Anti-Unity Values in the Media:


Examples of Anti-Unity Values (AUVs) -- Table 9


Section 20

Examples of anti-unity values (AUVs) that are often promoted in the media include:

1.      Living together unmarried

2.      Having children out of wedlock

3.      Making each other jealous on purpose

4.      Adultery for various reasons

5.      Promiscuity and bi-sexuality

6.      Sexy dressing for men other than one's partner

7.      Having a same sex best friend who is placed ahead of the partner or in competition for certain things

8.      Having a heterosexual best friend who is placed ahead of the partner or in competition for certain things

9.      Same sex friends going out as a group for fun and entertainment without their partners

10. Flirting with other gender as retaliation against one's partner (or other reason)

11. Separate interests and activities accepted for partners

12. Manipulating partner through deception

13. Accepting the idea that it's OK to "agree to disagree" about some things

14. Promoting the idea that one should not try to change one's partner but should accept them with their faults, etc.

15. Girls only or boys only entertainment

16. Acceptance of the idea that men are more important

17. Promoting the idea that men are more rational than women

18. Promoting the idea that women are generally frivolous as part of their gender

19. Making it look normal for a man to exploit women

20. Making it look normal for a man to abuse women

21. Making it look normal for a man to have prerogatives or perks that women should accept and honor (e.g., serving men, doing what they want no matter what, being dominant, etc.)

22. Making it look like what women say and think as less important

23. Accepting the idea that a man does not need to "grovel" when he apologizes for something bad he did to her (the minimum is enough and she should not ask for more even if her feelings are still hurt or else she is being "unreasonable" etc.)

This Table is from:


Anti-unity values are all the actions that counteract against the unity model of marriage. Many of these events occur between people who connect solely on the natural level and do not believe in an eternal relationship beyond death and through the afterlife. All the values that are mentioned above are selfish acts that serve to enhance the hellish traits belonging to the individual engaging in the AUVs.


            Unfortunately these acts occur on a daily basis in America, and preposterously these acts are condoned by their prevalence in media! Such acts as those that are listed are so common that people are not phased by or affected by any of these acts; they are accepted wholeheartedly and even misconstrued and applied to everyone’s relationships.


            Anti-unity values are not critically scrutinized and no attempt is made by anyone in society to eliminate them from society, and from our lives. These anti-unity values which are so well represented by movies, music, and television are seriously influencing and pressuring the youth of today. In watching these elements of the media, children are learning that those actions are acceptable and that they should recite and reenact the same situations they experience through the media.


            Anti-unity values have cemented their position in the American culture so well that finding a chivalrous human being to begin a relationship is thought to be “too good to be true”, it causes suspicion which eventually will lead to an inclination towards acting upon the anti-unity values, which only leads to a failed relationship. According to the American culture today, it is difficult to find a partner with which one can fully connect to. Because this is the accepted belief, no effort is made by the two individuals in the relationship for a conjunction, which is the basis of the unity model of marriage.


            In today’s society, it seems that sensorimotor stimulation and perhaps minimal cognitive stimulation, more prominently known as “friends with benefits”, or “a booty call” are increasing in popularity, as a result of this; our society neglects an integral part of our makeup, which, the last piece of the three-fold self, is the affective organ, our mind, or motivation. 


            In order to have a complete and fulfilled relationship, people need to look past their sexual attractions and work to create a relationship of the mind. People need to begin moving past the pressures of the dominance model and the supposedly new-age equity model to the nirvana of marriages, the unity model.


            In the unity model of marriage, it is believed that once two individuals become involved they strive to conjoin to each other to create an eternal relationship. The eternal relationship is the most important aspect of the unity model and therefore does not exist in a relationship until that idea is believed and lived thoroughly by both partners.


            All the acts mentioned above are just the components that work against and contradict the values belonging to the unity model of marriage. The anti-unity values include obvious things such as unmarried couples, illegitimate children, creating jealous situations, adultery, promiscuity, and racy outfits for other men aside partner.


All these anti-unity values are just simple things that should not have to be explained, but understood for the wellbeing of the relationship and more importantly for the partner. Things such as placing a friend above the partner, going out with friends without the partners, flirting with others in search of vengeance, lying, manipulation, accepting men as more important, and saying that men are more rational than women, and women are just naturally lighthearted, will all lead to the inevitable demise of a hopeful relationship.


The belief that it is normal for men to exploit women and to abuse them as well as believing that men should have a lighter load or that women should serve them. The idea that what women have to say is less important than what men have to say and that when men apologize it is not necessary for them to grovel no matter the size of their betrayal. All these traits scream the dominance model as well as mentally abusing women. And in believing in these fallacies one cannot obtain a relationship that maintains the unity model of marriage.


Other anti-unity values are not so obvious at first or take some thought such as, accepting or allowing separate interests, or accepting that it is natural to disagree with each other about some things.  A common misguided belief is that one shouldn’t attempt to change their partner but accept their faults instead, when rationally it is understandable to want to change someone for the better either for themselves or for the relationship. And the last anti-unity value which everyone is guilty of is the guys night out or girls night out. Although it may seem fine, the unrealized potential of a gender restricted outing can lead to resentment from either partner.


