Report 1

-->

Report 1

My Field Observations of Disjunctive vs. Conjunctive

Discourse and Behavior in Couples

By: Angela Murray

Instructions for this report are at:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409b-g25-report1.htm

G25 Lecture Notes on the Unity Model of Marriage:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409b-g25-lecture-notes.htm

What are Anti-unity Values?

Anti-unity values involve any trait, characteristic or action that separates one spouse from another. Within the Unity Model of Marriage, each spouse is determined to work to become conjoined as one marital couple. This process involves each spouse releasing some negative traits and taking on positive traits which would enhance the unity within their marriage. Some of the negative traits that need to be given up by both partners are written in the table below. These anti-unity traits or values are often portrayed in the media.

Anti-Unity Values (AUVs) in the Media

This Table is from:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409b-g25-lecture-notes.htm#Table%209

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

Table 9

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.)

These anti-unity values are seen through the media, through our role models and through our everyday life. Often, we see them so much that it becomes natural for us to overlook these AUVs. The problem with overlooking them is that we begin to think it is okay for us to behave in these manners, whether or not it is hurting our spouse. I have highlighted on a few of these anti-unity values below.

Anti-Unity Models in Detail

The first anti-unity value is living together unmarried (1). This is against the unity model because it involves purposely not committing to one another and committing to the sanctity of marriage. Many times people stay together unmarried because they are afraid of commitment. Since commitment is one of the primary goals of the unity model of marriage, this clearly is not a unity model attribute. Couples will also live together before marriage as a way to try out their new partner to see if they could handle living with this new person.

The problem again is commitment. When two people choose to marry, they make a commitment to live together and work out the difficulties. When two people live together, there is no commitment. Therefore, both parties are free to leave or give up on the relationship at any time. If something goes wrong or if your partner does not suit your needs, it is easier to leave that person when you have not committed to marriage. By doing this, the couple is purposefully not fully conjoining to one another and they are missing out on the possibilities of truly attaining a solid bond.

Having children out of Wedlock (2) complicates things even more. Couples who have children out of wedlock may either choose to continue living together or they may break off the relationship entirely. In doing the former, this leaves the children feeling confused and creates even more of a separation among the spouses. In doing the latter, the child is raised in a single parent home which is straining both to the parent and the child, regardless of whether or not the person is receiving child support.

Another anti-unity value is having a heterosexual best friend, male or female, (8) who is placed ahead of the partner or in competition for certain things. An example of this kind of relationship would be a man who has a best friend that he often hangs out with more than his own wife or girlfriend.

I once had a boyfriend Dan that I had just started seeing. In the beginning, he was devoting every moment of his free time to me. This involved taking me to restaurants, movies, and dancing. After we had dated a couple of weeks he wanted to introduce me to his friends Vito and Vito’s fiancée Kristen. They seemed like a very nice couple and Dan explained to me that he liked to hang out with them all the time. In the beginning I thought this was perfectly fine.

Then, Vito explained to us that he would be in Italy for a month and he asked for Dan and me to “take care” of his girl while he was away. After Vito had left, Dan began spending more time with Kristen than with me. He would take her to her weekly massages, to work and on many other errands. I started to feel uncomfortable about this because he would never invite me along when they were doing things. It seemed as though he wished to keep this part of his life separate from me.

When I confronted him about it, he said he had been friends with Kristen for much longer than he had been dating me. Although I understood this, I still didn’t see why he wouldn’t invite me along. Then I eventually gave him an ultimatum that if he hung out with Kristen, I wanted to be there. He was not willing to do this and we eventually broke up altogether because I did not trust this relationship or him for that matter.

This scenario is a perfect example of the previous anti-unity model. For starters, Dan was putting me directly in competition for attention with Kristen. He even would put her needs before my needs in many situations. When confronted about it, he also tried to make me feel guilty about wanting to spend more time with him. Part of the Unity Model of marriage involves putting your partner’s needs ahead of your own. In this case, I needed to feel that I was the most important person in his life. However, he was not willing to put me in that place. Therefore he was practicing anti-unity values.

Another anti-unity value is having separate interests and activities (11) accepted for partners. One example of this is from a show I watched a while back called Super Nanny. In this episode, there was a married couple with four children. The husband was heavily involved in his music and the church worship band. He would spend almost every night of the week practicing up at church while his wife was at home alone barely surviving with the kids. This man was putting his own interests ahead of his wife’s and in doing so, creating some very unruly children in the process.

