Report 2:
My Understanding of the Unity Model of Marriage
By Tiffany Lee
Instructions for this report are at:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409b-g22-report2.htm
I am answering Questions 3, 6, 10, 12 and 15
In this report I will be looking at the Unity Model of
Marriage and analyzing some of the implications it makes in relation to media
influences, current theories of marriage, and personally held marital values. In addition to presenting my understanding of
the Unity Model of Marriage, I will conclude with a section on the current PSY
409 generation as well as advice to future 409 generations.
The Question I am
answering is Question 3
Question 3:
A husband and wife seem to get along real
well together, enjoying the same activities, having fun, being popular with
friends, etc. Then they have a fight over some disagreement and they show
disrespect and hatred for each other. (a) Explain why this turnabout can happen
and what is its cause. Be sure to use some aspect
of the theory given in the Lecture Notes. (b) Discuss how married partners
can reverse this flip-flop cycle so that it never occurs again. In your
explanation be sure to apply the unity model, the threefold self, and the
conjoint self, as explained in the Lecture Notes. (c)
Anything else you have to say.
(a) According to Dr. James’ unity model of marriage, “the perfection of unity in a marriage increases through
differentiation and reciprocity of behavior in the threefold self of the two
partners, and is a spiritual union that lasts to eternity. In a unity marriage,
the husband and wife develop a conjoint self, while their former individual
self recedes into the background and no longer operates.”
When
a couple experiences disrespect and possible hatred toward each other following
a disagreement, they are demonstrating that they are operating in different
places within the unity model. According
to the unity model, men are not initially willing to give themselves
entirely. In the early stages of a
relationship, men may only be able to connect on the sensorimotor
level.
Men
on this level are mostly concerned with the physical aspects of a relationship
and this sensorimotor conjunction can be easily
observed by others who witness the couple’s interactions. Men operating in the sensorimotor
phase will tend to withhold conjoining with their partners cognitively and
affectively, thereby exerting power and dominance over the relationship. This dominance occurs because women are beings
who always seek unity in all levels of the threefold self.
This
can also be explained in terms of dependence vs. independence. While women in relationships seek dependence
and unity with their partner, men continually strive to maintain independence
from being in unity at the higher levels of the threefold self.
One
example to illustrate this conflict is a disagreement I’ve had with my husband
on numerous occasions regarding weekend activities and meals. We often sit around on Saturday afternoons
pondering what we will do that evening.
I am usually the first to suggest either an activity to do or a
restaurant to eat at. However, the frequency of my suggestions are seldom matched with what we
actually end up doing. Most of my
suggestions are met with “I don’t feel like doing that” or “I’m not in the mood
to eat there tonight”, and I end up giving in and
ultimately find myself eating and doing what my husband wants!
So,
does this mean that he is not conjoined with me at the same level? The Unity Model would say that my
agreeability in this situation, as a female, shows that I am operating affectively in the Unity Model. I am agreeing to the suggestions of my
husband because I am not thinking selfishly.
Rather, because I seek unity between us, I turn his wants into my
own. On the other hand, an analysis of
my husband’s actions in this situation would show his inability to let go of
his independence. He will not give in to
my wants because it takes away from his dominant and sensorimotor
needs as a male.
(b) So how can partners reverse this
flip-flop cycle so that it never occurs again?
One very important step for both partners is to be aware of the other’s
needs and desires. It is impossible to
alleviate conflict if you do not fully understand your partner and his or her
motivations. Within the unity model, it
is important to understand first where you fall into the model and then
identify both where your partner falls as well as where you overlap as a couple.
Another key element to reversing this cycle is
perseverance (especially on the woman’s part!)
Dr. James described his inability to understand and give his wife the
level of unity she desired and needed.
It took 20 years of his wife’s perseverance to get their relationship to
the level of unity needed. She did not
give up on him and this determination has enabled the reversal of this
unnecessary cycle in their relationship.
I find it extremely important in marriage to
step out of my own perspective and truly see things from my partner’s point of
view. How can I even begin to say I
understand my spouse when I cannot see and feel from his perspective? I have
also acquired the understanding that we are indeed two different beings with
different features, motivations, and desires.
We were created to complement each other so in order to conjoin in unity
I must understand and accept the features that I do not possess and utilize
those shortcomings through those that my partner does have.