Section B: Findings of Prior Generations:

Carly Kanemaru:

Their report may be found at:


Carly Kanemaru’s report examines both movies and songs which are popular in today’s pop culture. Her report dissects the attributions to media and evaluates the meanings behind the foot popping beats to the accepted and unnoticed derogatory phrases. She exposes their oh-so-obvious yet nakedly-hidden degradations toward the female gender. Her report contains thoroughly examined and interpreted arguments towards the movie, Unfaithful, and two songs, Secret Lovers, by Atlantic Star, and Big Pimpin’ by Jay-Z.


The movie she chose, targets the anti-unity values focusing on the male and how they are negatively affected. This is presented in the movie by portraying the life of a married couple who have fallen into a routine and have forgotten to set aside time to keep their relationship stimulating.


Because the husband is constantly working on maintaining a successful career and in doing so works long hours he has little attention for his wife. The wife, who apparently has more time on her hands falls into a sexual relationship with another man.


As the movie progresses, the anti-unity values are exposed in the wife’s cheating and lying to her husband. The husband also engages in anti-unity values by not confronting his wife with his feelings. Kanemaru agrees with the obvious problems that the movie is presenting, about the wife’s unfaithfulness. But she also exposes the undeniable faults of the husband as well, in a very objective and thorough summary of the movie.


The two songs that Kanemaru used, Secret Lovers and Big Pimpin’ are very common songs that play in their appropriate atmospheres; the first is mostly heard in gentle, professional atmospheres such as a hotel, dr.’s office, or an elevator, while the second song is a popular song among young adults and teenagers. But she explains that these songs both carry heavy anti-unity values that are barely suspected let alone questioned by anyone in society.


The first is just a sweet song about a couple in love who can’t be together because one is married, while the other one just sounds good through large speakers and woofers and is fun to dance to. Kanemaru expresses her shock that prior to taking this course she was one of those people who didn’t realize the detrimental nature of the songs or movies excused in today’s media.


Kanemaru is trying to expose the anti-unity values that have surprisingly become common-place for society and that females don’t even notice that they are the subjects of an extremely negative perspective. It seems that in both the movie and in the song by Jay-Z, women are the negative subject while the men are either the victim or the hotshots with all the girls. And I that what Kanemaru is trying to say is that this is allowed and overlooked by women. Why?


By reading what Kanemaru had to say about the media she used and even looking at it myself, I have realized that I too listened to and accepted the degradation of music, and overlooked movies as well. All because of the rhythm of the thump-thump, or even the thrilling experience of a movie. I suppose that with the large extent of these types of movies or music, young women and men have accepted such music lyrics and movie topics. Anti-unity values expressed in the media have become commonplace and are expected now.


Skip Saito:

Their report may be found at:


Skip Saito chose a rather popular movie for the year, one that was both aesthetically pleasing and humorous as well to portray his qualms with anti-unity values in the media. Saito chose to discuss the movie, “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” which starred Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. It is a perfect example of anti-unity values not only in the movie but in reality. What happened after the movie’s production? Well, Brad Pitt who was in what was thought to be a serious relationship with Jennifer Aniston cut his losses and sparked a relationship with Angelina Jolie.

            Pitt’s insensitive actions towards Aniston are upsetting but it is also intriguing to inspect the relationship that he currently has with Jolie. Was his previous relationship not improving positively enough to sustain a unity model? Or were the anti-unity values surrounding Jolie too tempting to avoid? Or did he see that a relationship with Jolie would be more inclined towards the unity model? Perhaps it is so controversial because it has happened with celebrities; this type of situation is commonly ignored when it happens between normal people. And in any event, which situation is the most ideal for the unity model? If each human’s ambition is to find someone they can love and attain a conjugial marriage with then is it so bad that they leave a current relationship to attempt another one with someone else?

            Saito makes a reasonable observation in mentioning that this movie also affected a situation in the real lives of the celebrities involved. It supports the idea that anti-unity values in the media directly affect people’s lives.

By including his friends in his report Saito makes it clear that he is disturbed by the functions that anti-unity values are controlling. He stresses a small and humorous scene in the movie concerning curtains and the interaction between the actors. This interaction demands much humor and in a normal viewing situation is not overly scrutinized. Saito informs his friends of the characteristics of the unity model of marriage and explains to them the problem with the curtain episode.

Once doing so his male friends were confused with the sacrifice that they are told they should make in the unity model, while Saito’s female friends were overjoyed and thrilled at the idea that their partner should respect their decisions and even allow them. This expression of emotion only tells me that these women have been exposed only to the dominance model and even in their thinking now they are excited for the wrong reasons, which shows me that they are not thinking about relationships rationally and they are not thinking about the unity model rationally.

Because of their actions it is apparent to me that they would not apply true facets of the unity model, in fact it would still be the dominance model because they are allowing themselves to believe that their husbands are allowing them to decide, when it really should be that they feel that their husband is striving for their happiness.  In misunderstanding this simple part of the unity model the women have revealed that they are comfortable in the dominance model and have not yet looked beyond it.

Saito uses two popular rap and hip/hop songs that apply to anti-unity values. The first song is Eminem’s Jealousy Woes II. Saito lists the lyrics and then explains which anti-unity values are presented in the song, then he goes on to explain why the song is unfavorable when it comes to the unity model of marriage.

Eminem’s song is about a wife who cheats on her husband even though her husband tries to mend the relationship and is still in love with her and showers her with gifts. She is resentful and unappreciative of his attempts, her actions are what’s destroying the relationship.