The problem with this scenario is that separate interests also create an atmosphere of separation or disjunction between the spouses. The couple is not united in their goals and is able to put their own interests ahead of their partners. When partners create separate interests, the couple begins to grow apart from each other. They become disjoined in their interests and lack a common goal that would unite them.

Another anti-unity value involves promoting the idea that one should not try to change one’s partner (14), but instead they should accept them as they are. This also goes along with anti-unity value (13) which states couples can agree to disagree.

I both agree and disagree with these statements. First of all, two people going into a marriage should be aware that each person will change as they grow older. Also, each person should try to release their negative traits and take on more positives ones which would promote unity within their marriage. This is the process of marriage, and if people think they can just go into marriage and never have to change, they do not have a realistic view of what marriage entails.

In contrast, there is a reality that a man/woman should try to know their partner before entering into a marriage with that person. A person who is stubborn before marriage is not going to magically change and lose their stubborn characteristics after marriage. If a woman is dating a man who never does the things she wants before marriage, she should realize that this is a type of man that may never be able to truly unite with her in marriage.

Likewise, if a man is dating a woman who never commits to him and is constantly flirting with other men, he might want to consider looking for another woman, because she is obviously not invested in their relationship. In order to become united in marriage, it involves two partners who are equally invested in making each other happy and making the relationship work.

Another anti-unity value is Adultery for various reasons (4). Adultery can be defined in many ways, but the simplest way to explain it would be any relationship physical, mental or emotional that takes place with a partner outside of the marriage. This can involve an internet relationship, a relationship in which two people share intimate secrets about their spouses but do not engage in sexual intercourse, and/or a relationship with someone other than the person’s spouse that involves actual sexual intercourse.

Findings of a Prior Generation

I found two student reports from a prior generation to read. These came from Carly Kanemaru and Lauren Buchner. Though each person emphasized slightly different points about the Unity Model, each had similar conclusions. These conclusions were that AUVs were constantly present in the media and we are often unaware of how our exposure to these beliefs is affecting our views of ourselves.

In the first essay by Carly Kanemaru, she stated that she believes that AUVs are constantly portrayed in the media and also that these values are so ingrained in society that we barely see them. Her report can be found at the following link.

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/kanemaru/kanemaru-409b-g24-report1.htm

She examined the movie “Unfaithful.” The unique thing is that she had found AUVs that I had missed: agreeing to disagree, men as more rational, and engaging in one’s desires instead of focusing on the spouse’s desires. The most obvious AUVs in this movie have to do with cheating on the spouse for any reason. However, Kanemaru said that the husband was also portraying AUVs as well.

When women automatically assume men are more rational, they are giving into the Dominance Model and lessening their beliefs in their own self. This is where communication often breaks down. Women begin to believe that what they say has little or less importance than what their husbands have to say. Later they begin to back down from arguments more, giving in to being treated like their opinions matter less.

Kanemaru was trying to show through interviews with her friends that people are daily not recognizing these AUVs. It is affecting our thinking, whether we wish to admit it or not. When she asked her friend Sori what she had thought of the movie, she completely put the entire blame on the wife without considering the fact that the husband had been neglecting his wife.

The other student work that I read was by Lauren Buchner. She also agreed with Kanemaru that we as a society are blind to the effects AUVs have on our gender interactions. Her report can be found at the following link.

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/buchner/buchner-409b-g24-report1.htm

She started out by examining a movie called “The Story of Us” in which a couple had gone from bad to worse through a series of fights, anger, resentment, and lack of physical and mental intimacy. One of the key themes portrayed in the movie was the way that people refuse to change. The wife in the movie was angry with her husband because he was constantly irresponsible about little things. In the end of the movie, he continued to be irresponsible, but the wife decided to stay with him despite his irresponsibility and accept him as being this way.

Buchner explained that this movie had both began and ended without unity. The relationship had been focused on the children and the wife and the husband showed a real lack of emotional and physical intimacy.

One unique thing that Buchner focuses on is how the movie scolded the wife for having too high of standards and not accepting her spouse for who he is. Due to this, the movie promotes anti-unity values. Any negative trait that does not promote a healthy marriage needs to be discarded in the Unity Model of Marriage. Also in this model, the woman is not looked down on for expecting better treatment from her husband.