(c) Developing
the ability to self-monitor my thoughts, feelings, and behaviors within the
threefold self is critical to analyzing potentially maladaptive processes
occurring in my feelings and behaviors and adjust them in such a way that
promotes the conjunction and union between my husband and I.
The Question I am
answering is Question 6
Question 6:
(a) Consider Table 6 in the Lecture Notes,
which is in the Section on Making Field Observations.
It gives 20 examples of Behavioral Indicators of One's Relationship Model,
along with Yes/No specifications for the three models. (b) First explain what
this table is trying to show and how it is doing that (give a couple of
examples to illustrate concretely). (c) Give brief
explanations for what the three models are. (d) Create a similar table of 20
new items that you make up yourself, and fill in the Yes/No columns. (d)
Calculate the percent overlap. (e) Discuss what your results show. (f) How can
such an approach be expanded to help couples be more
aware of their interaction pattern. (g) Anything else you have to say.
(a)
[Table 6]
|
Behavioral Indicators
of |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Partners tolerate role differences, either culturally defined or by
personal preference |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Partners tolerate some disagreements as something normal and
inevitable |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners tolerate status differences between a man and a woman |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Partners insist on exclusivity so that neither may carry on close
friendships with others |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners allow each other privacy or separate activities that the
other is not involved in |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners believe themselves to be married in this life and in the
afterlife in heaven to eternity |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Each partner is tolerant of some of the other's faults and tries to
live with them |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
The man always cooperates with the woman's attempts to change him |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
When partners disagree they negotiate to reach a consensus |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
When partners disagree the man gives in to the woman's way of
thinking |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners can't stand being separated even for a few hours, and get
very anxious |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners are mutually interdependent and complementary in all areas |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners have total confidence in each other, feeling free of any
criticism ever |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners never try to punish each other or retaliate for anything |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
While making seating choices for guests at a wedding, splitting up the
married couples |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners assume responsibility for each other's feelings and emotions |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners try to make each other happy |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Partners allow each other to have incompatible opinions about various
topics |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners never diminish in enthusiasm and admiration for each other |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
The original passion of love decreases as the years go by |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
(b) Table 6 in the Lecture Notes describes Behavioral Indicators
of One’s Relationship Model, which can be used to categorize people into
specific groups within the Unity Model.
It can also be used to compare the dominance, equity, and unity models
by determining whether or not a particular behavior is characteristic of either the dominance, equity, or unity model.
For example, one of the items
listed in Table 6 is:
[Partners have total
confidence in each other, feeling free of any criticism ever.]
The
table then lists three columns (each for dominance, equity, and unity) and
states whether not this behavior is typical of each model. For this example, it lists:
Dominance Model: No
Equity
Model: No
Unity Model: Yes
One
could infer from this analysis that the feeling of confidence in one another
along with the freedom from any criticism are behaviors that occur only when a
couple is operating in the unity model.
To illustrate the use of this chart concretely, I could take the
following example:
[When
partners disagree the man gives in to the woman's way of thinking.]
Dominance Model: No
Equity Model: No
Unity Model: Yes
I
can now think about this concept from my marriage’s perspective – “So, when I
have a disagreement with my spouse, does he give in to the way that I feel or
think about the situation?...I’d have to say no to
that one. Most times neither of us back
down and we end up coming to some sort of compromise. This allows us to settle disagreements and
both feel heard.”
Now while this solution may appear
to be a constructive and healthy one, according to the Behavioral Indicators of
One’s Relationship Model, not answering “yes” to this item indicates that we
are not working in the Unity Model for this particular area. Instead, by answering “no”, I have shown a
behavior characteristic of the dominance or equity model only.
(c) The
dominance, equity and unity models are the three very important stages of a
relationship’s progression toward unity.
The dominance model is comprised of attitudes and behaviors that are
traditionally male dominated. Society
has embraced men as the superior sex and women as the acceptors or receivers of
this dominance. Relationships operating
in the dominance model thrive solely in external interactions. It is also based on reward and punishment,
basing decisions and behaviors on the reaction of the other person.
The equity model incorporates
knowledge from the dominance model, but takes it a step away from the
traditional ideas of the dominance model.
In the equity model couples negotiate ideas and disagreements and the
focus shifts towards equality in the couple’s interactions. However, while women are beginning to have a
voice in the decisions that are made, men are struggling with not wanting to
give up their freedom and their traditional dominance.