Saito’s second example is a hip/hop song by Usher entitled, Confessions. Saito again lists the anti-unity values that are being portrayed in the song and then explains the nature of the song. This is opposite of Eminem’s song, in Usher’s song the husband is the unfaithful one.

Aside from being unfaithful, the husband in Confessions has also gotten his mistress pregnant and expects that once he confides this information to his wife that she will forgive him. Saito expresses his shock that a man would expect his wife to forgive something so horrible as that, and be able to move on with him at her side.

Saito’s ending conclusion about music in the media is objective, clear and quite to the point. He openly presents his ideas and deductions for the artist’s motivations as being their personal experiences that influenced their art. Saito is quite right in understanding that this is the reason as well as the ever-growing popularity of sex, drugs, and violence in the media. 

Saito’s honesty about his interpretation about songs versus his friends’ interpretations is interesting because I just recently experienced the same thing, where I just listened to the beat of the song, the sound of the voice and didn’t internalize the lyrics, whereas a friend of mine asked me if I had understood what had been said. I was caught off guard by the question and realized that I hadn’t even made an attempt to understand the lyrics. I was surprised to be caught in this situation, but this was the first time I had done that, I usually listen to the words and interpret them on my own.


Lauren Teani Buchner:

Their report may be found at:


            Lauren Buchner introduces a movie that she will be using to support her examples of anti-unity values in the media very clearly and thoroughly. The movie Buchner decides to use is called, The Story of Us. She states that she plans on describing several different situations in the movie that represent the listed anti-unity values.


            The Story of Us, is about a couple who have been married for 15 years and have been struggling to maintain the image of a happy relationship for the past 5 years for their children’s sake. As all American movies, this one has a happy ending too, or what we assume to be a happy ending with the exception of anti-unity values.


            The introduction begins with the start of the movie continuing on through the end of the movie. She seems to enjoy the movie which makes it much easier for her to explain and use as an example of the values. Buchner goes beyond just using one example, she uses a decent amount of examples to help support her thoughts pertaining to the anti-unity values, as well as making it clear that some of the actions that occur between the couple in the movie have characteristics of the dominance and equity model of marriage.


            After Buchner’s introduction to the movie, and a basic synopsis she continues to break down the episodes she has mentioned so that she can further analyze and identify the anti-unity values shown in the movie. But Buchner goes over and beyond when she breaks down the impact of the anti-unity values to those characters involved in the lives of the struggling couple.


            Buchner applies her examples to exact numbers of the anti-unity values she believe are present throughout the movie and she explains each one of them as it corresponds to the situations in the movie. One important point Buchner makes is that throughout the movie from beginning to end there is no effort made to accomplish or move towards the unity model in marriage. In the end, the wife simply accepts that the husband is still irresponsible and will not change. In the end, the wife ends up changing herself to avoid conflict in her relationship with her husband. These two acts, accepting that she cannot change her husband, and changing herself to save the relationship, fall into the dominance model of marriage at the end of the movie and ultimately confirm that in the couple’s ignorance they are “happy”.


            Buchner’s experience with trying to explain the unity model of marriage to her friends is quite accurate because I’m sure that each student taking this course encounters this same problem. Rationally it is understood that a relationship will only survive is both partners share the same feelings for each other and strive to make the other person happy. But being that we are pressured by the minute by our society, we begin to accept the anti-unity values and not question the irrationality of their existence. In taking this course, all students are asked to share their new knowledge with friends or family. I believe this is the most difficult to do, Buchner does a wonderful job by not necessarily informing her boyfriend of the purpose of the interview but erecting his natural opinion first before explaining.


            Buchner also uses two songs to portray anti-unity values in the media through lyrics. The two songs she uses are “Ms. Fat Booty” by Mos Def, and “Faithful” by Common. Although I’m not necessarily familiar with the songs, I can surmise by their titles and by the rather popular names that these songs are or were quite a hit.


            She takes snippets of the song lyrics and translates them into the anti-unity values expressing her dismay at the degradation towards women that passes as a hit song, “Ms. Fat Booty”. Even in the second song, “Faithful”, which does not so openly degrade women, it expresses instances of the dominance model and that the male who commits an anti-unity value should be forgiven because he came home to her, admitted his actions, and felt regret for them.


            The sad truth about this type of scenario is that it occurs on a daily basis. Women all over the country accept their husband’s confession, accept his apology and all the while think, “well, maybe this time he really did learn his lesson.” The songs and movies in the media only serve to expose that our supposedly evolved society has in fact not evolved in the bit! Where else would these singers find the inspiration to sing about something so negative?


            Buchner’s conclusion to her analysis is right on target. No matter how chilling it is to think of the effects of media are threatening, it is a reality that we must face. She indicates that if we do not make a change soon, we will soon lose the value of a relationship with a significant other and won’t know any better how we are actually supposed to interact.


Adriel Stipek:

Their report may be found at:


            Adriel Stipek chooses to analyze a romantic comedy by the name of “Sweet Home Alabama”. She described four different scenes in the movie and afterwards explained how these four scenes contained anti-unity values. She conceded that she was amazed that this movie of all movies had obvious anti-unity values. This proved to her that anti-unity values are present in all types of media even though we are unaware of its presence.


            She made her own observations about the scenes in the movie and took these examples to her friends to get their reactions. They individually did not respond to all of the scenes but each responded to three, so I am unsure if Stipek did not introduce all the scenes to her girlfriends or if she did and they just chose not to comment on all of them. Stipek went on to explain that she had given her friends a list of the anti-unity values and that they were able to distinguish some of them is a very good sign.