What both Buchner and Kanemaru have been trying to explain is that within our society, it has become reasonable for women to expect less from their husbands even in the form of emotional abuse. Women constantly learn from their interactions with men growing up that their opinion is not as important as a man’s and this ideology shows constantly through the media.

How Anti-Unity Values Show up in life:

One thing I remember when I began watching marriages as I grew up was that men were constantly hurting the women they were with and that the women just took this abuse. In my sister’s marriage, her husband would yell at her, ignore her pleadings and make her feel as though she was worthless. When I would ask her about this, she would say that this was what marriage was about. You don’t always get what you want, but sometimes it is the “lesser of evils.”

My sister subscribes to the Dominance Model of marriage which houses the common belief that men are good if they 1) have a decent job to take care of the family, and 2) do not cheat. Along with this Dominance Model, whenever a decent man becomes an indecent man, it is usually the fault of their wives driving them to this behavior.

The problem with this Model, which is clearly the opposite of the Unity Model of Marriage, is that it doesn’t fully illustrate what makes a man good. Any person can have a job, and any person can avoid cheating. However, truly good people are defined by much more than these simple attributes.

Being a good person involves treating people with respect at all times, taking responsibility for your actions, being honest in your life, being helpful in all situations, being caring towards the people around you and doing your best at all tasks. When we as a society allow for people to make excuses for their negative actions, we are doing people a great disservice.

Men being absolved of Responsibility:

I was recently at a party with some friends and my fiancé when we came across a guy who was talking about a woman he recently broke up with. He told us how she kept trying to change him and how she was so crazy that she even had the names picked out for their children. When he said this, my fiancé Joshua joked that we were already picking out names for our children, and he didn’t see it as a bad thing.

The guy then went on to inform me that I should let Joshua, my fiancé, do whatever he wants because he is a man and men should be allowed to do whatever they want. That’s when it hit me. This man doesn’t want a woman he can be united with. He wants a woman that he can rule over. He wants a woman that will be around when he wants sex and wants to talk about topics he is interested in and then he wants her to leave him alone when he is not interested anymore.

The sad thing is that he is not the only man like this. Our society if full of men like this, who believe they should never have to change, even if their actions are hurting their spouses. These people are dead wrong.

A successful marriage involves two people being willing to compromise with each other. It involves realizing that each person has both negative and positive traits. It involves recognizing the traits that are hurtful and trying to rid ourselves of these poisonous traits, rather than holding on to them. Most importantly, it involves giving up ourselves as individuals and working together for the greater good of the marriage as a unit, not as separate entities trying to threaten the other into submission.

Effects the AUVS in media and in life are having on young children:

When I think about what the effects these anti-unity values have on children, I have to think of my three nieces who have grown up in my sister’s household. Each day that my sister accepted abuse from her husband, she taught my nieces that is was okay for them to be abused. Each time my sister tried to ask for something from her husband and he refused to do it, my nieces learned that their opinions as women mattered less than the opinions of men in their lives.

I can’t blame my sister completely, though. The fact is that she has been trained like many other women have. She has been trained to believe that she is worth less than the men around her. Anti-Unity Values in the media that she grew up with taught her that boys would always push harder and that she needed to back down or she would be sorry for it. So many more girls are learning the same lessons right now, watching movies and listening to songs which promote woman bashing and male domination.

Links:

1) “Sexuality in the Mass Media: How to view the media critically.” Sex Info. University of California at Santa Barbara.

One article called “Sexuality in the Mass Media: How to view the media critically,” talks about how much exposure young people have to sex in the media. The author explained that there is an increasing amount of sex in the media, and that much of it is coming from unmarried people. In fact, unmarried characters have sex four to eight times more than married characters. In one particular soap opera, there was only one married couple in comparison with 28 unmarried couples who engaged in sexual acts on their show.

The article also explained that many teenagers are getting ideas for how to talk to their significant other from television shows, and many more are learning about complex issues such as birth control from their television shows. Many parents are not paying attention to how much the media is actually playing a part in their children’s lives. Teenagers are being taught that pre-marital sex is a more common occurrence than sex within marriage and they are also being taught how to behave within the context of their relationships.

