and Debra Barone from the sitcom “Everybody Loves Raymond”

MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR

INTERACTIONS

THREEFOLD SELF

SENSORIMOTOR
(external)

COGNITIVE
(internal)

AFFECTIVE
(inmost)

level 3
UNITY
Rational
Mentality

7
RATIONAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Raymond and Debra do not share external unity in terms of housework. Debra and Raymond ultimately are uncoordinated and usually fall back into old habits where Debra handles the housework alone.

8
RATIONAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Internally, it is not apparent that Raymond and Debra are in agreement about who should be responsible for carrying out housework.

9
RATIONAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

It seems that Raymond is motivated to do what ever he wants and Debra is left to perform the house work. He resists affective unity.

level 2
EQUITY
Sensuous
Mentality

4
SENSUOUS
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Raymond performs some of the housework in an effort to relieve Debra in stressful situations.

5
SENSUOUS
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Debra may disagree with the way Raymond performs the tasks. Raymond may think that he’s being helpful by doing the housework, but may create more grief for Debra by not doing it the way she would have it done.

6
SENSUOUS

AFFECTIVE
STATES
Raymond and Debra resolve to split the chores. Debra accepts Raymond’s ways of doing various chores in an effort to keep peace in the marriage.

level 1
DOMINANCE
Corporeal
Mentality

1
CORPOREAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Raymond finds satisfaction when Debra handles the household chores without him having to help.

2
CORPOREAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Raymond thinks that Debra should do the housework because she stays at home while he has to be outside of the home to work and provide.

3
CORPOREAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

Raymond continues to find activities to occupy his time outside of the home in order to continuously place the task of household duties on Debra.

MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR

INTERACTIONS

THREEFOLD SELF

SENSORIMOTOR
(external)

COGNITIVE
(internal)

AFFECTIVE
(inmost)

level 3
UNITY
Rational
Mentality

7
RATIONAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

During the pregnancy, Rachel agrees to move in with Ross so that he can be there to help with pregnancy-related issues.

8
RATIONAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Rachel and Ross may not be cognitively joined since they still have trouble with agreeing on one another’s opinions. For example, they get into an argument over the name of the baby.

9
RATIONAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

Since Ross and Rachel maintain their single status throughout the pregnancy, they resist interdependence. In fact, throughout the pregnancy they are involved in intimate relationships with other people.

level 2
EQUITY
Sensuous
Mentality

4
SENSUOUS
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Ross shows up at the first ultrasound appointment against Rachel’s wishes to apologize for his initial reaction to the news.

5
SENSUOUS
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Rachel forgives Ross and allows him to stay in the patient room to witness the first ultrasound of their baby.

6
SENSUOUS AFFECTIVE
STATES

Rachel and Ross agree to stay single, but to raise the child together despite Ross’ initial proposal that they get married.

level 1
DOMINANCE
Corporeal
Mentality

1
CORPOREAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Rachel has sex with Ross though they are not dating. She ends up pregnant.

2
CORPOREAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Ross’ initial reaction to Rachel when she told him about the pregnancy was selfish. He got upset and didn’t maturely react to the situation.

3
CORPOREAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

Ross thinks that it is his duty to marry Rachel. He feels like it’s the right thing to do.

MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS

THREEFOLD SELF

SENSORIMOTOR
(external)

COGNITIVE
(internal)

AFFECTIVE
(inmost)

level 3
UNITY
Rational
Mentality

7
RATIONAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Cliff accepts Claire’s methods of parenting and supports her in front of the children.

8
RATIONAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Cliff considers his wife’s thoughts on parenting before his own

9
RATIONAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

Cliff puts his wife’s feelings above his own before acting

level 2
EQUITY
Sensuous
Mentality

4
SENSUOUS
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Cliff and Claire try to discuss their plan before having to discipline one of their children

5
SENSUOUS
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Cliff and Claire find an agreement on how to discipline the child in accordance with the severity of the wrongdoing

6
SENSUOUS AFFECTIVE
STATES

Cliff and Claire usually agree, but if they don’t, Cliff usually defers to Claire to make the ultimate decision.

level 1
DOMINANCE
Corporeal
Mentality

1
CORPOREAL
SENSORIMOTOR
ACTS

Cliff and Claire appear to be different in the way in which they choose to discipline the children.

2
CORPOREAL
COGNITIVE
PROCESSES

Cliff and Claire seem to be motivated by different reactions to the children’s misbehavior

3
CORPOREAL
AFFECTIVE
STATES

Cliff and Claire sometimes disagree with they way to handle the children’s misbehavior

This was a difficult exercise because the ennead table reads from bottom to top and because the threefold self is interdependent, so the categories often seem to overlap and run into each other. Additionally, the media seems to only extend as far as the equity model is concerned. I cannot think of any media couple that portrays affective unity.

This section will review and summarize three students’ Report 2 from the prior generation (Generation 22). Their class folder is at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2005/

Ms. Miyake attempts to answer questions 3, 6, 7, 11, and 12 as outlined in the instructions for G22's Report 2 (found at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409b-g22-report2.htm). She does not complete questions 6, 7, 11 and 12. Additionally, Ms. Miyake does not complete her review on the current generation.

In her answer to question 6, I noted that Ms. Miyake’s table indicates that only in the Unity Model do partners feel that their love is eternal. I did want to note that my study on Mormon marriages reveals that the definition of eternal can differ. In the case of comparing these marriages to the Unity Model, the definitions of eternal are no the same. Mormon’s believe in eternal families being dependant on following their gospel doctrine. The Unity Model defines an eternal marriage in terms of a psychological, spiritual enlightenment that scientifically develops in the conjunction of the affective, cognitive, and sensori-motor levels.