            Stipek then went on to analyze what she thought about her friends’ responses and she said that it looked like they knew what she was talking about but that they didn’t fully understand the unity model of marriage. I feel that she is correct in her assumption, and feel that my friends would probably perceive in the same manner.


            When Stipek broaches the subject of society and couples being negatively influenced by this movie, she created valid arguments and I agree with her statement that couples should understand that these movies are unrealistic but she then says that couples might be intimidated by the prospect of marriage and an engagement if they have that type of situation to look forward to. I understand that perhaps couples will know better than to seriously consider the movie, but it seems to me that “Sweet Home Alabama” is more a movie that females would watch together not with a man.


            Stipek does a really good job of presenting the songs she uses. She bolds the lines that she feels are contributing to anti-unity values and uses both the male and female perspective to create a more diverse analysis of anti-unity values in lyrics. Stipek also lists which AUV is being presented in the song after each bolded example.


            What’s more is that she goes beyond just looking for anti-unity values but she finds a song which displays the unity model of marriage. She bolds the lines in the songs that display this model most clearly and by presenting this song makes it seem that not all songs have to submit to the negative requirements that media has set forth for artists.


            After listing the song lyrics, for which she used “My Way” by Limp Bizkit, “Never is a Promise” by Fiona Apple and “Making Memories” by Keith Urban. She lists the songs and their anti-unity values at the end of the lines that display them, she has written her reaction to the music and explains what she thinks about the interpretation of the song as well as the impact of the anti-unity values. The site where the lyrics can be found is listed as well for reference which tells me that she prepared for this report very well.


            Stipek analyzes the first two songs and expresses their possible impact on children in today’s society. She mentions that these songs my influence children into believing that the relationships mentioned are ideal relationships. Concerning her last song by Keith Urban, she explains how this song might be a positive influence on children because it shows a man’s devotion to the woman that he loves.


            Stipek really puts her friends to work in getting their reactions and I believe does really well to extract all possible thoughts from her friends about the songs. She points out that she has informed one of her male friends of the aspects of this class previous to this assignment and because of his experiences understands the material, while her female friend is younger than her male friend; she is also less mature and was not previously exposed to the material. These few instances change both of Stipek’s friends’ responses.


            Stipek’s male friend is able to rationally look at the material handed to him and make conclusions, while her female friend seems to be more emotional when seeing the lyrics and interpreting it. She seems to understand what the first two songs are talking about on a more personal level, saying that her boyfriend acts in the same ways. Her male friend confirmed that the actions taking place in the first two songs should not be occurring, while Stipek’s female friend accepted those same actions as a part of love, and relationships.


Cynthia Adams:

Their report may be found at:


Cynthia Adams presents the movie she is to interpret, “It Could Happen to You”, by explaining that it is based on a true story. That this movie is based on a true story and that it is chosen for this example is a smart choice because it basically says that these anti-unity values are not only taking place in the media but the media is recording occurrences of this type of behavior in real situations.

            Adam’s presents several examples of anti-unity values and explains them throughout the writing. She makes sure that the scenes are well described and makes sure that the display of the anti-unity values is clear and complete.

            Upon presenting the movie, Adams writes about the impact of anti-unity values in the media. She distinguishes the different opinions of each gender and explains what the motivations may be to these differences. She highlights certain anti-unity values throughout her reaction and expresses her opinions concerning their impact on society and relationships between couples.

            Adams presents two songs by groups that are not necessarily hard rap singers or extremely popular bands, she chooses groups that one wouldn’t expect to represent anti-unity values in their music. She chose “When Love Comes to Town” by U2, and “You Otta Know” by Alanis Morissette. She mentions the songs and includes the lyrics of the songs as well as her interpretation of the anti-unity values used and the impact of songs on society today.

            She expresses that she doesn’t think that people really listen to the lyrics as much as they do the rhythm of the beat or the popularity of the song. She feels that songs are not deeply considered for their content, rather the feelings that are elicited by listening to the song, or perhaps the feelings it helps one escape from their current situation.

            Adams’s own friends didn’t feel that music should be taken literally, that music should be valued for the feelings and thoughts that are created by the audio stimulation. This observation is a very common idea held by society. Music, much like movies are not entirely scrutinized anymore and that is what Adams is saying in her reaction to anti-unity values in the media.

Reflections of Previous Generations

The reports of the previous generation are all trying to portray the same thing, that anti-unity values are extremely prevalent in today’s society and they are accepted without question. These values become the object of entertainment in the media and men and women alike regard the values as normal aspects of a thriving relationship between couples today.


I believe that by not taking action, we are allowing the anti-unity values of the media to control and influence the types of relationships that we get ourselves into. More and more, a relationship is considered more sexual than emotional and love is lost throughout the country. But the only apparent important thing is that these movies and the music are making the artists money. Where did we go wrong?


            I was never oblivious to the derogatory terms used in today’s music; I always heard it but chose to overlook it because I didn’t take the time to apply it to myself. But being that I strive not to make subjects of personal nature I didn’t have a problem with it before. I also hate to admit that I don’t know that anything I do would change the way that society is headed now. There are simply too many people involved for only one to step back and make such a drastic change by eradicating values which have become commonplace.