Another shocking fact is that increased sex in the media is effecting how teenagers view premarital sex. More and more teenagers report to being dissatisfied with remaining virgins before marriage. Also, those teenagers who had been exposed to pornography tended to show less interest in condom usage during sex.

http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/?article=activity&refid=026

2) “Media Influence: She deserves better.” A website of Focus on the Family.

In this article, the author explains that pornography portrays women as being less than human. They become objects of sexual lust rather than a human with complex thoughts and needs. It views women as being property rather than being a separate individual. It also views women as being easy to catch and even easier to be discarded. Women are not seen as having any particular value except for within sexual fulfillment. This belief can be very harmful for young women.

It also portrays women as needing to look beautiful to hold any value and it portrays women that want to be dominated. Women in porn are always incredibly gorgeous, large breasted and willing to have sex. They may say no, but eventually if a man kisses her the right way, she will say yes. Pornography encourages men to disregard a woman’s pleadings as being trivial. It encourages the belief that women don’t really know what they want until you give it to them.

http://www.troubledwith.com/stellent/groups/public//@fotf_troubledwith/documents/articles/twi_013923.cfm?channel=Parenting%20Teens&topic=Media%20Influence&sssct=Background%20Info

3) Labour of Love: Media and Children. The Web Magazine for conscious parenting.

In this article the author explains that media messages play a powerful role in our children’s lives. Some of the messages include using fighting and violence to handle conflict and showing cigarettes and alcohol as being cool. It also promotes promiscuous sexual action without showing the negative results of these actions.

One major problem is that the media affects a girl’s image of her own body. Young girls see posters of women who are incredibly thin, incredibly gorgeous and completely flawless. Often these images can create low self esteem. It also makes girls more conscious of their weight at a very early age.

The media affects young boys by encouraging them to use violence and fighting to get what they want. It becomes rational to fight back when something or someone is bothering you rather than to think of positive solutions to common problems.

http://www.labouroflove.org/tv-toys-&-technology/media-&-children

Summary of all Links:

Many young people will say that they do not believe that media has a strong influence on their behavior, but in all of these articles we see how much of an impact it really does have. Daily, girls are given reminders encouraging them to be sexy if they want to be noticed by men. It encourages them to behave promiscuously and to lower their standards for how they wish to be treated. Though some may say they are able to rise above these influences, the old computer adage, “Garbage in, garbage out,” really sums up the reality about media influence.

Whether we like it or not, the media influences our decisions about morality, psychology, and rationality in our every day lives. By viewing sex regularly, the act has lost its sacredness within the marriage bed. It has been cheapened. In the media, promiscuous sexuality is promoted daily and the effects of such promiscuity are rarely mentioned.

One thing that was not mentioned in any of these articles is the effects of promiscuous sexuality on children emotionally. Young girls are being taught that their body is not sacred. It is merely a devise used to attract the opposite sex. When a girl begins to believe this, she begins to accept certain ways that boys and men treat her. She begins to loose her self worth. She may engage in sexual acts at a much younger age and she may also not know that it is okay for her to refuse such acts. Since her peers may all be doing the same things, she will feel forced to comply.

My Own Findings on AUVs in the Media

I have selected two different shows with which to discuss disjunctive and conjunctive talk and behavior. The first show I watched was Maury Povich, a day time talk show. The other show I choose was Sex and the City from which I selected two episodes to watch.

Show synopsizes:

1) The first show I watched was the Maury Povich show. In this particular episode, Maury was using lie detector tests to tell whether or not a boyfriend was cheating on his girlfriend. In each scenario, the girl would think that the man had cheated on her, she would have a lot of strong evidence (i.e. a friend who had confessed to sleeping with him or pictures of a naked woman in the car), yet she would still need more proof that her man was cheating.

2) In the show Sex and the City I chose the two final episodes of season one. The first episode was called “The Drought” and it was about how the number of times people have sex begins to decrease the longer you are in a relationship. In the show the lead couple, Carrie and Big, had been dating for a while. Previously, each night that one would spend the night with the other, they engaged in sexual acts. Then one night, Big just wanted to go to bed instead of having sex with Carrie, explaining that he was tired.