When it comes to marriage, Ms. Miyake appreciates the Unity Model as she believes it to be “wife-centric.” She admits, though, to feeling “a little bitter sweet” about the prospects of her upcoming nuptials. Asserting that the information given in the class will pose challenges, she encourages individuals to have an open mind. Her advice to future generations is to follow the instructions as outlined by Dr. James. She also advises to expect a lot of work when enrolling in one of Dr. James’ classes.

Ms. Kwan answers questions 3, 6, 7, 12, and 14 as outlined in the instructions for G22's Report 2 (found at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409b-g22-report2.htm). Unlike Ms. Miyake, she completes the answer portion of the five questions. Additionally, she summarizes and comments on three of her G22 colleagues’ oral presentations.

I thought her answer to question 12 was interesting to read. Question 12 asks the student to select three shows in the media that portray anti-unity values (AUVs). Ms. Kwan used the sitcom Friends as one way to answer this question. I found her examples to be useful in understanding the concept of anti-unity values. Moreover, I think it’s interesting that these sitcoms are so popular amongst so many people - male and female.

Ms. Kwan’s advice to future generations is to follow the instructions provided by Dr. James. She advises against procrastinating. Finally, she suggests psychology majors and non-majors alike should enroll in this class because the material presented is useful in relationships.

Mr. Hanai answers questions 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 as outlined in the instructions for G22's Report 2 (found at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409b-g22-report2.htm). He also chooses to answer question 11 for extra credit. The instructions for report 2, however, do not mention extra credit options.

In Mr. Hanai’s answer to question 15, he discusses the popularity of Dr. Laura and Deborah Tannen. I agree with his assertion that Dr. Laura seems to be the more popular of the two. I also did a Google search on Dr. Laura at the beginning of the semester and made the same discovery as this student. Dr. Laura is popular, but people either hate or love her; she’s famous or infamous.

In his section on advice to future generations, Mr. Hanai stresses several times that the one thing you do not want to do in any of Dr. James’ classes is to procrastinate. Also, he suggests taking the class to learn more about gender and relationships. He admits that the material was difficult to accept, but the he also asserts that everyone can learn something from taking the class.

Focus requirements (i.e., W & O) are nothing to be cavalier about. A professor once told me that American students are the LAZIEST on an international scale. How embarrassing and yet, true, I find. A resounding message amongst students in Dr. James’ classes is that procrastination often determines how successful (or unsuccessful) a student’s work will be in the end. The challenge is to go against the ‘lazy’ stereotype and be proactive. My advice would be to at least tackle the technical aspects of the reports and outlines as soon as the directions are available. Keep up with the readings and complete assignments as you go.

The endings of the semester always spell t-r-o-u-b-l-e. Students tend to sicker, more stressed, and over-extended. Teachers tend to be more stressed, too, trying to complete the material, grade papers & exams, etc. Therefore, to avoid yourself the added grief, try and complete the oral requirement of the class as soon as possible. I found that students who had already taken one of Dr. James’ classes volunteered to present their oral discussions on the literature during the first two months of the course. If you’re astute, you will do the same. Put the odds in your favor, because again... the end of the semester always spells t-r-o-u-b-l-e.

I’m a mother going through a recent separation with my husband. My son’s going to be four and I just turned twenty-five. Meanwhile, I’m a full-time student and I work thirty hours a week (on average!). SOUNDS FAMILIAR??? If so, take heart, I’m a firm believer that 1. Everything happens for a reason and 2. We are only given as much stress as we can handle. If you can’t finish all the assignments (notice, I didn’t “get to” all of my outlines), you may have mis-prioritized, but life goes on and you will survive. Besides, if you’re a woman, guess what??? Dr. James says you hold the keys to eternity!

DON’T TAKE AN ENGLISH WRITING INTENSIVE CLASS THE SAME SEMESTER AS ONE OF DR. LEON’S 4X9 WRITING INTENSIVE CLASS

Okay, I don’t want to trash-talk the English department. Perhaps I’m just using this opportunity to vent about my own experience. I decided to try and take ENG 255 Short Story and Novel as an elective this semester because I’m lacking another Writing Intensive class. WRONG DECISION! I’m learning a lot from my professor (who will go unnamed), but when the course is designated as writing intensive, the English department is sure serious about how much writing you’ll actually have to do.

My advice would be to space out the writing intensive courses (one per semester) if you’re as busy as I am. Otherwise, like me, you will find yourself stressed with having to deal with competing deadlines for written assignments. For example, I have to write a short story and submit my eighth draft on the same day this report is due. I expect to spend most nights (after my son’s gone to bed) on the computer.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE MARRIED, KEEP IN MIND THAT MATURITY TAKES TIME (AND OFTEN PAIN IS AN INEVITABLE EXPERIENCE)

I have learned so much from being married (and separated!). First, no matter how much effort one person puts into a relationship, it doesn’t guarantee things will work out. It definitely takes the efforts of two to make a successful relationship. It seems that initially, women are the main contributors to a marriage and men inhibit progress. If you’re fortunate, though, maturity will settle in and the man will recognize his foolish ways and begin to heed their woman’s requests.

Often, in retrospect, I commiserate about the abuse I’ve endured in relationships, but because of the abuse I know how to make better decisions when I’m confronted with the same situations later. It’s been quite an experience participating in the lectures in this course. I’ve gotten angry at Dr. Laura and sometimes confounded by Swedenborg, but overall, I’ve learned that accepting the Unity Model with a positive bias is much more enlightening and hopeful than remaining skeptical and stuck in the negative bias.