            In order for a change to occur, everyone has to be educated, and this is something that I believe society is striving to accomplish right now. The evolution of time has brought with it more freedom for women, and with this freedom I believe that society is still struggling to find a median in a relationship between men and women. That anti-unity values are popular is not a phenomenal thing that just occurred, it has been around for a long time, it is only now that we are beginning to empower women and that these values are becoming more and more unacceptable.


            Anti-unity values have been apart of my life since I was born. I am an illegitimate child. Because of this simple fact of my birth I have had to deal with that situation brutally. Even though it wasn’t a big deal in the American society in the eighties, I lived within a more tight-knit community that based their lives on a deeply orthodox religion with equally orthodox traditions. Because of this culture and because of the situation between my parents, I dealt with the community’s judgmental actions and blamed myself.


            It was only when I was older that I realized that nothing that they accused me of or judged me for were my fault. I did not choose to be born out of wedlock, nor did I choose to lead the lifestyle that I was apart of as a child. But it is because of these anti-unity values that I am here today. I was forced to perceive people as a child and understand their resentment towards me. As I grew older, I realized that my success in life was for my own good and had nothing to do with society. Which may be why I feel the way I do about anti-unity values.


In studying the anti-unity values presented by media and by society, I don’t find them as horrible as my situation was. They are detrimental, I’ll agree but if a human being can look beyond those values and understand that their lives do not have to reflect those presented in the media then they are rationally accepting the faults of society and choosing not to participate.


Anti-unity values are a societal issue and if a person is ignorant of the accepted, sometimes misguided ideas of society, they can become wrapped up in it and mimic their lives to match the perfect societal couple. This imitation is what leads to the downfall of all couples. Endeavoring to make your situation with a person exactly what you see in movies or hear in music, striving for your relationship to have the same problems that television comedy series do, trying to relate your problems to that of society, or creating problems because you believe that’s what you’re supposed to do will only lead to a failed relationship and a lot of wasted time.


I encounter anti-unity values daily, not just in the media but with friends who are suckered into believing that society is correct and that they should conform. Even I am guilty of feeding the fire that maintains these values within our society. I do so because it just seems simpler to understand the values and regurgitate them. If I began to preach my thoughts concerning anti-unity values and our misguided society, I would be regarded with a wary eye and avoided. This is why the people I choose to surround myself with understand and discuss how I truly think, I don’t have time to preach to a society that will not yet listen. I sincerely hope that each individual does understand that society is only a guideline for living and should not be taken too seriously.  


            While this is true for older more mature men and women, what we do have to look after are young children who are exposed to these values. It is already happening in society that little boys and little girls are acting with promiscuous tendencies. It is the responsibility of the adults surrounding these children to monitor what they are exposed to, and to explain the negative nature of media. It must be rationalized to children in order for the values to not influence the children.


Anti-unity values simulate a glamorous world that mystifies a child into believing that this is what they are supposed to act like. By presenting children with a stable relationship that does not depend on these values, we are exemplifying a real and honest nature and enlightening them with the idea that the values in the media are there only for entertainment and are completely incorrect.


The biggest problem with society is that each and every one of us fights to understand and create our own place within it. But one problem about society that seems to elude us is that its basis is artificial and corrupt with ideas of power and not love. Our individual struggles with society inevitably lead to our eventual submission, why? 

Section C: My Own Findings on AUVs in the Media

For this section I chose a popular sitcom that ran for ten successful years before it finally came to an end. Its popularity is thus that reruns still air on stations more inclined towards comedy, such as TBS. The series is Friends. I chose it because of its popularity being that so many people watch it, I wanted to take a look at what kind of AUV’s they were selling.


            The other television series I chose is a cartoon that plays once a day on Nickelodeon if it is not a marathon. The cartoon is Fairly OddParents, and I chose this because I thought it might be interesting to see what AUV’s are prevalent in cartoons targeted towards children today.


Illustrations of Disjunctive Talk and Behavior


            In the episode that I watched for this paper, Rachel has just given birth and is currently in the hospital when Joey through some twisted reason ends up on the floor, with a ring in his hands. Rachel misunderstands and answers without Joey’s explanation. As it turns out, the ring belongs to Ross but before he knows what happens, Phoebe informs him of how excited she is that he finally proposed.


Ross goes to speak with Rachel about this and ends up undermining her word. He tries to explain to her that he did not propose to her, which causes confusion until she tells him that Joey proposed to her. He then assumes that she is just making things up because she is tired. Confirming the AUV number 18, concerning the idea that women are generally frivolous due to their gender.


Illustrations of Conjunctive Talk and Behavior


            In this same episode at the end, Ross sits down to have a chat with Rachel. He begins by expressing his emotions about them honestly and proclaiming that they should maybe try to figure out their relationship. He is concentrating on her happiness with the new child as well as being able to provide a happy family situation for mother and daughter.




Although AUV’s are quite common in television series such as Friends, it is also clear that these AUV’s are laughed at and mocked as inappropriate. So if they are inappropriate, why are they still used in television? Because it attracts laughter which attracts ratings and thus drives the success of the creators and producers and who ever else had a hand in the series’ creation.


            The relationship with Ross and Rachel is a rocky one, they struggle throughout the seasons with relationships, as all of the characters of Friends do, but these two also share intimate feelings for each other that are not resolved until the tenth and final episode. In this episode, it becomes clear that the dominance model is shown as well as the unity model.