3) The second episode of Sex and the City was called “O Come All Ye Faithful.” In this episode, Carrie found out that Big and his mother attended church every Sunday. Carrie wanted to be introduced to his mother. However, Big refused because he felt it was a private thing he did with his mother and he was not sure of his relationship with Carrie. When she tried to causally show up at church, Big became incredibly angry and they had an argument.

Table 1: Gender Interactions within the Shows

The first disjunctive behavior we see with Big and Carrie is his unwillingness to open up parts of his life to her. He attends church every Sunday with his mother and Carrie knew nothing about this act or his mother. His mother also did not even know that Carrie and Big were dating and Big introduced Carrie as a friend. Big is consciously keeping parts of his life independent of Carrie. She wants to know more, but he will not let her in to his life. When she tries to force herself into his life, he becomes very angry.

The next disjunctive behavior he portrays is when he becomes defensive about her actions. “Are you trying to test me?” he asks as though she is in the wrong for wanting him to introduce her to his mother honestly. Later, we get to the heart of the issue when Big confesses that he is not sure she is the one. He needs time to figure things out. Basically, he keeps himself emotionally (i.e. affectively and cognitively) separate from her so that he does not get hurt if the relationship fails. The problem is, by doing this he is keeping the relationship from succeeding.

In contrast, the Conjunctive Aspects in this episode come from an unexpected place: Samantha. She begins to see herself as more than a sexual object when a man begins to call her an angel. She finds she wants to live up to that role and she decides to get to know this man as a person before engaging in any sexual relations with him. However, the viewer is soon disappointed when they find out that this dream man has a small penis. Later in the episode we see her crying because she has finally fallen in love with a good man, but she cannot feel his penis inside her.

Even when the show begins to show conjunction between two people, it always finds a way to discredit the action. Men who are portrayed in the beginning as honest, reasonable, good, and respectful eventually turn out to be on drugs, uninterested, or lacking in the sex department. If we are to agree with this show, we must say that it is normal for men to treat women as sex objects and if they do not, there must be something wrong with them.

Friends’ Responses to my observations on the shows:

1) Ronald Jones (mid forties): “Well it is true that in order for a relationship to succeed there needs to be honesty, but I am not sure about absolute honesty. When a woman asks, ‘How do I look?’ you wouldn’t tell her she looks fat. So there are some situations that are different. As for the show about the guy who goes to church with his mom, he is obviously embarrassed about what he is doing. He is hiding the sin from God and could be hiding (church) from her (Carrie).

“As for the media, it portrays weak men, effeminate men, men aloof. You see inadequate men. We do not have the role models of ‘Father Knows Best’ or ‘Leave it to Beaver.’ At some point in our nation’s history, they got real and said, ‘Not every one is an Ozzie and a Harriet.’ As for the shows, they are perpetuating and promoting a promiscuous lifestyle for both men and women. T.V. goes too far these days.”

I really enjoyed interviewing Ronald because it gave me insight into a prior generation. This is a man who has chosen to abstain from watching television at all except for the occasional documentary on the Discovery Channel. When asked why he did not watch regular programming he said he believed it was not good to watch shows like these. These programs are bad for the soul.

As we discussed more after the formal interview, he began to explain how when children watch these shows they pick up on ideas for why something is good or bad for them. A child who had not made a choice about whether or not sex before marriage was okay would be receiving these images from the media about how promiscuous sex is fine and even acceptable.

It is obvious that Ronald is very aware of the effects the media are having on the people around him, and he chooses not to be a part of it. He may not know exactly how AUVs are portrayed but I think it is good that he is aware of many other consequences the media have on individuals.

2) Marlene Jones-Skurtu (51): “In the first show (Maury Povich), they were not willing to commit and let people be part of their lives and marry. They take the side where they are against the guy before he walked in but they had good reasons to be. I agree that any kind of porn or naked pictures makes it hard on the woman. No real woman can live up to their imagination when they look at porn and pictures.”

“In the last show (Sex and the City), it is just too bad so many men want women on a carnal level and don’t want them to know the reality of life. The man wants to go to church with his mother and turn around and have a girl but has no plan to commit to her.”

“The shows promote promiscuous behavior. You think every one is doing it. They aren’t. God intended for sex to be between one man and one woman. Sex gives emotional ties. God is protecting that way. When you have emotional ties and broken promises, no commitment or commitment only on a physical level, you trick yourself into believing there is. It will bring you heart ache and grief later when you have four kids.”

“I have seen so many broken dreams and relationships. Formal marriage is where two people stand before God and tell God they will be together. It’s about commitment and not a piece of paper.”

“(Media effects on children) It reveals more from what it did ten years ago. In the old days the screen would fade on kissing, the adults would know but the kids wouldn’t. Now kids in grammar school are trying sexual things. They know all the words and they know what happens. It’s not just the birds and the bees. There are no morals. They learn from friends and TV. Without values, we are like animals.”

I really enjoyed interviewing Marlene because she is a divorced woman of four children. She had a lot of insight into how relationships work and don’t work. She is very aware of the negative influences that media have on young people. She believes it may be one of the causes for why children are starting to behave promiscuously at a young age.

I agree with all that she said. Many AUVs are commonly used in the media and are becoming common law among society. People see promiscuous sex as normal and children see it on TV and view it as normal. Not all kids are choosing to have sexual relations at an earlier age, but the fact that there is an epidemic of young teenage girls getting pregnant does seem to point us in the direction of media having a greater influence.

3) Joshua Skurtu (24): “I never realized the show (Sex and the City) was that sexist. As for Maury Povich, it’s always about putting messed up people on the show. You find the most horrible, disjunctive, idiotic people and you put them on stage. People like to see train wrecks.

“Subconsciously, the show raises your blood pressure, makes you in the mood to argue with someone. You mimic what you see. It gives the view of people in general that they are all liars and they are all bastards. It’s similar to the way people who watch television are more afraid of crime because on TV a large percentage of crimes they show are violent, but in real life it is a much smaller amount of violent crimes. I have a friend who is afraid to walk at night. She’s afraid of being raped, murdered, mugged . . . I’m like, ‘It’s Hawaii!’

“The writer (of Sex and the City) is bitter towards men. She may have been burned in the past and is generalizing towards all men. Sex is seen as a game. You have sex with everyone on the first date, and it’s normal, and it doesn’t make you a slut. You can have multiple partners in the same week, same day, even strangers. It gives women a lower view of men as being assholes or inadequate.

“As for media, there are many disjunctive relationships. There is a 50% divorce rate. Many marriages fail. The people writing the shows are having these experiences and they take it to the extreme to make it entertaining. Both shows show relationships as a failure. It makes you feel you need to watch your ass. A whole bunch of people want to have sex and are against you. There are good people. I am an example of one of them.”

I agreed with what Joshua said as well. There are many disjunctive relationships that are seen every day in the media. However, these relationships stem from reality. Joshua had said later that he believed that art imitates society and then society imitates art. So, in effect, it seems as though each is a vicious cycle that feeds into the other. Anti-Unity Values are constantly portrayed and it is important for each of us to become consciously aware of these images to avoid subconsciously being affected.

Disjunctive vs. Conjunctive Verbal Interactions

Anti-Unity Values can also be found in movies in the media. I picked two different movies, Crash and Poetic Justice, to illustrate how AUVs have infiltrated the movie scene as well.

Interaction 1:

I selected a scene from Crash to discuss specific disjunctive and conjunctive verbal interactions between a man and a woman. In the previous scene, the couple Cameron and Christine had been pulled over by two cops. One of these cops had molested Christine while frisking her. The scene below shows what happened between them afterwards.

“Crash”

Cameron: Who are you calling?

Christine: I’m gonna report their asses. Sons of Bitches . . .

Cameron: And you actually think they’re going to take you seriously?

Christine: (slams phone down) Do you have any idea what that was like to have that pig’s hands all over me? And you watch him do it and then you apologize to him?? What the fuck was that about?

Cameron: What did you want me to do, get us both shot?

Christine: --They were gonna shoot us on Ventura Blvd??

Cameron: So, you would have been satisfied with just being arrested.

Christine: You’re right, Cam, much better to let him shove his hand up my crotch than get your name in the paper.

Cameron: Yeah, that’s what I was worried about.

Christine: It wasn’t? You weren’t afraid all your good friends at the studio were gonna read about you in the morning and realize you were actually black?

Cameron: You need to calm down here.

Christine: No, what I need is a husband who won’t just stand there while I’m being molested!

Cameron: They were cops! They had guns! Where do you think you’re living, with mommy and daddy in Greenwich?