It is very common for men to fall
back into the dominance level during this phase and a large amount of
disagreement occurs in the equity model as a result of man’s conflict with
giving up his dominance.
The unity model is the highest level
that can be achieved by a couple.
Thought in this stage is based on the needs and feelings of the other
partner. Husbands are now conjoined with
their wives at all levels – they act according to how the wife feels they
should, they put their feelings and desires behind what their wives feel, and
begin wanting what their wives want. This
is the level that women strive to achieve from the very beginning of a
relationship and can now interact with their husbands entirely fulfilled.
(d) [New Table]
|
Behavioral Indicators
of |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Couple encourages interactions with friends outside of relationship
for support |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Couple agrees to disagree |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners accept each other’s shortcomings |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Compromises are important to couple |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners feel completely secure in relationship |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Personal wants and desires are based on partner’s wants and desires |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Passion increases as relationship progresses |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partner’s put each other’s feelings before their own |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners seek similarities over complementary characteristics |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Woman gives in to man’s ideas or solutions |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners share idea of eternal marriage |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners give in to wishes or ideas of one another |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Complementary roles are encouraged |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Couple allows close relationships outside of marriage |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Couple seeks happiness in relationship |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Partners discourage physical or verbal abuse |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Woman’s wishes are understood and followed |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Man rejects woman’s attempts to change him |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Solutions to disagreements are solved by compromise |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners understand each other completely |
No |
No |
Yes |
(e) Calculation of the percent overlap: (yes responses to items / total items)
The overlap between the
dominance model and the equity model in the newly created table totaled 90%,
while there is a 20% overlap between the dominance and unity models as well as
between the equity and unity models.
(f) Results:
The table I created yielded fewer yes responses to all items in general
compared to the original, with the least overlap occurring between the dominance
and unity models as well as between the equity and unity models.
(g) I think that the use of this table to
identify specific behaviors within a relationship can be extremely helpful in
allowing couples to look at where they fall within the Unity Model
continuum. I think the table may wish to
include a more comprehensive listing of relationship behaviors that can help
identify positive interactions as well as areas that need improvement in order for
couples to work more closely with achieving the desired Unity Model.
The Question I am
answering is Question 10
Question 10:
(a) Consider Table 8 in the Lecture Notes,
which is in the Section on Making Field Observations.
It shows how to construct behavioral illustrations that fit the patterns of
contrast between the three models. (b) Make up 5 new items for each of the four
patterns shown there. (c) See if you can think of a
fifth pattern, with illustrations. (d) Once you have the new table ready, copy
the items on a separate page (without the three model columns), and give it to some
of your friends to fill out regarding their own behavior as a couple (Yes or No
for each item). (e) Discuss the results. (f) Now relate these findings to the
ennead chart in the Lecture Notes. (g) Anything else you have to say.
(a) [Table
8]
|
Yes = tolerates at
times a difference or disagreement about that issue |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
What restaurant to go to |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
What to order on the menu |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
What movie to go to or rent |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
What either should wear somewhere |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
What friends to socialize with |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
How to deal with money or investments |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
How to deal with the children |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
Where to live |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
How to deal with family |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
What political party to support |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Physical abuse or violence |
No |
No |
No |
|
What they laugh at |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
What they feel sentimental about |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Patterns:
(b) After
considering the contents of Table 8, I have created additional items following
the above patterns:
Yes, Yes, No Pattern:
1. Where to go on
the weekend
2. What outfit to
purchase
3. Who one should
vote for in an election
4. How many
children to have
5. What religious
practices are followed
No, Yes, No Pattern:
1.
What school children should attend
2.
Sexual relations
3.
Household roles
4.
Role of extended family
5.
What gift to purchase
No, No, No Pattern:
1.
Control of partner
2.
Lack of happiness
3.
Love of one another
4.
Fidelity
5.
Happiness
Yes, Yes, Yes Pattern:
1. What they think
is funny
2. What things they
hold dear
3. Food preferences
4. Cultural values
5. Cultural
practices
(c) While trying to create a fifth pattern,
I identified Yes, No, Yes as a potential pattern not listed in the existing
table but could not construct any sort of example to illustrate this pattern.
(d) I
created my own chart with the above items I created and handed it to a few of
my friends. I asked them to complete the
table with yes and no responses according to their own relationship.
(e) The
results of this experiment were quite surprising. While I predicted that the individuals
completing the table would exhibit more attitudes and behaviors characteristic
of those in the unity model, the opposite was true. The majority of responses given proved that
these individuals were operating on more of a dominance or equity level within
the specific issues listed.
(f) For
example, one of the new items listed in my table was “Where to go on the
weekend.” The majority of the
respondents stated that yes, they would tolerate a
difference or disagreement on that issue.
The fact that they are disagreeing about where to
spend a day on the weekend shows that they are not thinking conjointly. Instead, they feel a preference for the idea
that they have come up with and feel comfortable sticking with that thought
instead of truly wanting to do what their partner does.
(g) I
think it is extremely important for couples to analyze some of these kinds of
issues and truly uncover what is going on when they have an argument or
disagreement about something. Having
such an awareness might allow them to re-construct
some of the feelings or cognitions they have about particular issues and learn
to understand their partner’s wishes and desires better.
The Question I am
answering is Question 12
Question 12:
(a) Consider Table 9 in the Lecture Notes,
which is in the Section on Making Field Observations.
It lists two dozen AUVs – anti unity values that are
commonly portrayed in the media – soaps, comedy, drama.
(b) Select at least three programs for which you can watch several episodes or
shows. Briefly describe a few scenes from each show to illustrate the portrayal
of gender interactions that are contrary to having a successful marriage. (c) Now describe the affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor aspects of these interactions. (d) What are
your reactions to these observations? (e) What is your explanation as to why
these interactions are portrayed so often? (e) What might be the consequences
for couples and society? (f) Anything else you have to say.
(a) [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.)
(b) I
have chosen three television programs that illustrate some of the anti-unity
values described above:
1.
“Everybody Loves Raymond”
2.
“Sex and the City”
3.
“Friends”
The first program I
observed was “Everybody Loves Raymond”.
In one episode of this sitcom, Raymond was faced with having to stay
home and watch the children following a dispute between him and Deborah. Deborah was having a stressful week (as the
primary caretaker of the children) and became infuriated when Raymond had made
plans to go golfing on the weekend with his friends. After their disagreement, Raymond was left
home with the children while Deborah spent the day with her girlfriend and
relaxed.
In
another episode, Deborah was exhibiting violent mood swings (laughing and happy
one minute then yelling and crying the next.)
These behaviors made Raymond absolutely certain it was because of
premenstrual syndrome (which was not the case.) The entire episode showed
Raymond’s lack of understanding and misattribution of Deborah’s behaviors by
trying to blame her actions on PMS and continually trying to give her pills to
make the moods go away instead of realizing that he was the cause of her behaviors.
In
yet another episode, Raymond was feeling undesirable as a husband. During the course of the show, he managed to
regain his sense of desirability by conversing and flirting with a woman he met
at (I think it was an airport.) After he
returned home, he showed satisfaction in his report back to Deborah on what had
happened.
The
second program I looked at was “Sex and the City.” In the first episode, Carrie was having
problems with her live-in boyfriend, Aiden. The two of them appeared to be going through
a period of uncertainty in their relationship, but neither of them approached
the other to discuss it. Instead, they
laid side by side in silence, wondering what was going on inside the head of
the other.
In
the second episode, Samantha was being her normal, promiscuous self, trying to
snatch up every man possible in her attempt to prove her sexual desirability.
In
the last episode, Carrie was away on a trip with Aiden
(her boyfriend) and Mr. Big (her ex-boyfriend, now good friend) called her
after breaking up with his girlfriend.
He was an emotional mess and asked to see her so that he could have
someone to talk to for support. Carrie
invited him up to where she was staying (remember – she was on a weekend trip
away with her boyfriend!) and the rest of the night was spent with the three of
them discussing the break-up.
The
final show I examined was “Friends.” In
the first episode, Ursula, Phoebe’s twin sister, was a few days away from
getting married to the man she had met two week before. After being introduced to and talking with
Phoebe, he mentioned that the two (he and Ursula) had so much in common and that
he knew she was the perfect match for him.
It turned out that Ursula had lied about her profession and the things
she had accomplished in her life in order to match his interests and win his
love.
In
another episode, Rachel found out that she was pregnant and the entire episode
was devoted to everyone trying to figure out who the father is (since Rachel is
a single woman who has been with several different men.) By the end of the episode, it turns out that
Ross, one of their close friends, (who is also Rachel’s ex-boyfriend) is the
father of Rachel’s baby.
In
the final episode, Monica and
(c) The sensorimotor,
cognitive, and affective aspects of these interactions:
As
Dr. James states, “What we do and say is the result of what we think, which is
the result of how we feel.”
Much
of these television scenes illustrate some sort of breakdown in the healthy
functioning of the threefold self. For
example, in the “Sex and the City” scene where Carrie and Aiden
are lying next to each other in silence, it is obvious by their actions (sensorimotor self) that they are thinking (cognitive self)
and trying to figure out what the other is feeling. However, neither has the motivation nor desire
(affective self) to do anything about the situation, and the silence between
them endures.
(d) The
anti-unity values portrayed in modern media play a huge role in the way people
develop their attitudes toward the opposite sex, relationships, and
marriage. While there have been some
positive changes with regards to the role of women in society, the majority of
the information media consumers receive are laden with many of the anti-unity
values that can inhibit progression toward desired unity in a marriage. Since the areas of threefold self are so
highly interconnected with one another, a breakdown in just one of the areas
will halt any further movement in the direction toward unity.
(e) So why are these interactions portrayed so often? I think society and the media have become so
accustomed to this way of life between married partners. I also feel that modern life has
de-emphasized the religious values of marriage so much that it has become funny
and even entertaining to people to watch such anti-unity interactions.
There
also may be some deeper psychological meaning to watching such
interactions. It may provide an escape
from some people’s real lives to witness another couple displaying similar or
worse anti-unity behaviors. It may serve
as a way to either justify or make them feel better about particular behaviors
or values that they may have.
(f) In conclusion, I have probably gained the most awareness from
this section of anti-unity values. I
have acquired the ability to analyze television programs with more scrutiny
with regards to the portrayal of anti-unity values and use this knowledge and
awareness to modify my television behavior and attitudes toward unity.
The Question I am
answering is Question 15
Question 15:
(a) Describe the Web presence of Dr. Laura Schlessinger and Dr. Deborah Tannen.
What does one find when looking them up with google?
(b) What do people say about them? (c) Do they seem
to have influence? (d) Are they popular? (e) How do you react to this Web
information now that you are familiar with these two authors? (f) Discuss some
of their ideas with friends and see how they react. (g) Anything else you have
to say.
(a) Dr. Laura Schlessinger and Dr.
Deborah Tannen are two highly publicized individuals
on the web. When searching for content
related to the theories and publications of these women through a search engine
such as Google, a wide variety of topics related to them comes up, some
positive and some negative. However,
there were noticeable differences between the two.
(b) I first entered “deborah tannen” into the search engine and a list of various
websites appeared. While browsing
through a few that appeared on the first page, (such as www.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend
, www.annonline.com/interviews/990310/biography.html
, and www.newdimensions.org/online-journal/articles/agreeing-to-disagree.html
) it seemed as though the general public respects her research and findings and
pose questions that show their interest and awe in the theories she explains.
On the other hand, while Dr. Laura does have a few
websites that speak positively of her work (www.drlaura.com
), the others (such as www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/radio/dr-laura-schlessinger
and www.stopdrlaura.com ) appear to
be on a mission to debunk her “sexist” and “traditional” theories.
(c) Do they seem to have influence? I would say yes, definitely. Dr. Laura has gained a large following with
both men and women through her publications and even her radio talk show. Hundreds and hundreds of listeners call in
each day to seek advice from her, whether it be
marital problems, family problems, or advice to deal with their children.
Deborah Tannen appears to be a
respected professor of linguistics and although though there is some criticism
of her research and work, she tends to be a lot more balanced in her
presentation than Dr. Laura is.
(d) I think that both individuals are extremely popular, just
looking at the web content available on both women (Dr. Laura is quite a
household name!)
(e) Now that I have become familiar with these two authors, I am
not too surprised by the negativity projected towards them in online sources,
especially in Dr. Laura’s case. I think
she is extremely one-sided in her advice to women on how they should be
catering to and treating their husbands.
I disagree with much of her comments because the dynamics of modern day
households are a lot more egalitarian than they once were.
While
what suggestions she makes may indeed be helpful to a couple’s relationship, I
think that her advice needs to be followed by both sexes in order to be truly
beneficial.
(f) When I discussed some of Deborah Tannen’s
and Laura Schlessinger’s ideas with people I know, I
received similar responses between men and similar responses between women.
Both
men and women tend to agree that Deborah Tannen’s
theories are easy to follow and account for differences in sexes – but that
both sexes are represented in her research.
However, the differences in opinions arose when I discussed Laura Schlessinger’s theories.
The
men I spoke to overwhelmingly loved Dr. Laura’s concepts. They laughed and agreed to pieces of advice
that I read aloud to them. A few stated
that they felt “that’s what a wife should
do!”
Women, in contrast, reacted with disgust to Dr. Laura’s
advice. They agreed that her advice to
women should be applied to men as well and that she neglects to address the
changing roles of the household with more and more women spending equal amounts
of time in careers as their partners are.
(g) In conclusion, I find it very beneficial to have been exposed
to the various perspectives on gender and marriage. I have definitely taken parts and pieces from
all of the readings presented in the course and applied them to various aspects
of my life and my marriage. While
arguments exist (both positive and negative) for each theory and perspective,
couples can utilize and apply the concepts practically to their own relationship
and hopefully gain something that can work to improve their relationship.
My Report on the Current
Generation
On March 15, Davis Hanai gave
an oral presentation on Reference 5 of the Lecture Notes. This section was titled “My Proposal for TV
Ratings on Anti-Unity Values (AUV)” by Makana Liwai, 2004.
The
ideas presented dealt with the strong occurrence of anti-unity values in many
of our current media sources, primarily through television.
I
agree with the perspectives presented by both Makana Liwai in her report as well as the suggestions presented by
On
April 12, Nancy Miyake presented the section in Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s
book “The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands” that dealt with sexual relations
and the issue of respect towards men. Like
with much of Dr. Laura’s advice, I had a hard time agreeing with her
suggestions that women should cater to men’s sexual desires and appetites and
respect them and their opinions at all times.
This is not to say that I don’t agree with
what she is presenting. Just as I stated
in my discussion of question 15, I disagree with the exclusivity of her advice
solely towards women. I feel that her
suggestions, when applied and adhered to by both women AND men, can work to make
substantial improvements in marriages.
In
addition to
I
found Michelle’s presentation valuable in completing this report, since there
was a tremendous amount of overlap in the content of her discussion and the
goals of this report. One specific
section of Michelle’s presentation discussed the Behavioral Indicators of One’s
Relationship Model. I was struggling
with the percentage overlap calculations between each of the models and
received the needed clarification on how to derive these figures.
Advice
to Future Generations
This course has been a very
interesting academic experience. While
the course requirements initially seemed detailed and overwhelming, the tasks
and assignments were broken up into very manageable subtasks that were easier
to conquer. My biggest piece of advice
to future generations would be to follow directions VERY CAREFULLY. The course is designed with specific steps
that must be addressed and although the directions for assignments are
extremely long and sometimes complicated, as long as you read through it
carefully and adhere to every instruction listed, you will succeed in the
task.
I would also strongly advise
taking the tasks apart and breaking them into smaller ones. Do not wait until the last minute to complete
an assignment. The format of the
assignments in this course makes procrastination a very difficult option. If you work on a task regularly, little by
little, it will be completed before you can ever have a chance to stress out
about it.
For example, in Report 1, there were numerous
sections that had to be written out, with weekly deadlines that had to be
met. When I first read through the
instructions for this report, I thought it would be impossible to
complete! However, I took one task at a
time and worked through them slowly, and lo and behold, I had completed the
report before I knew it. I didn’t feel
pressured or stressed to meet the deadline.
Instead, because I finished it in such a timely manner, I was able to
spend some extra time working on the look and format of my homepage.
Overall, this course has been a very worthwhile
experience. I came into the course with
pre-existing viewpoints and perspectives on gender and marriage. The wide variety of exposure to various
theories and perspectives has allowed me to think more critically and become
more open-minded, understanding, and accepting of other beliefs and values in
marriage. I encourage anyone taking this
course in future generations to really give their all towards succeeding – it
is truly worth the effort! Good Luck!
Class Home Page:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/classhome-g22.htm
My Home Page:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2005/lee/home.htm