            The unity model is presented in such a minute act that it is easily dismissed and overlooked for a more humorous remark. The television series is only one among many who make light of relationships and perhaps strive to present a type of caricature of either gender who emphasizes the accepted anti-unity values and creates a laughable situation. 


Illustrations of Disjunctive Talk and Behavior


          In one episode of Fairly OddParents, Cosmo and Wanda are providing children with the moral that junk food is not nutritious, therefore; the five basic food groups are necessary. Of course, as all cartoons do, this one starts out with a good situation turning bad before the end of the episode brings the observed moral. So, Timmy wishes for junk food to be the normal food that is served around Dimsdale, the town.


During this scene with Timmy making a wish, both Cosmo and Wanda hesitate and try to explain to him the negative aspects of eating too much junk food. Cosmo explains to Timmy, that Wanda loves chocolate and if she gets into it, she gets into it! He makes cracks about Wanda and portrays AUV’s to children across the country. By making fun of Wanda, Cosmo is showing children that it is okay for males to feel superior to females, and that men are allowed to mentally abuse women and exploit them.


Illustrations of Conjunctive Talk and Behavior


          Throughout all the episodes, Cosmo does not hesitate to undermine Wanda and does not view as she should be regarded according to the unity model of marriage. But there are some instances in his easily-excitable brain that he showers Wanda with heartfelt love in an extravagant expression and reminds Wanda why it is she’s married to him.




            Because Fairly OddParents is a show for children, every characteristic of the series has a childlike perception to it. The relationship between the fairies is definitely one that portrays a twisted and childlike feeling. Cosmo and Wanda say things to Timmy that at times seems like advice and other times they squabble with each other which influence Timmy as well as viewing children that it is appropriate in a relationship for arguments to occur.


            In presenting these episodes to children, we are influencing their development with negative anti-unity values, and expecting them to grow up understanding that those actions aren’t correct. The relationships in Fairly OddParents are all in the dominance model or perhaps even striving for the equity model, but they present old stereotypes which hinder children’s thinking when they accept what they are watching.


My Reaction & Friends


            Having watched both television series regularly, it was not until I took this class and began to seriously think of the impact from media concerning relationships. After looking at these episodes with calculating eyes, I am saddened that they both fall under the same media trap as all the others. I have to wonder if anything in the media that presents marriage or relationships does it correctly without the stereotypes and the dominance or equity model seething from every action.


            The series Friends, has dealt with some interesting and serious situations, but one thing I have never seen them emphasize were their intimate relationships. Sure they date regularly and there are plenty of different episodes involving relationships, but they are dismissed by the humor placed in being artificial or critical of a person’s appearance.


            After taking this course, I feel that Friends, has become just another destructive organ to separate the genders more. It is disappointing to analyze what Ross did to Rachel, and to understand their setbacks in such a clear manner.


My Friend’s Reaction


            When I proposed the situation to my friend, she was nonplussed by it. “It happens everywhere!” she exclaimed, “it’s not a big deal, they make fun of everything”. To which I had responded that they make fun of negative things and that even though it is all lighthearted, this influences our whole society. “Exactly, it’s supposed to be lighthearted, nothing in the series is supposed to be taken seriously. And they’re just emphasizing that these situations occur in everyone’s lives and by making light of them they are accepting it and attempting to instill a sense that people can laugh at themselves.”


            This friend of mine also enjoys watching Fairly OddParents, and when I began to tell her my findings, she said to me, “I know it’s not necessarily sound for children to be watching, they have all sorts of sexual innuendos and things that children should not be exposed to. Take Shrek for example! It’s filled with that sort of thing and still it’s popular among children. But take a look at all of the other crap that children are allowed to watch. I don’t think that half of the cartoons presented today are entirely acceptable for children, but what can be done to change that? Just because we don’t like it doesn’t mean that it will change overnight, we just have to regulate what children watch for ourselves. Which is the lesser of two evils?”


What She Really Means?


I understand her reaction to my interpretations of the episodes; I think that we’ve all faced defeat when it comes to the media. There isn’t a few enlightened folk who understand and know that media is selling lies, many people understand this. But they also understand that these television series are brought forth to bring humor to such situations and not negatively influence as much as I interpreted them to be doing. How do you stop a boulder rolling down a hill? It takes a great amount of effort. It’s the same way with media. There’s so much going on, there are so many different types of media that they can’t all be targeted at once and changed for the better.


My Expectations

          I have already stated so many times that the reason for media to present these interactions is for the humor, for the station ratings, for not only a successful series for the creators but also a successful series for viewers. Media thrives on people, people have to be satisfied with what media is presenting to them in order for media to maintain a successful state.


            Such situations as portrayed in the media are a fact of everyday life. No matter how much we try to deny the existence of these such situations between couples, they exist and when put into a script and acted out, viewers find humor in it because they know that if they thought about it they could remember a similar situation they were in that reflected the same ideas.


Why is media the way it is?       

The reason for media’s portrayal of this is for relation. People find comfort in being able to apply their lives to the life of a fictional character on the television set. In being able to relate to that fictional character the life of that character becomes the persons and they can forget for a while that they have their own real problems to contend with.


Consequences for Couples and Society

As for the consequences media has for couples and society, it has some basis. I don’t feel that a couple should feel pressured by media, just as they should not be pressured by their society. If a couple allows for pressure, or strong influence from society than it is apparent that their relationship has not reached the unity model which exists without social influences.


But because media has such a large role in society, it is difficult for society not to be influenced by the occurrences in the media. I do believe that the ideas that are presented in the media find their way into society and thrive there, just as fashion influences society. It’s important to understand that society is always changing and evolving. It is also so malleable that any outside influence can affect the outcome of perspectives belonging to society.


If society and media continue to portray relationships in the way they do, and if society remains unwilling to admit that their success is a failed marriage, then it is imminent that couples will be a thing of the past that people will become more self-involved and eventually it will lead to demise in our civilization.


Effects on Young Adolescents

Young adolescents in maturing and growing in their surroundings are still creating an identity. It is because of this that they allow society to rule their decisions, they are highly influenced by the media and I believe at this point somewhat confused about societal rule. But by accepting what they see and acting in the same manner, they are adopting negative societal traits without realizing that they are doing so.


Being able to rationally distinguish between negative and positive societal aspects is difficult to accomplish at any age especially as an adolescent. I think that both genders are equally confused by what media is presenting them therefore they assume the role and aid in destroying a peaceful existence.


Young teenage boys are more likely to degrade women and agree that the dominance model is an ideal relationship between a man and a woman. While young teenage girls are confused by the messages being sent to them by the media, one minute they’re supposed to be promiscuous, but the next if they are then they are called ‘sluts’. Young women are manipulated into accepting the dominance model because this is all they see from their surroundings.


If young men and women are not shown that society and the media are propagating the wrong message and that the real, ideal lifestyle is the extreme opposite, then in their ignorance they will succumb to their society and sacrifice their happiness. It’s sad that in today’s society, children must grow up like this, but it is our responsibility to educate them.

Section D: Disjunctive vs. Conjunctive Verbal Interactions

For this section, instead of researching conversations online or looking for them in the book, I thought it might be interesting to hit closer to home. I thought it might be interesting to see how my friends and I interact with each other or even with other people. While studying or doing homework, I regularly speak with people online with instant messenger services. These messenger services also record all of the conversations that I have. So this was very helpful in going back to look at some of the conversations I’ve had, while taking this course. 

The first two examples are conversations I had with my friend Nathaniel, who just recently went through a breakup and found another romantic interest. In the conjunctive interaction, Nathaniel is telling me about a text messaging session he recently had with his ex-girlfriend. While the disjunctive interaction pertains to his breakup with his ex-girlfriend.

The conjunctive interaction focuses on how Nathaniel interacts with his girlfriend through text messages, and his caring communicative style. The disjunctive interaction actually is an example of my own perception of anti-unity values, as well as the ordeal that Nathaniel went through with a girl who was unwilling to share her feelings with him, no matter how valiantly he attempted to console her feelings.

Conjunctive Interaction I

her:  hi. did u take anthropology 152? i'm not sure wich prof to take.

Nathaniel: me: I think i did. i had perry 4 that class. is she a option? 

her:  no. blimes, mandryk, or cooper my r my options. it sounds like a fun clas, tho i remember u not liking sum assignments :/ 

Nathaniel:  yeah it was alright. i had it the summer after i was an archeaologist. so it was interesting ah! i'm shooting pictures 4 the ka leo soon! :)

her:  cool. i saw diana and baby sam yesterday. damn he was cute! did u register? 

Nathaniel:  yeah i saw her @ the ka leo! :) she was asking about u. : sam is cute. he was smiling @ me. hehe. yeah. i registered. it went poopy. blah! dumb classes :) 

her: haha y r ur text messages making me feel goofy? goofball...hehe. registration is always hell! hahaha my clasmate is snoring. o boy...oh boy i can't wait for sem to end!

Nathaniel: Muahaha! bc ur goofy. that's y. :) ah i finished my photoassignment! That was easy. :) 2 bad class registration isnt easy. Now 2 edit the pic & make it look pretty :P

Her: :) have fun!

Nathaniel: good luck w ur classes! :) take care. ttyl :)

            In this example, Nathaniel is paying attention to all that his ex-girlfriend has to say and is responding politely, even engaging in asking about her situation she has brought to him, and offering a supportive conversation.

Disjunctive Conversation I

Christina: you thought the relationship was at a different... level..

Nathaniel: kind of but she told me that her main reason was because we'd been dating for almost 2 years and she felt that the relationship hadn't reached the level she wanted it too

Christina: and what level was she expecting?

Nathaniel: i don't know exactly

Nathaniel: the "i love you" level? since i never said that to her

Nathaniel: and she was too chicken to say it herself?

Christina: ...wasn't your pov discussed and understood before you started the relationship?

Nathaniel: she was aware of it

Christina: maybe she thought what all girls (mistakenly) think.. "oh, he'll be different for me"....

Nathaniel: i don't know all i know is a 3 year friendship has died

            In this situation, after the initial breakup, Nathaniel and I were discussing the situation. The end of the relationship was such that his ex-girlfriend was unwilling to open up to him about what was bothering her, and she began to act differently towards him. He attempted several times to appease her to no avail, and finally confronted her head-on about their problems. Her unwillingness brought about the demise of their relationship. I suppose that her situation and experiences rubbed on the dominance model, and while Nathaniel was using the unity model to try to make her happy and to make the relationship work, at the end with her unwilling to oblige, it was just not worth his emotions anymore. On a side note, I also noticed my acceptance of an anti-unity value  myself, and am surprised and almost shocked that I would feel so defeated towards relationships, and preferring the dominance model.

My next example of conjunctive and disjunctive interactions is with my friend, Daniel. In the first section, for the conjunctive interaction, he is telling me about something he did for the new girl currently in his life. While in the next, we were discussing a situation that I was facing myself. The quirks about Daniel are such that we can verbally abuse one another with no fear of either of us taking offense. Most of the jabs are all in good fun, but if I were to objectively analyze our conversation, it would be a disjunctive one.

Conjunctive Interaction II

Daniel: okay  so i bought a rose and i went to her work at macy's and i talked her friend into letting me put the rose in her bag

Daniel: so she would find it after work

Daniel: and i wrote a little note on it!

Christina: Aw!!

Christina: that's so..... romantic

Christina: heh...

Daniel: yeah and the note was kind of a "cute" note

Daniel: i guess

Christina: what'd you say?

Christina: ....if you don't mind...

Christina: haha

Daniel: "hey! Surpirse! I thought this would be a really nice surprise to come back to after a long hard day or standing around.....and watching people. :) you better get a lot of work done tonight and tomorrow and not be such a bad student! :) ~Daniel" something alone those lines

Christina: LoL

Christina: cute...

Christina: you're right... it's exactly that

Christina: CUTE

Daniel: yeah 

            This is an example of a conjunctive interaction because of the actions he takes in pleasing the woman in this relationship. His motivations are to surprise her and make her feel special about their relationship.

Disjunctive Interaction II

Christina: ...i didn't want to feel like a "horrible" person

Christina: and kind of left out the fact that... um... well i already hooked up with him :S

Nathaniel: of course you did sigh women

Christina: what??

Christina: what's that supposed to mean?

Christina: -Man who manipulated 2 women in the past... i dunno... 2 MONTHS!!!

Christina: i'm allowed to play too you know

Nathaniel: no ways

Nathaniel: it's different for guys than it is for girls

Christina: oh please!

Nathaniel: totally different

Christina: how is it any different?

Nathaniel: by societal stand point

Christina: yeah but we're not taking societies view of it

Nathaniel: what are we talking then?

Christina: not society

Christina: personally

Christina: personality wise

Christina: so what, i'm supposed to stand by and let myself be manipulated by guys like you?

Christina: NO thank you!!

Nathaniel: dude that's the thing

Christina: i'm too much of a sceptic to believe your type of words anyways

Nathaniel: you don't even know the manipulation is happening

Nathaniel: if the guy is good at his job

Nathaniel: true you do know too much

Nathaniel: maybe i shouuld "silence" you

Christina: yeah.. but because i grew up reading people, it's kind of hard for me not to know

            In this example of a disjunctive interaction, Nathaniel uses the phrase, “women” which is a derogatory slander used by men in the dominant model, then he goes on to say that the actions of men and women are looked at differently, pointing out double standards another example of the dominant model. While I do no better to alleviate the anti-unity values presented in this case. Although, it doesn’t seem that my opinions here lead to the dominance model, I suppose it is more the equity model in that men and women should be allowed to do the same things.


Section E: Conclusion and Advice to Future Generations

Summary of what I have learned thus far

Prior to taking this course, I understood the dominance model and the equity model of marriage, but was completely unaware of the unity model of marriage. I believe that most of society understands the dominance and equity models of marriage; they are just not as intricately defined to them as they are in this course.

The course has offered tables of examples and explanations to support the three models and define them. Thus far, I understand that the quality of the relationship begins at the bottom with the dominance model and continues on through the equity model and finishes with the unity model of marriage.

The basic breakdowns of the models are as follows. The dominance model demonstrates a relationship where the male is always superior to the female in all cases, where the equity model strives to maintain an equal relationship between the partners in every aspect and in the unity model; males strive to keep their female happy.

I feel that by understanding all three models I can more rationally create relationships with other people, not just in a personal intimate relationship but in all of my interactions with people. By understanding which relationship style people are inclined towards I can make rational decisions on how to interact with them.

I can only guess that because I grew up witnessing all relationships in a dominance model and that I had only recently been exposed to relationships that maintained a successful relationship in the equity model. I still have trouble fathoming the successes of the unity model. The concepts assigned to this model seem a little far-fetched at times; perhaps it is just that I credit males with having a rational mind just as women do. I understand that at times we act irrationally and that we all need to take a step back to analyze our previous step and observe our next, but I attribute this to both genders and not just the male gender.

Any modification of the course would not be that beneficial for anyone. I understand the concepts and the models of marriage; my problem is personal acceptance of the information brought to me. 

Advice to Future Generations

The obvious advice here is not to procrastinate. But beyond that, one must also understand that they must not be overwhelmed by the amount of pages that must be written. If it makes the student feel better, one way to effectively write out the report is to break the sections up and work on the sections individually. Another important piece of advice is to be sure to take a look at the instructions weeks prior to the due date of the report.

Once you take a look at the instructions then a smart idea would be to think about your answers, research the topic and then make an outline so that it may be easier construct the paper.

By taking this course and doing the work that it requires, one will find that in any case they will be more perceptive of relationships they encounter as well as beware of the influences being sent through popular media. Being educated in relationships, will offer one a better understanding of things that could help or hinder a relationship they may want to work on. It is valuable information that will be used throughout the course of one’s life.


My Home Page:

G25 Class Home Page: