Report 2:
The Unity Model of Marriage
Idealizing the Modern Day Gender Relationship
By Kelly Sasser
The instructions for this report are at:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy26/409b-g26-report2.htm
I am answering Questions 05, 06, 12, 13 and
14.
The Question I am
answering is Question 05
(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. How do you see
Dr. Laura's approach and what is your evaluation of it?
(b) Find 5 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) Make up a few quotes of your own. In each case pretend you are either a
woman or a man emailing Dr. Laura. Then give a brief explanation regarding what
AUVs are exhibited in each case.
(a) Rules of
Dominion According to Dr. Laura Schlessinger
Dr. Laura Schlessinger (2004), a marital and family
therapist wrote and published her marital-help guide notoriously titled The
Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands. In this book, she points out how wives
are mainly the cause for discourse between themselves and their husbands. She
illustrates her male-centric perspective in battling the evolution of females
(i.e. feminist ideology) and boldly persuades her audience to adopt
conventional values, placing women once again at threshold of obedience and men
on pedestals. Dr. Laura gives, what she believes, is helpful advice saying that
in order for wives to have happier marriages with their husbands, they need to
be more submissive and accepting of their husbands “simplistic” ways. Dr.
Laura’s philosophy is focused on what I call a “male-centric cost-benefit
analysis.” This philosophy dictates that the negative costs that females claim
to incur by being with their husbands (i.e. husbands not helping out with
chores and child-rearing, husbands not sharing their feelings with wives) are
not substantial to what the husband does for the wife (i.e. make a living for
the family, staying faithful, etc.)
Schlessinger (2004) begins
her book by incessantly ranting about stereotypical females who stay with men
who treat them horribly (i.e. abusers, opportunists, or “jerks”). After
discussing what I will state later as contradictions in Dr. Laura’s logic, she
introduces her dismay on the issue concerning wives who are unhappy in their
marriages and openly express it towards husbands who are “decent, hard work,
caring husband.” Each chapter focuses on characteristics of women that exhibit
hostilities towards their husbands. Empathy however, is not directed towards
wives, but rather to husbands, who as Dr. Laura feels, is being subjected to
“improper care” facilitated by wives. The first chapter aptly titled “The Improper
Care and Feeding of Husbands” begins by Dr. Laura incorporating conversations
she’s had with viewers from her radio talk show, as well as feedback through
letters and e-mail. Couples from all backgrounds write to Dr. Laura asking for
advice or stating their frustrations with their spouse. In the beginning of
this chapter, she takes viewer feedback and their personal inquiries and
responds to them according to a male-centric perspective. This dialogue between
Dr. Laura and a caller named
Dr. Laura: What are three reasonable things you know would please him
if you changed?
Dr. Laura: Okay. That seems fair for a marriage. What else?
Dr. Laura: Generally, I think that means he wants to feel appreciated
for what he is and does.
Dr Laura: And, when you are constantly trying to change him or demand
more or different, he reads that as though you don’t approve and appreciate
what he is offering and who he is. Remember, this is the man you picked. Okay?
So he needs more appreciation. And what is number three?
Dr. Laura: Okay. Be easier going.
The fallacy portrayed here
and throughout this is book is the one-sided (male-centric) perspective which
Dr. Laura emphasizes. In the example shown above, Dr. Laura’s biased judgment
inhibits her ability to empathize with her viewer and the apparent frustration
this wife feels towards her husband’s inconsistencies. Instead, Dr. Laura
begins, as well as continuing throughout her book, making the false presumption
that the root of wives problems with their husbands lies in maltreatment
towards their husbands. In the dialogue above, the response that Dr. Laura
gives in Sandy’s second and third reasons her husband wishes she would change
are completely illogical.
Granted, only placing focus
on one of the sexes affective self (James, 2007) could possibly be
self-centered, but Dr. Laura clearly contradicts her own dictations. Her double
standard falls under what I call “male-centric cost-benefit analysis.” Dr.
Laura imposes values favoring male dominance which emphasize that the benefits
of men’s happiness outweigh the costs of women’s stress, frustration, and
mental suffering in relationships. Dr. Laura rarely gives advice that allows
for an “equitable” conclusion, but rather she offers opinions prescribed from
her inabilities to see past an illogical belief that it’s only possibly for
turmoil to be caused by only one sex (particularly women because Dr. Laura is
in favor of a husband who financially supports their wife). Favoring men who
support women financially and negating the significance in the responsibilities
wives carry is detrimental to the evolution of females which carried through
the 20th century and today. Women weren’t happy with the conditions they
were subjected to and relentlessly fought of the tyrants who failed to
appreciate their worth. When people like Dr. Laura misinterpret the feminist
perspective by saying it’s a mechanism women use to degrade and retain
independence from their husbands, they fail to understand the implications of
freedom from traditional values that have universally tread upon the happiness
of an infinite amount of individuals.