Christine: Go to hell.

Cameron: Maybe I shoulda let them lock your ass up. I guess sooner or later you should learn what it’s like to be black.

Christine: Fuck you, like you know. Closest you ever came to being black was watching the Cosby show.

Cameron: At least I wasn’t watching it with the rest of the equestrian team.

Christine: You know you’re right, Cam, I got a lot to learn. ‘Cause I haven’t quite learned how to shuck and jive. Let me hear it again: “Thank you, Mr. Poh-liceman. You sure is kind to us po’ black folk. You be sure to let me know next time you want to finger-fuck my wife.”

Cameron: You know what? Fuck you.

Christine: Oh that’s good. A little anger. A bit late, but nice to see.

(Cameron slams out of the room-scene ends)

The first disjunctive behavior Cameron shows is not being supportive of his wife after she had been in such a horrible ordeal. He takes a defeatist perspective in believing there is no use to even try to report the incident even though his wife wants to do so. “And you actually think they’re gonna take you seriously.” He may not know what is right to do, but he should be supportive in her making the call even if nothing does come of it.

The second disjunctive behavior is actually attached to the previous scene where Cameron did not defend his wife. He was scared of the police and he did not know what he should do. Under other circumstances he probably may have stood up for her and fought for her, but he was under stress from cops and this is a hard decision to make. “What did you want me to do, get us both shot?” It is important for a man to stand up for his wife, but in the same respect it is equally important for a man to look out for the welfare of his family. He had to choose between the lesser of two evils.

Another disjunctive interaction occurs when he tries to calm her down, but he is unable to. “You need to calm down here.” Cameron says. Christine says, “No, what I need is a husband who won’t just stand there while I’m being molested.” She is extremely hurt by his inaction. He sees that she wants him to stand up for her but at the time he was crippled by fear.

This is a tough situation. If it had happened in a Unity Model, the man might not have done something at the time out of fear as well. However, the interaction afterward would probably have been much different. The husband would be the first to call and report something, or he would have been right behind his wife supporting her decision. He also probably would be apologizing that he could not have done something or he would just comfort her because he would understand that what she went through was horrifying.

Their interaction after such an ordeal shows that they are more in the dominance model of marriage. He is probably the one who often takes charge of things, but previously he was put into a situation where he was unable to dominate. The result was pure meltdown. He lost his control and was unable to regain it back. However, in the Unity Model, he would not have been damaged by loss of control as much as he would be damaged by the loss of his wife’s peace of mind.

Interaction 2:

This is the opening scene to the movie “Poetic Justice.” Here we see a man and a woman in a drive-in movie theatre where most of the people are there to enjoy intimate time with one another. The main couple is watching the movie but the man has a different idea on his mind.

Poetic Justice

MARKELL: C'mon, let's get in the back seat.

JUSTICE: No, Markell, why can't we just watch the movie?

MARKELL: 'Cause it's boring.

He goes to kiss her again. This time, it's a nice, long, juicy powerhouse kiss that causes the Richter scale to jump two points. Justice appears obviously affected. She asks the inevitable question.

JUSTICE: Markell, do you love me?

MARKELL: Of course I love you.

JUSTICE: Why? Tell me why you love me.

MARKELL (looks around): Now?

JUSTICE: Yeah, right now.

There is a pause. He thinks.

MARKELL: Okay, I love you because you too fine.

JUSTICE: Is that it?

MARKELL: Yeah.

Justice looks dissatisfied.

MARKELL: Can I have some sugar? Some butter? Some sweets?

JUSTICE: No, not yet. Get me some popcorn.

Markell 's face drops.

JUSTICE: Pleazzze?!

Markell relents and gets out of the car. He takes two steps, turns on a heel, and leans into the car again.

MARKELL: Hey, Justice! I was just thinking. I also love you 'cause when I was in tha county jail, you wrote me a lotta sweet poems.

Justice grins. Markell smiles and blows her a kiss good-bye.

I chose this scene because it actually shows more of a mixture of disjunctive and conjunctive talk between the couple. The scene starts with a common male/female interaction. The man wants to do more than watch the movie but she just wants to watch the movie. “C’ mon let’s get into the back seat.” He urges. “No, Markell. Why can’t we just watch the movie?” she pleads. “Cuz it’s boring,” he replies. This interaction is disjunctive because Markell is not showing interest in things she is showing interest in.

The next disjunctive behavior comes when Justice tries to find out if he loves her. He is embarrassed to express his true feelings to her. He is more interested in his appearance and looking cool than he is in showing that he has a soft side. “I love you cuz you too fine,” he says and causes her to frown. This particular facial expression also shows disjunction between them. If he were trying to connect to her conjunctively, he would not be satisfied with her frown. He would try to say things to make her smile.

The final disjunctive behavior comes afterwards when he tries again to get some “sugar” from her. She denies him because she is unsatisfied with his answer to why he loves her and also because she probably feels pushed into doing things she does not feel ready to do. His reaction is also disjunctive in that his face drops. This is his way to let her know that he is unhappy with her refusing him. It is also a way to make her feel guilty for letting him down and not giving him what he wants.

However, Markell redeems himself with conjunctive behaviors in the end of the scene. The first thing he does is agree to get the popcorn, even though he does not want to do this. By doing this he is giving in to his girl friend’s wishes and making her feel appreciated. He is also letting her know that her needs are more important than his sexual urges. This creates a good atmosphere for communication.

After this, he also turns to tell her another reason why he loves her. He loved that she took the time to write him sweet poems when he was in jail. Markell was aware earlier that his answer to her question was a weak response. In order to make her feel like she was more than just a pretty thing to look at, he let her know that he loved her for who she was and what she gave as well. This probably made her feel important to him. She realized that she was worth more to him than being just a pretty face.

Final Thoughts:

In each of these two scenes, the men and women had a chance to show conjunctive and disjunctive behaviors. Overall, there were more disjunctive behaviors shown than conjunctive ones, and in most shows this seems to be the case as well. It was nice to see Markell shown as a good and decent man who could show affection. He was a solid and decent man, regardless of the fact that he had been in jail. However, if you are aware of the story, shortly afterwards, Markell is shot while in the arms of his lover Justice, and the movie begins at this point.

It seems that even when I had found hope for a conjunctive relationship that might eventually be able to venture into the Unity Model, the possibility was vanquished by an outside source. In the other movie, the entire portrayal was anti-unity.

Conclusion and Advice to Future Generations

The more time I spend studying this model, the more I see families, talk shows, and movies that show disjunctive relationships and behaviors. It has become the norm to expect to see more anti-unity values. People seem uninterested in watching shows that are wholesome, because they lack entertainment value in our culture. Though there are some shows that have conjunctive behaviors, the number of shows that focuses on disjunctive behaviors far outweighs the number of shows that focus on conjunctive behaviors.

Should we believe that it is the media that dictates our behaviors? Yes and no. There is no doubt that the media is constantly putting images in our minds but in the end, we have the final say as to what we will believe and not believe. Many of our choices for our lifestyle also come from our families and how we were raised. Also, each individual goes through different life experiences that help them decide what is right and wrong.

So, this is one part but it is not the whole. In the end, it is important for us to understand what images are coming from the television but it is also important to realize that we are responsible for our own actions and inactions. We have to be able to rise above the images we receive and make those choices for ourselves. There will always be anti-unity values present in our society. By acknowledging these AUVs, we are able to choose not to continue participating in those behaviors.

Advice:

As for future generations, the advice I would give is to take your time with this report and treat each section as though it were its own paper to write. Spend about a week on each section so that you have time to edit and research each topic. Also, take plenty of notes in class. The more you take in and study, the better your paper will be.

When it comes to the Swedenborg parts, take this with a grain of salt. It is interesting that all of these ideals came from such a strange place, but that is not where the heart of this class lies.

The Unity Model teaches women and men how to succeed in relationships together without trying to dominate one another. It will help you understand things about yourself you never knew before and it will cause you to put issues from your life in the forefront. You will learn how to talk to your spouse in a conjunctive way and you will constantly be forced to rediscover your beliefs about what makes a good marriage.

Do not take this class lightly. The values it teaches will be helpful. Even if you choose not to agree with every principle, take from it what you feel is best for you. Every class holds some value and has knowledge which can be gained. It is up to you to decide whether you will learn from it or continue with Dominance Model relationships.

Links:

My Home Page:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bf2006/murray/murray-home.htm

G25 Class Home Page: