Report 2:
My Understanding of the Unity Model of Marriage
By: Carly Kanemaru
Instructions for this report are at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy24/409b-g24-report2.htm
I am answering Questions 4, 6, 10, 11 & 13.
Question 
:
(a) Select
at least one student report on marriage from each of Generation 20, 21, 22, and
23, as listed in the
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy24/409b-g24-lecture-notes.htm#students
(b) Summarize each of the selected reports. Be sure to put a link to the student's report.
(c) Add a General Conclusion Section in which you discuss your reactions to what each student did and said –
(i) their ideas,
(ii) their method,
(iii) their explanations.
(d) Summarize what they gained from doing their reports?
(e)
How do their ideas influence what you yourself think about these issues?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Generation 
Shortcake’s “Gender Unity: Annotated
Bibliography”: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/shortcake/report1.htm
I decided to choose shortcake’s report on
“Gender Unity.” Shortcake began her
report in the format of a proper English paper with a nice preface into what
her class experience with Dr. James was like.
She gave a nice introduction into the course itself and noted Dr. James
for the many years he has dedicated to Psychology and the advancements he has
achieved in driving psychology, the breakdown of theories of Emanuel Swedenborg, marriage analysis and gender
understanding. She notes that this is
the first generation that Dr. James has introduced the Unity model of marriage
to. This was very interesting to me
because I would have thought that Dr. James had taught it to many generations
before this.
Shortcake then completes a short analysis/
review of Psychological reports written and published on the web from the
previous generations of Dr. James’s classes.
Her reviews are very brief and she adds a lot of personal opinions into
her summary which was nice because I felt it showed a little bit about her
personality and kept it from being mundane and boring!
Shortcake adds an enthusiastic introduction,
mentioning how the course’s topic of “Gender and Discourse: How Men and Women
Talk Differently” sparks her interest as what she learns is observed in
settings all around her.
For her report, she covers
four categories: (1) Articles on Gender Relationships, (2) Generational Curriculum: Students Reports on
Gender and Driving, (3) Articles on Analyzing Talk by Dr. Leon James, and (4) Generational
Curriculum: Student Reports on Analysis of Talk.
In category one, Shortcake
analyzes 5 different articles, either from a book or the web, and writes about
the main topics and points of the articles as well as her own opinion and
interpretation of the content and the way the author presented the material.
In category two, Shortcake
goes into the previous generation’s reports on the differences between driving
habits and gender. She summarizes two
reports posted on the web and provides the link to the original report for the
viewer’s option of visiting it for their own comprehension purposes. She adds her personal opinion to the
information posted in the reports and any insights she gains.
In category three, Shortcake
chose two articles found on Dr. James’s site and summarizes the articles based
on analyzing “talk” and conversations.
In the final category,
Shortcake chose a report from a previous generation based on the analysis of
talk. She mentions that the article is
mainly a dialogue exchange over dinner with “not much background information
provided” to analyze.
Shortcake
closes her report with her conclusion which summarizes her adventures through
the completion of the assignments and the benefits she ended up gaining because
of the class’s requirements.
Before
leaving her audience she adds a personal message to the next generation of Dr.
James. She provides not only tips and
pointers but also motivates the next class as well.
General Conclusion on Shortcake from
Generation 20
(I) Ideas- I found myself quite on
a roll when reading through Shortcake’s report.
I appreciated her personal opinions which were quite generously spread
out with her analysis of the articles.
They kept me connected to her comprehension flow and also sparked ideas
into my mind.
I,
like Shortcake, find the topic of Gender Discourse very interesting as
well. I also find very strong importance
in it too! I believe that communication
is the key to almost every major goal in life, especially in our relationships
with others. In a marriage,
communication is essential and to constantly be unaware that we, men and women,
are miscommunicating to one another is a formula for
disaster. I feel that the analysis of
conversation and “talk” should be done by everyone in society. It’s not something taught in school and I
have never even thought about it until taking Dr. James’s class. I agree with Shortcake’s idea that these
communication mishaps are all around us in our everyday lives.
I
also agree with Shortcake on her analysis in Category four. I did my second presentation on Deborah Tannen’s Gender and Discourse section on conversation
styles and agree that it would be difficult to analyze such a dialogue if one
had never read up on the conversation styles often used in communication.
(II) Method- Shortcake used a mixture
of personal opinion with the presentation of information obtained through her
chosen articles. I appreciated her style
of writing which kept me drawn into her thoughts and perceptions of the
material. It kept me on track with her
and made me think of my own interpretations as I read along.
The
visual appearance of the report was nicely written with a smooth layout. The only suggestion I had for her report
method was to enlarge the font. I’m not
sure if my eyes are going bad or not but with the cute but tiny font, I often
had to squint and constantly leaned in towards the computer screen to get a
better look at what I was reading.
(III)
Explanations-
I would give Shortcake an A for her explanations throughout the entire
report. They were very clear and easy to
understand. She gave an excellent spread
of the topics in the articles and made the summaries brief but quite
informative with her own tidbits of experiences and thoughts.
(IV) What the
Author Gained From the Completion of Their Report- Shortcake gained
knowledge into the understanding of conversation analysis and why it’s
important to know the difference between the styles of communication used
between different genders. She admits
that had she never been assigned to do this report, she would have never
discovered the many differences that exist in linguistic strategies. She also learned that it helps to keep an
open mind when it comes to anything in life.
She doesn’t seem to be an individual from a religious background but she
still attempts to understand the teachings of Swedenborg
and the relationship of his experiences with Dr. James’s class content.
(V) How the
Ideas Influence Me- The main influence that Shortcake’s report had on me is the
importance of publishing the material we learn in Dr. James’s class. I realized that there are so many things that
I learned from taking this one course and most of which were things that I
never knew, realized or just never really took the time to think about and
analyze. As I read Shortcake’s report
and thought about how she never knew the many interactions going around her
could easily be misinterpreted communication efforts that both the speaker and
listener are unaware of, it became apparent to me that as students who have
gained this knowledge, it is important for us to publish what we learn and
share our own understanding and knowledge with the many who will probably never
have the opportunity to broaden their minds in the ways that Dr. James has
taught us to.
Generation 
Cheryl Sabey’s “Report 2: My Understanding of the Unity Model of
Marriage” : http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bf2004/sabey/409b-g21-report2.htm
Cheryl
Sabey’s Report 2 begins with a brief introduction
mentioning the four main books used in Dr. James’s Psychology 409b class; “The
Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands” by Dr. Laura Schlessinger,
“Gender and Discourse” by Deborah Tannen, ”Doctrine
of the Wife” and “Conjugial Love” both by Dr.
James. The body of Cheryl’s report is
based on the answering of five questions which she has selected on her own to
answer.
In
the first question, Cheryl summarizes the main concepts and stand points of the
three books used in Dr. James’s class.
She adds her own interpretation and impression by the book and contrasts
the three books from each other.
Cheryl
starts off with Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s book, “The
Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands” and immediately presents Dr. Schlessinger’s bias with men and the expectations she
carries for wives in the survival of their marriage. Cheryl states that “it almost seems like she IS a husband and she
supports all of the husbands around the world.”
Cheryl presents the book with Dr. Schlessinger’s
theories on why women are to blame for the faults and failures of
marriages. Dr. Schlessinger
is portrayed as a woman who believes that a proper and successful marriage is
one where the male remains in the dominance model of marriage. Cheryl also states that Dr. Schlessinger believes in sacrifices made specifically and
exclusively by the women in marriages only and “that women must submit
themselves to their husbands emotionally, physically, and mentally.”
“Gender and Discourse” by
Deborah Tannen is the next book to be summarized and
analyzed. Cheryl describes the book as
an insider’s view into the strategies of conversationalists and presents the
book as an analysis into the common linguistic strategies used by different
genders. Cheryl explains the main points
of the book by presenting Tannen’s observations
including “women’s inferior positions in conversations versus men who dominate
conversations by interruption or aggressiveness.” The linguistic styles common to females are
portrayed to be the opposite to the linguistic styles
commonly used by males, thus presenting the common miscommunication and
impression problems in men and women relationships. Cheryl relates the book to all three models
of marriages; dominance, equity, and unity.
She compares the dominance model with the aggressive conversation habits
used by men to dominate and remain in control of the conversation and those
involved. She relates the equity model
to the compromises made between argument solutions enacted between males and
females. The unity model is represented
with the assumption that a couple who learns to understand the common
linguistic styles used between men and women and achieves the ability to avoid
miscommunication will eventually “pass into this (the unity) model.”
Dr. James’s “The Doctrine of
the Wife” is portrayed by Cheryl as a book in which a wife is born with
“natural ability to achieve conjugial love and they
have spiritual insight of reality.”
Because men are not born with this insight, it is imperative that they
place trust in the women and adapt to the ways needed by a woman. The main order comes from
the woman’s inborn nurturing and drive for the success of happiness of
their partner as well as the relationship.
Women are presented with the main objective of achieving the unity model
of marriage, which is the highest level of marriage satisfaction, where both
partners tend to each other’s needs and wants with the sole intention being “to
make the other person happy.” Cheryl
states that men should change according to the ways women suggest although,
they should keep the “self” parts of their identity that currently posses the
characteristics of the unity model to benefit the relationship.
Cheryl expresses her
opinions on her understanding of the chart of “characteristics/situations in
gender relationships” and the reasons why certain characteristics are agreed or
disagreed with by the three different books.
This explanation of the chart and the books relation to the
characteristics clarifies the main standpoints and views of the authors in marriage
and the relationship categories they fit into; dominance, equity, or
unity.
In the second question,
reads and analyzes six reports posted by the previous generation of students of
Dr James. Cheryl chose Suzanne
Howard, Ryan Lau,
Shortcake, Brigitlynn Duclos, Makana Liwai and Jennifer
Combs. Cheryl starts with a summary of each
student’s report and then concludes with the ideas, method and explanations
presented and observed by the author.
In the third question,
Cheryl provides her own explanation of Table 6 in Dr. James’s lecture
notes. She starts off by mentioning that
Table 6 is a compare and contrast between the three models of marriage;
Dominance, Equity, and Unity. She points
out that in activities listed in the table, ones in which the couple refrains
of remaining binded to one another and instead
portray separation or independence from one another are present in couples
involved in the dominance model, or even the equity model, of marriage.
Cheryl explains the
characteristics of the three models of marriage. The dominance model of marriage is when the
husband controls the relationship, refusing to allow the wife to mold him into
a state where they can enter pure marital success and satisfaction (the Unity
model). The equity model of marriage
involves the strive for equal power by both partners
and the sacrifices made by the partner to “balance” their relationship. It is
important to state the intention behind the effort for equality between a couple (to get something in return). The unity model of marriage is one in which a
couple strives together to achieve marital satisfaction. Cheryl notes that this is only achieved “when
the husbands put down all of the societal pressures to be macho and in control
in the relationship. They find their inner peace and wisdom in their
wives.”
Cheryl creates and presents
her own version of Table 6 by thinking of her own activities and the relation
they pose to the three models of marriage.
She ends this question with a results and discussion observed by the
activity. Cheryl analyzes the characteristics
present in the dominance, equity and unity models and finds the characteristics
to be quite opposing from each other when contrasting the dominance and unity
models of marriage. Although she credits
equality with remaining the tie breaker between the two models, she ends her
conclusion with the fact that couples in the unity model may spend more
maintenance in their relationship but the marital happiness is going to be at
the highest level of satisfaction.
Cheryl analyzes Dr. Schlessinger’s book, “The Proper Care and Feeding of
Husbands,” in the next question. She
takes out 10 brief quotes from the husbands writing to Dr. Schlesinger and uses
Dr. James’s threefold self to explain the husbands
quotes and their characteristics. In all
10 quotes, Cheryl believes all the husbands to be in the dominance model of
marriage. She believes Dr. Schlessinger’s philosophy to be in the dominance model of
marriage as well. Cheryl states that the
author believes in the simple care and sacrifices women need to make to take
care of their husbands who are really just simple creatures. She believes that food, chores and sex should
be administered accordingly to when, where and how the husband desires. Cheryl states that Dr. Schlessinger
believes that men are entitled to this because they are the financial
dominators in the marriage who bring home the money to support the family. Women do not make enough to support the
family so therefore, should be working for their husbands accordingly.
Cheryl ends the question
with her own explanation and opinions.
She ultimately disagrees with Dr. Schlessinger
because she feels that “there is too much emphasis on pleasing the
husband.” She expresses her view that
equality is needed in relationships as opposed to Dr. Schlessinger’s
view of women doing all the work in the relationship to create success. I
believe that Cheryl has been slightly jaded by society and seems to be in the mindframe of settling for a man who will reside their
relationship standards according to the equity model of marriage.
Cheryl’s last question
required her to observe tables 7a and 7b and create two similar tables, one in
which the couples showed feelings of closeness using the three models of
marriage and the other in which the couples showed feelings of not getting
along using the three models of marriage.
Cheryl concludes her report
by stating her enjoyment in the class and that she believed the knowledge she
gained was beneficial to her. She
believes that with her understanding of the three models of marriage, she can
better identify the type of relationship she is in and mentions that the
importance of the oral presentations was the insight gained by other people’s
interpretation of the material.
Cheryl adds advice to the
generations to come which was mainly to keep an open mind and keep up with the
schedules of the class material. She
states that procrastination is not a smart move and is one habit which can
prevent you from succeeding in the class.
General Conclusion on Cheryl Sabey’s Report from Generation 21
(I) Ideas- Cheryl Sabey did not seem to have much personal opinion on the
books read as well as the class.
Although I did like her Table 7a and 7b where she created her own views
of a couple either close to each other or opposing each other according to the
threefold self, I felt that she did not fully understand the importance of the
unity model of marriage to a relationship.
In the first question, Cheryl describes Deborah Tannen’s
“Gender and Discourse” and ends by stating that the book represents the unity
model of marriage because by understanding the linguistic strategies used by
different genders and achieving communication success, “may allow a deep connection between two people
allowing them to slowly pass into this model.”
This is one idea of Cheryl’s that I disagree with. Although I do believe that a deep connection
as well as communication success is a necessary element, I do not believe that
these are the only two things necessary to allow a couple to reach the unity
model of marriage. I feel that in order
to achieve the unity model of marriage, the husband’s intention, attitude and
understanding of himself and his wife must be conformed
by his wife to instill the concepts and characteristics needed to achieve the
unity model of marriage. After reading
her report, I also realized that Cheryl’s ideas reflected her allowance of an
equity model of marriage. When she
stated that “for some submissive wives, the dominance model will work
perfectly” and “things should not be so weighted on one partner but somewhat
evenly spread out” it became apparent that she has been influenced by men in
society to believe that these three models don’t just exist, they are
okay. She seems to believe that the
dominance and equity model are okay for couples who are willing to abide by the
demands of them.
(II) Method- Cheryl’s method was to
simply answer the questions and provide summaries of ideas, thoughts and
concepts present in the reading material.
She did not add too much personal opinion and insight. Her opinions also seemed to reflect the
opinions of the author, except for that of Dr. Schlessinger.
The
visual appearance of the report was very easy on the eyes. Cheryl provided an excellent format for her
report by creating a box for the questions she was going to answer and placing
the questions in bold fonts. She also
used a nice sized font which was easy to read and follow. I appreciated her method of ending paragraphs
and leaving spacing between the next new paragraph.
(III)
Explanations-
Cheryl’s explanations of the content and concepts presented by the authors was excellent. She
provided details on major key points without going overboard with any
unimportant information. Most of the
content presented in the report was necessary for the reader to understand
Cheryl’s answer to the questions.
(IV) What the
Author Gained From the Completion of Their Report- Cheryl gained knowledge
about the three models of marriage that exist.
She began to understand the different characteristics involved with each
model of marriage and used it to analyze her own understanding of which model
her relationship was in. Cheryl states
that the oral presentations were also very beneficial to her because they allowed
her to understand other viewpoints and interpretations made by her classmates
that she might not have been able to come up with on her own.
(V) How the
Ideas Influence Me- I strongly disagree with some of Cheryl’s ideas. I don’t believe that it is okay for some
women to be in a dominance model of marriage and I also don’t believe that the
satisfying relationship is one in which the couples only “spread out the
weight” of the work and effort of the relationship. I believe that the unity model of marriage
exists and that women should strive for a husband who is willing to achieve
this level of marital satisfaction.
Cheryl’s ideas in her report has influenced me because I now realize how
blind women can become to our own understanding and knowledge of what a
relationship needs and the views society tells us a relationship needs in order
to survive. With constant reiteration
from the media, our peers and the relationships we observe, we lose our ability
to see the needs of a relationship and instead conform to the norms that we
observe to be the “truth” when inside, we know better. We know what it takes to achieve the unity
model of marriage and we also know that this model of marriage is one in which
couples will attain the real love that exists and not the disguised “real love”
we see in society and the media.
Generation 
Jenny Kwan’s “Report
2:
Jenny
Kwan immediately starts off by answering 5 questions. In the first question, she explains a
situation on why a couple who seemed to always get
along and are popular amongst their friends get into a fight one night and then
begin to hate and resent each other.
Jenny explains that the couple is probably in the equity model where the
couple may be participating in the same activities and be popular amongst their
friends but they may be striving for balance between remaining equal in power,
control and independence with each other.
She explains that the couple is not in the unity model because a couple
in the unity model of marriage would not hate and resent each other simply over
a disagreement. Jenny explains the
threefold self and introduces the reader to the sensorimotor,
cognitive and affective levels of a person and a relationship. She explains the characteristics associated
with each of the three levels and explains that the couple must enter the
affective levels of their relationship in order to prevent this resentment and
hatred towards each other. She explains
more about the unity model in order to answer “how a married couple can reverse
this flip-flop cycle so that it never occurs again.”
Jenny
ends with expressing her agreement with the theories of the threefold self and
the unity model of marriage. She relates
the material to her own relationship with her boyfriend and believes that they
are currently in the equity model. She
believes that the sensorimotor portion of their
relationship is in the unity model but they need to work on the cognitive and
affective levels together which currently remain in the equity model. Jenny states that she is hopeful of their
future together and strives for his understanding of her interest and wisdom of
creating conjugial love.
In
the next question, Jenny observes the 20 examples of “Behavioral Indicators of One's Relationship Model, along
with Yes/No specifications for the three models “in Table 6. Jenny
pastes the table for the reader and explains that the table is trying to show
the different behaviors of the dominance, equity and unity models of
marriages. She takes two examples of the
behavioral indicators and explains the reasons why the different models of
marriages either specify yes or no with the behavior as a typical behavior of
couples in that model. Jenny then
describes the three models of marriage in her own interpretation.
Jenny creates and provides a
similar table of her own of the behavioral indicators of the marriage model a
couple is in. She calculates the percent
overlap to be “60% overlap in answers with the dominance and equity model but
only a 15% overlap in answers with dominance and the unity model. The
equity model has a 35% overlap in answers with the unity model.” She explains what the percent overlap results
signify in her table and explains why certain models have a higher or lower
overlap than they do with the other model of marriage.
Jenny creates a way for
couples to easily understand the behaviors correlating with each model of
marriage to help them understand what model of marriage they are in and how a
unity model of marriage couple would be behave so that they can achieve the
unity model as well. She ends with her
own commentary to the reader on the importance to realize the behaviors present
in their relationship and the behaviors associated with the unity model of
marriage in order to achieve the highest level of marital success.
In the third question, Jenny
analyzes Dr. Schlessinger’s “The Proper Care and
Feeding of Husbands.” She starts with a
summary of the book explaining the major concepts that Dr. Schlessinger
expresses. She presents Dr. Schlessinger’s ideal role of a perfect wife and husband and
the efforts needed by the wife to satisfy her husband for a successful
marriage. She explains that Dr. Schlessinger includes lots of quotes from her callers and
analyzes the relationship problems by blaming them on the wife. She states the Dr. Schlessinger
feels that women are the ones who consistently try to control their husbands by
nagging them and refraining from their womanly duties of satisfying their
husbands which results in the failure of their marriage. She also includes that Dr. Schlessinger’s stand point on marriage is “very
traditional.”
Jenny takes 10 quotes from
husbands in the Dr. Schlessinger’s book and analyzes
all ten by explaining the situation the quote is coming from, what model of
marriage the husband is in and the relation the quote has to Dr. James’s three
models of marriage. She ends by
expressing her disapproval with Dr. Laura Schlessinger
and her viewpoints of women and their roles in relationships. She states that “she only sees one side of
the sexes - the male’s side and tends to agree with them.” She states the importance of a household
wife’s completion of chores, cooking, cleaning, and child rearing and related
that to the importance of the duties the woman does that a man does not do for
the family. She states that she does not
agree with a single thing that Dr. Schlessinger says
in her book.
In
the next question, Jenny looks at Anti-Unity Values (AUV’s)
listed in Table 9 in the lecture notes and posts them for the reader. She then chooses three television shows,
“Friends”, “I’m Sorry, I Love You,” and “Full House,” and explains scenes which
clearly present many anti-unity values.
She then describes the sensorimotor,
cognitive, and affective aspects of the scenes that include anti-unity
values. Jenny notices that through her
observations, the media contains numerous anti-unity values that it becomes a
necessity in a show. However, she also
starts to look for unity values and realizes that the shows do not show
any! She explains this by stating that
it could be due to the freedom that men are so unwilling to surrender that
prevents the unity model of marriage from happening. She also explains that anti-unity values are
so popular in the media because they create drama and many times, people enjoy
watching shows with drama and without anti-unity values, people would not be as
interested in the shows. Also, the
comedy comes from the imperfect and many audiences appreciate comedy in their
shows.
In
the last question, Jenny describes the concepts of the “unity model of
marriage, the eternal significance of marriage and the mental state of the
couple’s threefold self.” She explains
that the unity model is the highest state of marriage in which the couples work
to achieve the highest level of marital success. Jenny states that “this state can only be achieved when the husband
allows his wife’s inner wisdom to lead his outward intelligence.” Jenny describes a typical couple in the unity
model of marriage which displays the reasons why the couple will be completely
satisfied and happy with their love for one another. She explains the resistances that are common
by men which prevent conjugial love. She also explains that she is not very
religious so the eternal state of marital happiness in heaven was a little hard
for her to understand.
Jenny explains the unity
model to her boyfriend and her sister and explains their reactions towards
it. Her boyfriend sees the unity model
as the dominance model for women to control men. He flips the model around but claims to
believe that Jenny’s inner wisdom is important to him because he appreciates
her. He also agrees that couples re-unite
in heaven and then tries to force his beliefs on her because he feels that if
she does not believe then they will not be together in heaven.
Jenny’s sister sees the
unity model as ideal but also feels that it is a very hard model of marriage to
achieve due to the stubborn characteristics of men and their unwillingness to trust
in women and let go of their freedom.
She does hope that her and her boyfriend will achieve this model of
marriage someday but remains confident and hopeful.
Jenny selects three students
from Dr. James’s previous generation and analyzes their reports. She chooses Tiffany Lee, Michele Ching, and Tawny Antonio.
She summarizes their oral presentations and expresses her agreement or
disagreement with the material for the oral presentation.
Jenny closes with a message
of advice to the next generation. She,
like the others in the previous generations, believe
that it is important to not procrastinate and to keep an open mind. She understands that it may be difficult to
understand the material in the beginning but believes that she has learned so
much in this class and that it is so important for students to learn and
understand how the models of marriage and the threefold self apply to them in
their own lives.
General Conclusion on Jenny Kwan from
Generation 22
(I) Ideas- Jenny had amazing insights
to the material and I was amazed that her ideas were so similar to mines. She had the same viewpoints and opinions that
I have on relationships and the three models of marriage. Jenny’s ideas influenced the proof that women
really do have the inborn characteristics of striving for the unity model of
marriage and her effort in her relationship with her boyfriend to get him to
one day realize and trust her attempts to mold him into the best person he can
be proves that women really are interested in the survival of their love,
marital success and happiness.
(II) Method- Jenny’s method was to
answer the questions and be straightforward with the reader. She added not only answers to her questions but
her own viewpoints on the material as well as a little personal information
about her own life and how the material related to her. I liked this because I felt that it pushed
the reader to do the same and analyze where they stand as well with the threefold
self and the three models of marriages.
The
only advice that I have for Jenny would be to change the size of her font. It was a little too small and a little hard
on my eyes. I would have also
appreciated more spacing in between her paragraphs. It provides more organization and makes it
easier to read.
(III)
Explanations-
Jenny was excellent at explaining the class material. It was very obvious that she had read Dr.
James’s lecture notes and tried to really analyze and understand it because she
was able to easily teach it to the reader in her report. Jenny does not overwhelm the reader with too
much tidbits but rather the main points and concepts that are necessary for the
reader to know. Her personal relations
to the topics also paved way for better understanding.
(IV) What the
Author Gained From the Completion of Their Report- I really feel that Jenny
gained a lot of knowledge from the completion of this report. She came to a self-realization of her own
inborn ability to strive for a unity model relationship while also realizing
the model of marriage her current relationship was in. By finishing this report, she also better
understood the threefold self and the report also forced her to realize what
parts of the threefold self she and her boyfriend had to work on. She also realized that her relationship was
strong on the sensorimotor level but needed to
improve the cognitive and affective.
Also, by completing the behavioral indicators of the three models of
marriage, she was able to see the behaviors needed in her relationship with her
boyfriend to work towards the unity model.
The completion of this report was like a self-help course!
(V) How the
Ideas Influence Me- I am influenced by Jenny’s report because I feel that she has grasped
the concept of the threefold self as well as the three models of marriages and
the importance of the unity model of marriage.
I am happy because this is the first report that I felt I connected to
as far as views and personal opinions on the theories. I agree with Jenny’s ideas and appreciated
her approach towards encouraging the reader to gain knowledge through her
understanding of the class’s material.
Generation 
Lacey Ethier’s “Report 2:
My Understanding of the Unity Model of Marriage ”: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bf2005/ethier/ethier-409b-g23-report2.htm
Lacey
begins her report immediately by answering her five questions. In the first question, she contrasts the four
views in the four books used in Dr. James’s class: Deborah Tannen’s “Gender Issues”, Dr. Laura Schlessinger
in “The Proper Care and Feeding of
Husbands”, Joshua Coleman’s “The
Lazy Husband”, and Swedenborg in “The Unity Model of Marriage.”
She starts with Deborah Tannen
and summarizes the linguistic patterns of each gender listed in the book. She believes that Tannen’s
book helps “to better understand how the
different linguistic tendencies of men and women can affect how they
communicate with each other.“
In Dr. Schlessinger’s
book, Lacey explains the dominance model that Dr. Schlessinger
is in and the view that women must nurture and abide to their husband’s every want
and need because the men are the one’s who support their family by bringing
home the paycheck. Lacey is upset by
this and states that Dr. Schlessinger “blames women
for all the uncaring, insensitive, or cruel things their husbands do.” Dr. Schlessinger’s
views of the specific acts that women must engage in to make their husbands
happy and to be a good wife are to have sex with their husbands, regardless of
if they want to or not, and look beautiful to keep up with the male’s standard
of what a women should look like. By
doing this, Dr. Schlessinger believes that the male
will immediately be grateful and begin to do whatever it takes to please the
wife.
In
Coleman’s book, she states his idea that men feel guilty about not doing that
much housework and that the solution is for wives to “play into their guilt” to
trick their husbands into helping out around the house. Lacey also mentions the tips that Coleman
provides to wives on how to bargain with their husbands if they continue to not
help out.
In
the summary of the Unity model, Lacey states that the wife is shown to be the
enlightened one and therefore should be allowed to make all the final decisions
in the relationship. She states that the
husband should put aside his independence and conjoin with his wife and do
everything he can to please her. Her
happiness should be his main concern. He
should not do what she disapproves us and should listen to what she wants and
then do it.
Lacey
creates a chart of her own to explain the major concepts of the course and
whether the four books comply or go against these concepts of the unity model
of marriage. She believes that it is
difficult to understand the models of marriages strictly from the chart. She expresses that she most closely related
to the Joshua Coleman book and has a difficult time understanding and believing
Swedenborg’s views on the afterlife. She also lacks self-confidence in her
decision making skills and believes that she may not always make the right
decision and therefore cannot fully believe in the unity model. She agrees with Coleman’s bargaining
strategies and the equity model of marriage.
Lacey does believe that Swedenborg’s views on
marriage are ideal and “comforting” but finds it difficult to believe.
Lacey’s
answer to the next question involves explanation into why a couple who appears
to be so in love with each other, involved in similar activities and popular
amongst their friends could get into a disagreement and then show resentment
and hatred toward each other.
Lacey
explains that the couple has not yet reached the unity model of marriage and
talks about the threefold self. She
believes that the couple is fighting and feeling resentment towards each other
because they have only joined at the sensorimotor
level.
Lacey
believes that the solution is for the couple to realize what level their
relationship is currently on and begin working towards the unity model of
marriage. She describes Swedenborg’s view of conjugial
love and believes that the couple will never end up in this situation again if
they are able to work hard enough to reach the level of the unity model of
marriage. Because the husband is
currently hanging on to his independence and freedom, Lacey feels that the wife
is currently unable to avoid the conflicts of their marriage. Lacey presents Table 1b to
the reader and explains the different levels of the threefold self and
their interactions with the three different models of marriages.
Lacey
then lists 12 “ways men resist mental intimacy” and 9 “ways men work towards
mental intimacy.” She interviews women
from ages 18-42 and discovered that women could describe ways men resist mental
intimacy in their own lives as well as ways that the men in their lives work
towards mental intimacy. She believes
this result may be from the constant change in society and our cultures and
views this experiment as proof that not all men are resistant to mental
intimacy.
In
the next question, Lacey starts off by explaining that “sexual blackmail” is
the act of a husband forcing his wife to have sex with him when she does not
want to. She believes that men have
always held the more dominant positions in society and therefore were granted
the power to create submissive wives and force their wives to give in to them. She explains that a common reason why a wife
may resist sexual intimacy with her husband is that women crave mental intimacy
as well and when they are deprived of it, it becomes difficult and almost
impossible to want to engage in sexual intimacy.
Lacey
mentions that Dr. Schlessinger is not an advocate for
this common view from women and recalls Dr. Schlessinger’s
opposing view that women “owe” their husbands sex and other desires due to the
husband’s paycheck. Lacey explains that
the man must come to realize that the wife is resisting sexual intimacy to
signal change for her husband to provide more mental intimacy. Lacey mentions that the husband must learn to
change and “learn how his wife likes to
be touched and loved.”
Lacey ends with her reaction
stating that as a woman, she has always felt “angered and frustrated by the
double bind women are put in. If we do not have sex with our husband he
will treat us badly and/or be unfaithful. If we have sex with our husband
even when we don’t want to, we end up feeling slutty
and used.” She disagrees with Dr. Phil
and Dr. Schlessinger and says that more sex will not
in turn result in more mental intimacy.
Lacey posts Table1c for the
reader to view and then creates 3 of her own versions of this table, housework,
jealousy, and sex. In each table, the
main topic is related to the threefold self in the three different models of
marriage and the actions occurring are examples of the behavior of a couple in
that stage. Lacey does feel that the
table was a bit complex and hard to understand but tries to describe things the
best way she can by using the dominance, equity and unity model to describe the
behaviors in the tables.
Lacey starts the fourth
question by posting Table 9 from the lecture notes which lists 23 examples of
anti-unity values (AUVs) that are often seen and sold
in the media. She selects three
different sitcoms that are popular on television to explain and point out the AUVs present in a particular episode. The three sitcoms she used were “Everybody
Loves Raymond,” “Sex and the City,” and “Desperate Housewives.”
Lacey then explains each AUV
in detail and relates them to the threefold self and the three models of
marriage. She mentions why the AUVs are negative to the public who views them and mentions
that she is “not surprised” to see so many in popular television shows. She believes that these anti-unity values are
present because it makes the characters more interesting to watch because most
people in society would never want to be them.
She believes that entertainment values is the
main reasons why AUVs are so increasingly popular in
the media.
Lacey expresses concern that
although these shows are meant for people to be entertained, many people are so
oftenb exposed to these AUVs
they watch over and over in the media that they begin to think of AUVs as part of reality.
People can be mislead into thinking that the AUVs
are okay and therefore may begin to accept them in their own relationships and
marriages which can be ultimately detrimental!
On Lacey’s last question,
Lacey looks up the four authors of the books used in Dr. James’s class on the
internet. She lists her findings on the
various mixed reviews by those who have listened to or read Dr. Schlessinger’s theories.
She mentions that there are some people who even started groups to
condemn and “disenfranchise” her radio show.
Lacey’s results on searching
for sites on Deborah Tannen were more official in
demeanor. She was able to find Tannen’s official website as well as educational websites
that lead to Tannen’s lectures and guest speaking
events. There were also sites listed on
the reviews of Tannen’s many books on linguistic
strategies.
Joshua Coleman was found to
have an official website, a site with a short review on his books, and links to
other sites which sell his books.
However, Lacey notes that the author shares the same name with a new and
upcoming celebrity actor. She mentions
the confusion with the sites and finds most of the results from her search to
lead to information, pictures and relations to the actor rather than the
author.
Emanuel Swedenborg
was said by Lacey to have many sites.
She mentions her surprise on the many links on his work as well as his
personal life and experiences. She notes
that Swedenborg probably tied with Dr. Schlessinger on the most sites found.
Lacey notes her findings and
other peoples opinions and reviews on the authors
found on the internet. She also mentions
which authors she believes to hold the most influence on people. Lacey believes that Dr. Schlessinger
has the most impact on people, whether it is positive or negative. She feels that Joshua Coleman had the least
influence on the public. She believes
that Tannen is viewed more as a
educator and does not rouse too many people in the general public. With Swedenborg,
Lacey believes that although his teachings and life lessons do not influence a
broad variety of the public, she does feel that Swedenborg
deeply moves and influences those that do understand and believe in his
teachings.
Lacey mentions that she is
not too surprised that most of the reactions and web site findings were on Dr. Schlessinger. She
was, however, surprised to see the many links and sites on Tannen
because she assumed there would not have been as many as there were. She was also shocked with the amount of sites
associated and mentioning Swedenborg. She talks with her friends and mentions their
opinions and thoughts on the authors and their teachings. All of her friends did not seem to like Dr. Schlessinger and thought “she was crazy.” She felt that Swedenborg
was the hardest to describe to her friends.
Lacey then analyzes three students reports from the previous generation of Dr. James’s
class. She chooses Heidi Nakamura, Laina Beard, and Michelle Ching. She discusses what each student did in their
report and what she agreed or disagreed with.
Lacey also provides advice to the next generation before she ends her
report. Her most important tip was to
follow directions carefully and keep up with all assignment dates and
deadlines. She believes that by
following the schedule, a student can achieve success in the class.
General Conclusion on from Generation 23
(I) Ideas- I feel that Lacey’s
ideas on the Unity model of marriage lacked true understanding. I feel that she restated what was taught in
class without truly grasping the concepts and relating them to herself personally and how it affects her and those around
her.
(II) Method- Lacey’s method was to
answer the questions while providing her own touch of
personality and beliefs. I appreciated
the easy-reading format of her report and the size font she used was perfect
for my viewing pleasure!
(III)
Explanations-
I thought that Lacey did a good job on explaining the threefold self and three
models of marriages in general but I do not feel that she really took in the
material and gave it much thought.
However, her explanations contained enough information and personal
insight for the average reader.
(IV) What the
Author Gained From the Completion of Their Report- I actually feel that
Lacey was able to teach herself more about the threefold self and the three
models of marriage by completing this report.
However, I do not feel that the material will truly stick with her
because she did not internalize and truly think about how it all applies to her
and everyone around her.
(V) How the
Ideas Influence Me- The main influence that Lacey’s ideas had on me was that I can now
see how society has the ability to transform a woman’s inner knowledge and
truly mislead us to believe in a man’s outward intelligence. Lacey started off her report mentioning that
she agrees most with Joshua Coleman and his theories and this upset me. I feel that a woman should not have to learn
“bargaining strategies and tips” in order to get her husband to help out around
the house. I also disagree that the equity
model is a model that is fine for couples to stay in and can still be happy
in. I believe that the husband truly
needs to understand the woman’s inner need to look out for her husband’s best
interest and the best interest of the marriage and trust in her to make the
right decisions. Thus, if the wife tells
her husband to do something, it is not because she is trying to dominate him
but rather, asking him to do something which will ultimately benefit the
relationship.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 
:
(a) Analyze the book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands by Laura Schlessinger, summarizing its perspective, and discussing the author’s philosophy or psychology of relationships between men and women.
(b) Find 10 brief quotes from what the husbands wrote, analyzing each one, showing the character of their threefold self. Use the unity model in the Lecture Notes to characterize the threefold self of the husbands that wrote to her.
(c)
How do you see Dr. Laura's approach and what is your evaluation of it?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Analysis
on Schlessinger’s “The Proper Care & Feeding of
Husbands”
This book was
about Laura Schlessinger’s views on the roles of
wives and husbands and the reasons and solutions for failing marriages. Dr. Laura, who is not really a doctor, views
men as simple creatures who do not need and want very much. They only need the necessities to survive
such as food, attention and sex. She
believes that because men are the breadwinners of the family, it is clearly the
wife’s duty to tend to, please and satisfy their simple minded husbands in any
way the husband desires. She believes
that the only reason why men cheat on their wives is because the wives are
selfish and ungrateful women who are depriving their husbands of the needs they
want and deserve. She feels that if
women simply submit to the every want and need of their husbands that in turn,
their husbands will treat them with respect, honor and love them
unconditionally. Dr. Laura comes from a
very male dominant view on marriage and advises women to always put their
husbands first or else they are failing as wives and therefore should expect
the results of infidelity, negative attitudes and a failing marriage.
I have
listed 10 quotes from men who have written to Dr. Laura in her book. With each quote, I will analyze the husbands
writing and their relation to the threefold self.
1. “What ever happened to sweetness? If you act like a Bitch, you will be treated
like a Bitch.” – Clifford
Clifford is in
the dominance model of marriage. He
displays his cognitive thoughts about his wife and is unconcerned about her
well-being and what she is trying to communicate to him. Instead, he interprets her plea for help as a
reason to mistreat and abuse her through his actions, thoughts and feelings
towards her. He is only concerned about
his sensorimotor, cognitive and affective levels and
not his wife’s.
2. “They run around in ‘mother attire’ all the
time rather than what they used to when they were out fishing for ‘father,’ and
this continual visual turns most men off or pushes them elsewhere…” – Ken
Ken is in the
dominance model of marriage as well. His
focus is on the physical appearance of his wife and not her cognitive and
affective bond with him. He believes
that her lack of “personal upkeep” is a valid reason to cheat and wander
towards other places to satisfy himself. His cognitive level tells him that it is okay
to cheat because she deserves it for not dressing up for him and looking
pretty. At Ken’s affective level, he
feels she is to blame and resents her for “making him cheat.” His sensorimotor
level tells him that he needs to be physically touched and admired by a pretty
woman, regardless if it is his wife or not.
3. “When that need (sex) isn’t met, the man
begins to look at his wife as just a roommate who doesn’t pay her share of the
rent but continues to harp on him about leaving the toilet seat up.” – Chris
Chris is
obviously in the dominance sensorimotor level. He is only concerned about sex which
ultimately pleases him and not his wife.
He is not concerned about how she feels about doing sexual acts and only
concerned about the amount of pleasure and how often he receives it. He resents his wife because he is not in the
unity or even the equity model. He does
not strive to please his wife in any way: sensorimotor,
cognitive, or affective.
4. “When I do catch my wife in a ‘willing mood,’
I have to endure twenty minutes of her complaining about this, that, and the
other thing before I get to touch her.” – Bruce
Bruce is not
listening to his wife’s cry for help. He
is only concerned with the sensorimotor actions he
craves from his wife and the pleasure he will reap from it. He is unconcerned about her feelings,
thoughts and the many tasks she has difficulty accomplishing on her own. According to the Unity model of marriage,
Bruce should not be waiting to “catch his wife in a willing mood” but should
create an environment where she will always be in a willing mood because he is
taking care of her sensorimotor, cognitive and
affective needs. This ultimately will
bring them together and she will stop complaining and will love the intimacy
they will share.
5. “My wife still doesn’t get it. I would be much more willing to do the chores
she wants me to do if I got some show of appreciation for doing them.” –
Charlie
Charlie needs to
move out of the dominance model of the threefold self. By remaining unwilling to do the chores,
regardless of how his wife feels, he is dominating and forcing her to do all of
them on her own. If he were in the Unity
model of marriage, Charlie would be concerned with her sensorimotor
actions and cognitively strive to help her so that they can achieve affective
unity together for the benefit of their marriage. Charlie needs to look beyond the situation
and focus on the affect it has on his wife and their relationship.
6. “Recognize that he (your husband) has his own
ways of doing things.” – L
According to the
unity model of marriage, a husband and wife must let go of their differences
and work together to strive for unity in their relationship. If doing things “her way” are what the wife
believes is needed in order to create a lasting relationship together, L must
need to learn to trust her inner knowledge and move focus on her affective and
cognitive well-being.
7. “Know who your husband is and accept
him. He is what he is.” – Bill
Bill appears to
be in the dominance model of marriage.
He is clinging on to his independence and refuses to trust and conjoin
with his wife, thus preventing the unity model of marriage. In order to achieve the unity model, Bill
needs to work at improving the qualities his wife notices that are preventing
their marriage from achieving conjugial love.
8. “Permit us to have opinions, feelings, and
thoughts that do not agree with yours.” – Llyod
Llyod is clinging onto his
independence and freedom and remains in the dominance model where he refuses to
conjoin with his wife. According to the
unity model of marriage, a man must let go of his own personal desires to
remain outward intelligent and conjoin with his wife to gain her inner
knowledge.
9. “I am
tired of women putting all men down for wanting and needing affection. Aren’t
people in love supposed to want to kiss, hug and make love?” – Ron
Ron is only concerned about the sensorimotor level of his marriage with his wife. Ron needs to stop thinking in a male dominant
view of how he feels and thinks and focus on why his wife is not engaging in
physical intimacy with him. He needs to
take care of her cognitive and affective levels in order to receive the sensorimotor actions he desires.
10. “My wife feels that if she doesn’t remind me
again and again, something won’t get done.” – Evan
Evan needs to
listen to his wife and help her with what she needs. He appears to be in the equity sensorimotor level because he is trying to help her with
some of the household chores and yet does not partake in it because he wants to
help her but because she continues to ask for his help. Evan needs to help her when she asks so that
he doesn’t make his wife repeat over and over again. If he was in the Unity model, he would love
to help her, knowing that it made her happy and ultimately brought them closer
together.
My View on Laura Schlessinger
I completely
disagree with Laura Schlessinger and every single
thing she says in her entire book. It blows
me away to think that someone can actually give such advice and truly believe
that women are at fault for every single problem in relationships. She clearly comes from the dominance model
and believes that women are so much lower in worth and value when it comes to
men. She pretty much advises all women
to become slaves and not wives. She is
encouraging rape in marriages by forcing women to believe that it is “their
obligation to meet the sexual demands of their husband.”
It worries me to
think that so many people have read her books and listen to her talk
shows. The advice she gives is
disastrous to a woman’s self-esteem, dignity and overall well-being. There is nothing in the book that describes
the need for a husband to appreciate, love and care for his wife, just as much
as she cares about him. Laura Schlessinger advocates the belief that affairs are results
of a failing wife and this is just SO not true!
Affairs occur because men go out and cheat on their wives. This is what an affair is. Affairs occur from husbands who refuse to let
go of their independence and remain separated from their wives in the affective
and cognitive levels.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 
:
(a)
Consider Tables 1a, 1b, 1c in the Lecture Notes, which is in the Section called
Sensorimotor, Cognitive, and Affective Conjunction
It shows how to construct an ennead
chart using the threefold self and the three levels of mentality creating the
preference for each model. One illustration is given in the area of sexual
behavior.
(b)
Explain what has been discussed in class and the Lecture Notes as "sexual
blackmail." Describe the development of your thinking regarding this
concept, from initial reaction to now. Collect some data on how others you know
react to this concept when you explain it to them. How do you interpret their
reactions and comments?
(c) Copy Table 1c and replace the characterization of each illustration (in each cell) into an example of your own. Think of a couple you know in reality or from TV. The three tables should cover these three topics:
(i) housework
(ii) jealousy, and
(iii) a third area of your own choosing.
(c) Discuss what these data show or prove.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Sexual blackmail” is when a husband uses
any type of method to make his wife feel obliged to have sex with him against
her will and true inner feelings.
Although a husband and wife may have had sex many times before, aspects
of the relationship may have changed which cause the wife to feel declined
toward sexual intimacy with her husband.
When a husband overlooks this and instead initiates ways to force her
into giving into him sexually, this is called sexual blackmail.
When we first started to discuss the topic
of sexual blackmail in class, I was already upset. Just hearing the two words put together, I
immediately had my own interpretation of what sexual blackmail was and how
easily it could be used against me. My
first interpretation of sexual blackmail was that it was when a man used the
many things he may have done for me as a reason for me to return the favor with
sex.
I notice this all the time in so many men I
know. I know of a guy, who I’ll refer to
as Chris in this report, who loves superficial women. He loves to be around them and loves to say
he knows them. If a girl is pretty, he
will do whatever necessary to get them to notice him, get them to know him and
get to know the girl. Last but not
least, he will do whatever it takes to get them in bed with him a.k.a.
sex. This is what he prides himself
in. You can find Chris often in the
young social scene of
I rarely talk to him but when I do, our
conversations always start off with,
“So, how have you been?”
Often times, my reply is,
“Oh, just the same ol’ routine! Finishing up school and working!”
However, when I ask Chris the same question,
his response is always,
“I met this girl and I’m so close to sealing
the deal. She’s coming to the club
tonight! You gotta
see her!” or
“Ah, you know me. Different girl, different day!” or
“I slept with this girl and man, she’s getting all psycho on me! She keeps calling me and leaving me messages
and it’s like, ‘get a clue.’ I hope I don’t see her! She’s SO not my type.”
I’m pretty sure you can figure out why I
don’t associate very often with Chris.
Hearing him talk just makes me sick.
One day, I ran into him at the club and saw him a bit upset. Out of kindness, I asked him what was
wrong. He told me that he met a girl who
was really pretty and has been taking her to dinners and to the clubs and
buying all her drinks and she still hasn’t let him do anything with her. He expresses his anger by mentioning that
“men don’t do things for free” and “everything has its price, even when you
can’t see the tag.”
This got me thinking and I asked a few of my
close guy friends if they believed in the same theory of Chris. They disagreed with him but all agreed that
many men do think that way. When we
first started talking about sexual blackmail, this was the first thing that
came to my mind because I thought of Chris as a pure example of a perpetrator
who used drinks and dinners as a way to tally up the “favors” that were
expected in return from the female. Of
course, these “favors” were all sexual favors which Chris, and apparently many
other men, believe they are entitled to.
However, when we started to actually discuss
what the definition of sexual blackmail was in the class, I became even more
upset. To think of a marriage, I picture
two people who care and love each other so much that they decided to spend the
rest of their lives together for all of eternity. I think of two best friends who trust each
other more than anyone. Then, to think
that sexual blackmail is something so common in marriages where the husband
forces his wife to have sexual intercourse or sexual intimacy with him when she
is unwillingly and it is against her will is upsetting and depressing. To think that a husband would betray his wife
in such a way as to force her to degrade herself and not only make her do
something she does not want to do but to psychologically play with her mind
into thinking that she owes it to him just blows me away.
I mentioned the idea of sexual blackmail to
my two best friends. Both of them were
extremely upset and one of my friends said that she would never let her husband
put her in a position to make her feel used and mistreated, especially when it
came to her own body. My other friend
showed more compassion by expressing her concern for the women who are actually
out there in the world and submit to their husband’s demands even when it came
to abusing their bodies for the pleasure of their husbands.
We all began a discussion on how it’s really
not fair for women because we are always exposed to the idea that men are
sexual beings and need sex and therefore, when a man wants it, he will get
it. We all agreed that at times women
who are married can feel trapped because if they do not submit to their
husbands demand on having sex, their husbands may cheat on them and blame the
wives for it. We all came to the
conclusion that it shows that men are more concerned, more often times than
not, with their own benefits and well being than the well being of “the one
they love.”
This is Table 1c from the Lecture Notes.
This is
Table 1c (READ
TABLE FROM BOTTOM UP)
|
MODEL
THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS |
THREEFO0LD
SELF |
||
|
SENSORIMOTOR |
COGNITIVE |
AFFECTIVE |
|
|
level 3 |
7
|
8 |
9
|
|
level 2 |
4 |
5
|
6
AFFECTIVE
|
|
level 1 |
1 sensations
and pleasures felt as consequences of maintaining control over the
partner |
2
involved
with thoughts about how to keep pressuring the partner to cooperate or be
non-resistant |
3
|
I have
created three of my own tables based on Table1c covering 3 different topics:
housework, jealousy, and sex.
HOUSEWORK 
This is Table 1c (READ TABLE FROM
BOTTOM UP)
|
MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS |
THREEFO0LD SELF |
||
|
SENSORIMOTOR |
COGNITIVE |
AFFECTIVE |
|
|
level 3 |
7
|
8 Focus placed on the effect of household chores on
the unity of their relationship |
9 Both strive for partner’s happiness to ensure
unity in their relationship |
|
level 2 |
4
|
5 Both check upon each others duties to ensure
equality of the chore distribution |
6 AFFECTIVE Both are motivated by the equal distribution |
|
level 1 |
1 Wife forced to complete all household
chores |
2 Husband criticizes wife if she is unable to complete
all household chores |
3
|
JEALOUSY 
This is Table 1c (READ TABLE FROM
BOTTOM UP)
|
MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS |
THREEFO0LD SELF |
||
|
SENSORIMOTOR |
COGNITIVE |
AFFECTIVE |
|
|
level 3 |
7
|
8 Focus placed on the unity of their relationship
rather than the need for opposite sex contact |
9 Both strive for partner’s happiness to ensure
unity and prevent jealousy |
|
level 2 |
4
|
5 Both check up on each other to disprove notion of
infidelity in the other’s opposite sex contact |
6 AFFECTIVE Both compete with each other for opposite sex
contact |
|
level 1 |
1 Husband constricts and watches over wife’s
actions based on the idea of cheating |
2 Husband believes wife is guilty until proven
innocent of infidelity |
3
|
SEX 
This is Table 1c (READ TABLE FROM
BOTTOM UP)
|
MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS |
THREEFO0LD SELF |
||
|
SENSORIMOTOR |
COGNITIVE |
AFFECTIVE |
|
|
level 3 |
7
|
8 Both are focused on the effect of sexual intimacy
to the unity of their relationship |
9 Both strive to please partner’s sexual needs and
wants to ensure happiness and unity
together |
|
level 2 |
4
|
5 Husband’s focus is on the return of sexual
pleasure from wife by providing equal sex acts |
6 AFFECTIVE Husband finds pleasure in getting his wife to
return the sex acts he desires that she dislikes |
|
level 1 |
1 Husband forces wife to engage in sex acts
exclusively for his pleasure |
2 Husband focuses on level of pleasure being
received from wife |
3
|
What
This Table Demonstrates and Proves
These tables are examples of how the threefold self and
the three models of marriage govern the actions of a husband in each level of
the relationship. Each table has it’s own situation and the typical husband’s behavior in
each level is shown to the reader.
At the dominance level, the husband is purely concerned
with himself in every way. His goal is
to get his wife to satisfy every aspect of his needs, wants and desires. The wife is simply a controlled being whose
main objective is to keep up with the level of demands created by her
husband. The wife will partake in these
demands at the dominance level in an effort to please her husband and keep
their relationship going. The husband is
not concerned with any part of satisfaction for his wife’s physical, mental and
emotional states.
At the equity level, the husband is still purely
concerned with himself in every way.
However, the husband will strive to “meet his wife half way” in her
physical, mental and emotional states to ensure the return of the pleasures provide
by his wife. His intention is to give
her reasons on why she must complete his demands as a way of “owing him back
the favors.”
At the unity level, the husband is purely concerned
with his wife’s emotional, physical and mental well being. His intentions are to continue to please her
and make her happy because with these actions, the husband and wife are brought
closer together. The ultimate goal is to
achieve complete unity and intimacy between husband and wife. Therefore, the husband will give up his
freedom and independence gladly in an effort to conjoin with his wife and
benefit from her inner knowledge. This
will result in the highest degree of marital satisfaction by both husband and
wife.
The sensorimotor level
describes the physical and everyday pleasures of life. Behavior from this area often tends to result
from actions we can observe with our own eyes.
The cognitive level describes the thoughts and ideas
behind the actions made. These are
things that we would not be able to physically see with our eyes but can often
assume and guess. The cognitive level is
all about the focus of the action. The
intentions behind sensorimotor actions are the main
focus in the cognitive level.
The affective level describes the inner feelings,
emotions and perceptions behind the actions made. These are also things that are not visible by
the eye.
The tables prove that the Unity model of marriage is
the best and most beneficial to both the husband and wife. Instead of only one person experiencing
pleasure (dominance model), or husband and wife fighting in the
strive to keep things equal and both not being fully pleased (equity
model), the unity model provides complete satisfaction and happiness by both
husband and wife. With this satisfaction
and happiness, both partners are happy and conjoin in love with each
other. Complete intimacy is created and
fights should rarely occur and prolong to the extent of the ruins of the
relationship when such a high marital satisfaction is achieved between both
partners.
With each example on housework, jealousy and sex, it
is clear to see who is being pleased and the problems that will occur due to
the unequal distribution and satisfaction by both partners. In the unity model, it is clear to see how
the partners will behave, what they are thinking and what they are feeling.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 
:
(a) Create three dialogues between a husband and wife. Each dialog should represent one of the three models of marriage discussed in the Lecture Notes. Each dialog should contain at least 10 numbered talking turns by each of the two partners, and no more than 20 each. A talking turn can be as brief as a nod or grunt, and as long as several sentences. Preface each dialog with a paragraph explaining the context of the conversation and the topic.
(b) Analyze and contrast the dialogues to show how
they each illustrate one of the models. Focus on the threefold self (this is a
requirement). Use the entire ennead chart, or parts thereof, to discuss and
contrast the dialog segments you analyze.
(a) Dialogue Situation for the 3
Models of Marriage
A married couple is in their living room. The wife, Lisa, is a housewife married to her
husband, Brent, who works at a construction firm. He has just come home not too long ago and
she begins to tell him about her long day of household chores and expresses
concern that she has not yet completed the chores for the day. Brent is watching television while as she
talks to him.
Dialogue:
Dominance Model of Marriage
1.
Lisa: “I’m exhausted from today’s work and I
still haven’t finished the laundry. In
fact, I haven’t even started cooking. I
feel like just knocking out!”
Brent: “Well, I guess you better hurry up
and finish the laundry and cook my dinner because I’m hungry and I need clean
clothes tomorrow!”
2.
Lisa:
“I’m thinking about ordering pizza for you. I know you love Pizza Hut and they have a
special 2 for 1 deal this week since we’ve been saving up for the golf clubs
you wanted in time for your getaway vacation with the guys!”
Brent:
“You must be kidding! I don’t
want any damn pizza. I told you this
morning that I was craving beef stew.
Are you deaf or just dumb?”
3.
Lisa:
“Please don’t talk to me that way.
I-”
Brent:
(cuts her off) “I don’t want
to hear your nagging and excuses. Just
hurry up and cook my dinner.”
4.
Lisa:
“Brent, please. I promise to cook
you beef stew tomorrow. Really, I think
I’m coming down with a cold and-”
Brent:
(stands up and makes a loud groan
in anger.) “What did I just
say?! I don’t care what you’re coming
down with. All I want is my damn
dinner. Is that too hard for a lazy wife
like you?!”
5.
Lisa:
(Begins to sob and walks to the
kitchen to begin cooking.)
Lisa:
“Brent dear, we’re all out of beef.
Would you mind running to the store to buy some while I prepare the
vegetables please?”
Brent:
“What do I look like, your slave?
Get it yourself! I knew this was
going to happen. I come home and my wife
doesn’t even have dinner ready. I swear, I should just go to the Korean bars after work. The women there feed me and give me all the
attention I want plus, they’re way prettier than you! I don’t know why I married you!”
6.
Lisa:
“I’m sorry Brent. I’ll go get
changed and I’ll be back with the beef.”
Lisa
walks to the bedroom and puts on a spaghetti strap top and jeans.
Brent:
“Just where in the world do you think you’re going dressed like that?”
7.
Lisa:
“I’m just going to Foodland and this is the
top you bought me, remember? I love it
so I decided to wear it!”
Brent:
“Don’t lie to me! You’re using
this as an excuse to get out of the house, aren’t you! You dirty liar!”
8.
Lisa:
“Brent, how can you say that? I
asked if you minded going to get the beef and you said-”
Brent:
(Cuts her off) “I know what I
said you manipulating slut! Who is
he? Who’s the guy you’re going to meet
instead of cooking my dinner?”
9.
Lisa:
(Lisa cries out) “Brent, I
love you! I don’t know what you’re
talking about and what’s got into you?!”
Brent:
“You had ALL DAY to cook my dinner and you did nothing and now, you wanna go out dressed like this for the grocery store! How stupid of you!”
10.
Lisa:
(Tears streaming down her face,
Lisa drops to her knees in front of Brent) “Brent, I swear I’m not cheating
on you! I would never do that to
you! You’re everything to me!”
Brent:
(Looks away and toward the
ceiling) “Yah, well you’re nothing to me!”
Dialogue:
Equity Model of Marriage
1.
Lisa: “I’m exhausted from today’s work and I
still haven’t finished the laundry. In
fact, I haven’t even started cooking. I
feel like just knocking out!”
Brent: “Really? You do look a bit tired. What did you do today?”
2.
Lisa:
“Well, I actually did get a lot done today. I watered the yard first thing in the morning
so that the sun doesn’t soak up all the water. Then, I made breakfast for the
kids before taking them to school. And
they wanted spam musubi so I made them home
lunch. Then, when I went home, washed
the car and did two loads of laundry. I
vacuumed and mopped the house and cleaned the bathrooms. At one o’clock, I took Toby to the vet for
his physical and booster shot. By the
time I left the vet, the kids were almost finished with school so I went to
pick them up. I helped them with their
homework, got them all ready for school tomorrow, and took them across the
street for an hour at the park. Then, I
made sure they both showered and had them pick up their toys. Shortly after, you came home and I didn’t
even get to cook dinner yet.”
Brent:
“Aww…so I’m guessing there’s no beef stew
tonight like I had hoped.”
3.
Lisa:
“No honey. I’m so sorry. I forgot to go to the store to get the beef
and I didn’t prep at all. I just didn’t
have enough time.”
Brent:
“Darn, I was really craving beef stew all day! Well, I’ll tell you what, since you did so
much today, you can rest and we’ll just order some pizza.”
4.
Lisa:
“Oh, Brent! Thank you so
much! You have no idea what a relief
that is! I still haven’t washed your
clothes yet and I’m so sticky and icky and haven’t had a chance to even shower
yet! Ordering pizza really helps me out
a lot! I’m just gonna
rest for 5 minutes and then I’ll get right to your laundry!”
Brent:
“You’re welcome Lisa. I do have a
request though.”
5.
Lisa:
“Yes dear?”
Brent:
“Since we’re ordering pizza tonight, can you make beef stew
tomorrow. I really wanna
eat beef stew and I’m just craving it.”
6.
Lisa:
“Oh, okay. I guess I better try to
get some rest early tonight. I really
think I’m coming down with something.”
Brent:
“Okay baby. I hope you feel
better. Why don’t you go get started on
the laundry. The faster you finish, the faster you can go to sleep. I guess since you tuck the kids in
practically every night, I can do it tonight.”
7.
Lisa:
“Oh Brent! You’re the best! Thank you so much! Would you mind ordering the pizza for me while
I get started on the laundry?”
Brent:
“Sure, just find the number in the phone book and write down everyone’s
order and I’ll call it in!”
8.
Lisa:
“Okay honey. Thank you so much
dear!”
Brent:
“No problem baby! Anything for you!”
9.
Lisa:
“Oh, and how was your day today baby?”
Brent:
“It went alright! I don’t really wanna talk about it.
I had a rough day so I went out for a couple beers after work.”
10.
Lisa:
“Oh, okay….who did you go drinking with?
You didn’t tell me you were gonna go out.”
Brent:
“Oh, yah. Well, I figured you had
everything under control with the kids and you were busy anyway so you wouldn’t
miss me too much. Plus, I was only at
the bar for a hour.
Who cares honey? The main thing
is that I came home to you right! See, I
was good!”
11.
Lisa:
“Yes, you did come home to me and you weren’t gone that long so I guess
its okay. But honey, next time, please
let me know where you’re going. I worry
about you and I wanna know where you are in case
anything should happen to you. Plus, I
would let you know if I was going to go somewhere. It’s only fair! And, you still didn’t tell me who you went
out with.”
Brent:
“Look babe, I had a bad day! I
don’t wanna fight with you. Can you just drop this. I’m doing you a favor and you repay me by
grilling me! You know I’m not going to
do anything bad! God! Just please, for once, let me live my life
without you barging into every little thing I do! Can you just do that for me? That’s all I’m asking for.”
12.
Lisa:
“I’m sorry Brent. You’re
right. I didn’t mean to upset you and I
shouldn’t need to know every little thing if I trust you. It’s my fault. I’m sorry.
I’ll go get the number for the pizza.”
Brent:
(Shakes his head in irritation and
rolls his eyes at Lisa’s back as she leaves the room.)
Dialogue:
Unity Model of Marriage
1.
Lisa: “I’m exhausted from today’s work and I
still haven’t finished the laundry. In
fact, I haven’t even started cooking. I
feel like just knocking out!”
Brent: “Oh, baby! You look so tired! Tell me how I can help you. I hate seeing you like this.”
2.
Lisa:
“Well, I didn’t even start cooking yet and your laundry still hasn’t
been washed. I’m sorry honey. I did so much today but I just didn’t get to
the clothes and dinner in time. I think
I might be coming down with something.
My throat is sore.”
Brent:
“Oh no baby. You go take a shower
and get ready for bed. I’m gonna cook you some of my magical chicken soup. That’ll soothe your throat. Oh, and take two of these. The Tylenol will help fight the cold and take
some Echinacea too. Let me get you some
water. You sit down right here.”
3.
Lisa:
“No, baby. Really. I’ll be okay.
That’s not necessary.”
Brent:
“Now, now my love. Don’t be
silly. Here’s your water and pills. I want you to get to bed early tonight so
your body can feel in ‘tip top’ shape soon.
I hate to see you sick and hurting.
It makes me so sad to see you in pain.”
4.
Lisa:
“What would I do without you Brent?
You’re so good to me!”
Brent:
“I love you! That’s why! Nothing more, nothing
less!”
5.
Lisa:
“Brent, your clothes-“
Brent:
(Cuts her off as he gently leans
in towards her and helps her to lie down.)
“Baby, don’t you worry about a thing.
I got it all under control. You
just rest.”
6.
Lisa:
“Are you sure baby?”
Brent:
“Of course my love. Now, hush and
relax. I’ll bring the soup to you when
it’s ready.”
7.
Lisa:
“Thank you so much baby!”
Brent:
(Gently looks into her eyes and
smiles as he touches her cheek.)
“Thank you for what my dear?”
8.
Lisa:
“For loving me the way you do and taking care of me!”
Brent:
“Of course. I’d do anything for
you. We’re one, my dear. Whatever you feel, I feel.”
9.
Lisa:
“Oh Brent. You truly are the
best!”
Brent:
“Only with you by my side honey.
Now, get some rest my love.”
10.
Lisa:
“I love you Brent!”
Brent:
“I love you too my Lisa dear.”
(b) Analysis Using the 3 Marriage
Models and Threefold Self
In the dominance model of marriage, the
couple is completely restrained from reaching overall wellbeing and
happiness. The wife is dominated by sensorimotor actions done by the husband. His cognition is upon the wellbeing and
satisfaction of himself and the wife is only
affectively thought of in an effort to please himself. The couple remains in complete disjunction
from each other, thus preventing the elevation of the marriage.
One spouse, the husband, is selfishly
benefited from the sensorimotor actions initiated by
his wife. However, this may or may not
be in long term. The negative aspects
from the dominance model for the husband are that he is unable to truly learn
of his wife’s inner knowledge when remaining focused to his outward
intelligence. He is unable to
self-sustain the marriage and in turn, refrains the
marriage from elevating from a corporeal state.
As you can see in the dialogue titled “Dominance
Model of Marriage,” the husband is not the nicest person. All of the cognitive thoughts are focused on
himself and the benefit or promotion of his current state. So, his sensorimotor
actions of yelling, name calling, refusing to help out, demanding his wife to
cook beef stew, and playing with her emotions and her mind are all a result of
his affective state to attempt to gain more from her. He is unconcerned (sensorimotor)
with her feelings, emotions, physical state and happiness.
Also, in line five, where Brent tells his
wife that he “should go out to the Korean drinky
bars” to be with “pretty” women who are better looking than her, he is
degrading her and bringing her down. He
is also, only showing interest in the sensorimotor
(physical) attraction of women and does not see the cognitive (her mind and
thoughts) and affective (emotions and feelings) as attractive. He is missing her inner being and thus does
not see the true beauty she retains but only sees the outward physical features
which represent his lack of inner knowledge and focus on his outward
intelligence.
In the equity model of marriage, the couple
remains satisfied with the expectations from the other. So long as the expectations are constantly
met and remain on a perfect balance between the two involved in the marriage,
the couple will remain satisfied. This
is not to say that they are happy or, even at the happiest level that other
couples in the unity model are at. Also,
with change being the only constant factor in life, there is no possible way to
ALWAYS remain equal in expectations and in efforts to meet the other’s
demands. When the couple meets this
point of dis-satisfaction, the marriage begins its
course to self destruct.
What happens is,
the equity model’s focuses on the sensuous aspects of the marriage. This means that the husband is concerned with
the constant battle to keep the balance scale equal to the other side. In effort to do so, on the sensorimotor level, the husband will do things that will
keep up his side of the relationship, with the cognitive expectation that his
wife will do so in return. Every
deed completed is considered either as a point or a favor. Thus, each deed or action must be repaid by
the wife or is a “payment” for another deed or action completed by the
wife.
Affectively, the emotions which constantly
are produced are of concerns and worries.
Concerns and worries are negative, thus preventing the positive
affective conjunction between a man and his wife. Many of these concerns and worries derive
from the struggle to either remain equal in every aspect as well as a struggle
to obtain more from the other spouse to ensure the better half of the
relationship.
The complete well being and happiness of the
spouse is not completely addressed and neither is it accomplished. The husband shall always have his cognition
based, at the most, half on his wife and the other half on himself. His sensorimotor
actions will reflect this with his affective emotions starting a search for the
equality of the actions he has done for his wife.
In the dialogue titled “Equity Model of
Marriage,” the husband is not fully concerned with his wife’s overall wellbeing
and happiness. He is consumed with the
constant battle to equate their relationship and the actions (sensorimotor) done by him compared by his wife. He is willing to help her out with the
clothes and with dinner, providing that she “meet him half way.” He agrees to help her with dinner by ordering
the pizza, but he requires her to meet him half way by making the beef stew
tomorrow. He agrees to place the pizza
order in, providing that she find the telephone number of the restaurant and
get everyone’s order ready for him. She
must do “equal amount of work” and put in “equal amount of effort” in order for
him to do something in return for her.
Each time something is done, it is considered as a favor. Everything positive is considered
circumstantial.
The husband is refusing to let go of his
independence and forces his wife to refrain from knowing where he has been and
with whom he has been with. In this
marriage, the wife apologizes, thus, he negatively hurts her affectively and
cognitively through his sensorimotor actions of
arguing, yelling and getting upset with her.
In the end of the dialogue, they agree to disagree. This promotes independence which is
disjunctive to the marriage and to the conjunction of the couple.
In the unity model of marriage, the couple
is conjoined all through sensorimotor, cognitive, and
affective levels of the self. At the sensorimotor, the couples actions and physical states
towards one another are directed in the effort for the pursuit of happiness for
the spouse. Everything possible to
promote and complete the well being and happiness of the spouse is done through
the sensorimotor actions of the other.
Cognitively, the spouse’s main initiative
and motivation for the sensorimotor actions comes
from the desire to keep the other person happy.
Ensuring the happiness of the spouse by one’s own actions is what drives
the other to initiate the actions and deeds of the sensorimotor
level. Inside, the spouse is thinking of
how this will benefit, provide and protect their spouse to give their spouse
the best possible outcomes.
Affectively, the spouse’s emotions are put
into play with the notion of wellbeing in the relationship. Any possible way to improve the relationship
and bond that is shared between the wife and the husband is acted upon. By creating happiness and well-being, the
husband is actually improving the emotions, and in turn, level of love from the
wife. This spark of passion and joyous
emotions influences the wife to elevate their marriage and conjunction to an
even higher level than before.
With the sensorimotor,
cognitive and affective conjunctions constantly within their married lives, the
wife provides her inner knowledge to her “willing to learn, released from
independence, and open hearted” husband.
With his ability to release himself from his freedom, she is able to
penetrate him with her knowledge and effectively promote the union into conjugial love.
In other words, the husband will do whatever
is in his power to do to make his wife happy.
He, cognitively, understands that his, sensorimotor,
actions will, affectively, affect his wife’s love and conjunction with him,
thus, elevating their bond and marriage to the highest level of closeness and
satisfaction.
In the dialogue titled “Unity Model of
Marriage,” the husband is completely concerned with anything and everything the
wife is thinking, feeling, concerned with and going through. His main effort is to help her to make her
happy. To demonstrate this, he is very
concerned that his wife is tired and feeling sick. He immediately aids her in giving her time to
rest by finishing the chores without her even asking. He cooks her chicken soup to “soothe her
throat” without her asking and does not in any way, make her feel (affective)
bad for not finishing what she had intended to do. He is glad to help her.
The husband is not concerned with any direct
benefits which will result from his sensorimotor
actions. He does not expect anything in
return and is not trying to get her to repay him. He is completely focused on his wife and her
happiness and health. He understands
that when he places positively in her sensorimotor,
cognitive and affective levels, she will display and teach him more on her
inner knowledge which ultimately transforms their relationship into the highest
degree of satisfaction…conjugial love. With each positive step he takes, he is
improving every aspect of the threefold self and thus, conjoining himself to
his wife. This in turn, results in the
happiness of both partners in the marriage, shown in the last dialogue exchange
in line ten. Both partners replace their
concerns with the conquer of love for each other which
brings them to an even higher level of marital satisfaction.
I have posted Table 8 and Table 1b from the Lecture Notes to demonstrate the levels of a couples threefold self based on their sensorimotor, cognitive and affective levels as well as the tolerance of a couple in each of the three models of marriage.
This is Table 8
from the Lecture Notes
|
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 |
This table demonstrates that only at the Unity model
does the couple fully agree with each other except when it comes to the benefitial aspects of their own identity which are healthy
to the conjoining of the spouses. At the
equity and dominance model, there is a lot of “agree to disagree” in the
relationship which is only a promotion of independence and disjunction among
the spouses. This non-union behavior
prevents the marriage from elevating to the highest degree of satisfaction and
prevents the husband from ridding himself of his disjunctive outward knowledge.
This is Table 1b (READ TABLE FROM BOTTOM
UP)
|
MODEL THAT GOVERNS THEIR INTERACTIONS |
THREEFO0LD SELF |
||
|
SENSORIMOTOR |
COGNITIVE |
AFFECTIVE |
|
|
level 3 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
|
level 2 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|
level 1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
“Table 1b above identifies the psychological
characteristics or "mentality" that creates a preference for one of
the three models. The dominance model is called level 1 because it tends to be
first in the couple's development. "Corporeal" mentality refers to
the style of personality that focuses almost exclusively on physical goals and
satisfactions. It is a materialistic outlook, but even more so than the
"sensuous" mentality of level 2. The corporeal mentality reflects the
level of operation of the threefold self -- our feeling states, our thinking
style, and our overt acts and sensations (zones 3, 2, 1). If you inspect the
Table you will see how each zone of the ennead is defined by the marginal
entries. The by three marginal entries (columns by rows) equals 9 cells or
"zones" of interaction between the threefold self and the three
levels of human mentality.”
–Dr. James
Table 1b demonstrates to the reader of the mentality
of the spouse at each level of the threefold self and in each specific domain
of the three models of marriage.
Starting at the bottom corner, labeled one, the spouse elevates himself
as he continues up the chart in numerical order. With each advancement,
the couple is closer and closer to conjoining with each other and achieving
complete marital satisfaction and overall wellbeing and happiness strictly
within each other.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 
:
(I) Describe
the Web presence of Schlessinger, Tannen,
Coleman, and Swedenborg. What does one find when
looking them up with google?
(II) What do people say about them?
(III) Do they seem to have influence?
(IV) Are they popular?
(V) How do you react to this Web information now that you are familiar with these four authors?
(VI) Discuss some
of their ideas with friends and report how they react.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Laura Schlessinger
(I) What I
Found When Looking the Author Up on Google- There are a lot of sites listed with Dr. Schlessinger. The
first site that appears when searching is her official site. The site provides her mailing and email
address and also lists that all calls or letters will become property of Dr. Schlessinger. She
has an “About Dr. Schlessinger” link and also “Shop
Dr. Laura” link. There are also sites
that either praise or hate her.
(II) What
People Said About the Author- There were many people who disapproved of Dr. Schlessinger and her theories. There were many single men and single women,
gays, lesbians, and married couples who all disagreed with her and many of them
started their own websites and groups to express their reasons for
disagreement. Many people criticized her
for her “traditional view on marriage” and for using the title of Dr. when she does not have a doctoral degree or a PhD.
(III) Does the
Author Seem to Have Influence- I am sad to say that Dr. Laura does seem to have
quite an influence on her advice. There
are actually people that believe her and follow her advice very closely. There are people that even try to adopt her
theories and ways of thinking in an effort to solve their own marital
problems. She also has a negative
influence on people because there are many people who go against her way of
thinking and very strongly show this in their comments on their websites.
(IV) My
Reactions to the Web Information- Although I was glad to find many sites that
disproved of her and her advice, I was disappointed to see sites that praised her
as “knowledgeable.” I was also upset
that there were links to scholarly articles on her. I wasn’t shocked to see that there were so
many websites on her because she is so controversial that I would assume many
people would have something to say about her, whether it was negative or
positive. I discovered that she is not
an actual doctor which also made me upset because she uses the title as if she
was one. It’s like false advertisement
and she is giving herself a better name than she deserves.
(V) Discussion
with Friends and Their Reactions- I discussed Dr. Laura’s theories with my two best
friends. Both of them laughed and were
in disbelief. They could not believe
that a woman could actually feel the way that she does and be so “narrow minded
and male dominant in their thinking.”
One of my friends feels that it is so important to keep faith in your
own views and not let others in society, like Dr. Laura, influence and change
you for the worst. She has no idea how
people can actually look up to someone like Dr. Laura.
Deborah Tannen
(I) What I
Found When Looking Up the Author on Google- I found many websites on Deborah Tannen, including her homepage for Georgetown University
where she teaches in the linguistics department. I found websites that posted articles and
speeches that Tannen had made and I also found
websites that directed you to places on where purchases could be made on her
books. I also found a website that
listed a bunch of quotes from Deborah Tannen.
(II) What People
Said About the Author- I was unable to find any public opinions on Deborah Tannen. Even the
article written by a New York Times journalist did not include any personal
opinion.
(III) Does the
Author Seem to Have Influence- The author does seem to influence many people,
including the students that she teaches and those that have read her work and
her books. She comes from a very
educational background and her work is simply teachings and theories rather
than personal opinion so I believe that is why she is featured in so many
scholastic websites and articles.
(IV) My
Reactions to the Web Information- I was not shocked to find many scholarly websites
on Deborah Tannen being that her work is based on
very educational standpoints. Because
her work is based upon conversation observations and then analysis, I was not
shocked that there were not very many personal websites on her.
(V) Discussion
with Friends and Their Reactions- I discussed Deborah Tannen’s
teachings with my two best friends and they both were quite amazed by her
ability to notice things that people do in conversation that may be differently
interpreted by others. I talked about
the major concepts in the book “Gender and Discourse” and they agreed with
either doing certain linguistic strategies in their conversations with others
or knowing other people who use a particular linguistic strategy on them. They thought that more people should read Tannen’s work to better understand the type of
miscommunication caused by people’s individual linguistic patterns.
Joshua Coleman 
(I) What I
Found When Looking Up the Author on Google- There were not as many sites on Joshua
Coleman the author but majority of the websites I found were on Joshua Coleman,
the actor. I did find Joshua Coleman’s
official website which listed his books, speeches, biography and his views on
various topics. There were also websites
that lead to the purchasing of his books.
There were websites that listed Dr. Coleman but did not really have any
content on his theories and information on his biography.
(II) What
People Said About the Author- I was unable to find any public opinion on Joshua
Coleman, the author.
(III) Does the
Author Seem to Have Influence- The author does not seem to influence too many
people due to the lack of websites talking about him and even featuring him. There was not
any public opinion I could find so I am assuming that he is not very popular
and therefore, many people do not know who he is.
(IV) My
Reactions to the Web Information- I am not surprised that there are not very many
websites featuring him because he is not too controversial and has not made too
many appearances with large volumes of audiences. I am a bit glad that he does not seem to
influence too many people because I do not agree with his teachings and do not
feel that women should need to bargain and obtain tips to get their husbands to
do their fair share around the house.
(V) Discussion
with Friends and Their Reactions- I discussed Dr. Coleman’s major concepts from the
book and they agreed with me. They feel
that he is a little advanced as a man but still is not the type of husband they
would want. One of my friends said that
she would not advise people to even take his advice because it could end the
woman in a vulnerable and male-dominated position. I agree with her and I wouldn’t follow his
advice.
Swedenborg 
(I) What I
Found When Looking the Author Up on Google- I was surprised to find tons of websites on
the teachings and biography of Emanuel Swedenborg. I had never heard of him before this class
and thought that most people would not have either. There are many church sites that base their
teachings on the teachings and life events of Swedenborg. There are also many websites leading to the
purchase of books written on Swedenborg.
(II) What
People Said About the Author- Many of the websites are a bit more informational
rather than based on public interpretation and opinion. I was unable to find a chat discussion
website that listed people’s personal views on Swedenborg
specifically.
(III) Does the
Author Seem to Have Influence- Swedenborg obviously
has quite a large influence on many people. The amount of websites are
proof of this as well as the many various churches that base their teachings
around his life events and findings.
There are many people who follow these churches and believe in his
teachings and what he says.
(IV) My
Reactions to the Web Information- I was shocked to see so many websites on him and
as I began to answer the questions, I was also shocked to see that there were
no real personal opinion type of websites but rather websites based on the
biography, teachings and how his teachings are used in other churches and
religious groups. It’s amazing to think
that someone from the 1600s-1700s is still so popular till this very day!
(V) Discussion
with Friends and Their Reactions- I discussed Swedenborg’s
teachings with my two best friends. Both
of them thought that his journey into the afterlife and his documentation were
pretty unbelievable. They can see why he
has such an impact in so many churches and why so many people view him as
scholarly. Both of my friends are
religious so they both believe that couples do spend eternity together but
never really thought about the true details and specifics like Swedenborg has experienced.
Class
Home Page: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy24/classhome-g24.htm
My Home Page: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/kanemaru/kanemaru-home.htm