I believe that Dr. Laura
has created a book of advice condescending women because of their pre-distinguished
roles in societies. It has been for years that a man supports his family while
the wife watches after the children and runs the household. But times are
changing. When you think of the evolution of happiness, if someone places
restraints on anyone’s personal well-being it’s in fact detrimental to their
survival socially and mentally. However, if a person can withstand and overcome
these obstacles then their happiness and well-being will prosper. It’s apparent
as we’ve seen through time that oppression and domination incurred by husbands,
or male-centric perspectives, have been proven to a woman’s well-being and she
is fighting to this day to overcome the pressures. Women don’t specifically ask
for their needs and thoughts to be ONLY cared for, but rather they desire men
who are willing to appreciate and take careful consideration towards their
feelings. Reciprocity thus is given when a man can see that his wife is willing
to do anything for him as long as he’s willing to comply with his wife’s
affection. Dr. Laura believes that reciprocity happens when a wife is fully
committed to submission, but history has shown that men take advantage of wives
and continue to neglect their needs.
When a wife is forced to
comply and have sex with her husband on the basis that he deserves it on the
basis that he went out and made a living for a family, this devalues a woman’s
right to have her feelings taken into consideration. Dr. Laura implies that
marriage works like Karl Marx’s conflict theory where those who are in power
receive all of the benefits and exploit those who are not of power (Babbie,
2007). In this case (or at least in a traditional sense), those who in power
are men because they financially support their wives. Thus, men who are in
power will exploit their wives by having them to all of the housework and
childrearing and expecting them to have sex with them (despite evidence of
exhaustion) when they come home. I feel that Dr. Laura needs to abandon her
biased judgment and empathize more with women. The solution to marital
discourse should not be seen in a unidirectional fashion. Marriage will always
be bidirectional.
(b) Quotes from
Husbands and their Threefold Self’s
Quote #1:
“What ever happened to sweetness? If you act like a bi*ch, you will be
treated like a bi*ch. I asked my wife once if she wanted something, as she was
being unusually nice. She angrily said to me ‘I would never be nice to anyone
to get them to do something for me. That is sucking up!’ So, what is the
alternative? Treat them like Sh*t? A man takes care of his woman and a woman
should take of her man! What a concept!”
This husband seems to focus
on his sensorimotor and cognitive self in his relationship in the dominance and
equity models. He finds that wives that act negative towards their husband
should in return receive negative treatment. This could possibly be an equity
standpoint, but his cognition degrades the actions that emotionally disturbed
wives characterize. This puts his self into the dominance model because he’s
viewing his wife’s actions in a degrading manner. However, he stands firmly
that men should take care of woman and vise versa which keeps his cognitive
self partially in the equity phase.
Quote #2:
“A woman would do well to understand that an honest, faithful husband who
goes on a three-week hunting trip is not telling her he doesn’t love her. He
just wants to kill something. Nothing more complicated than that.”
This husband focuses his
cognitive and affective self in the dominance phase. He devalues what his
wife’s thoughts are towards his leaving for a substantially long hunting trip.
He puts his feelings, needs and desires above his wife. He doesn’t think that
leaving for that amount of time is bad because he feels his wife needs to
comply with what he wants. The difference between a wife’s desires and needs
versus a males is because women are committed to their husbands and care
greatly about how they feel. When a husband places emphasis on them being in
the dominance phase, they take advantage of what they think, believe, and feel
is owed to them.
Quote #3:
“We need more sex. Once a day is fine.”
This husband focuses in the
sensorimotor and affective areas of the threefold self. He is also a dominant husband
whose own physical urges motivate him to desire sex from his partner daily. His
dominant affective self tells him that he needs more sex and therefore is
motivated in suggesting his wife that sex once a day is his standard. A wife
who is emotionally upset may feel that she cannot fulfill this standard based
on her own affective self, causing the male to pressure her into it more. This
constant pressure could detrimental to a woman’s mental health and will
continue to circulate with her actions and his desires/standards.
Quote #4:
“Despite our rugged outward appearance, most men tend to have delicate
psyches. I know four very happily married men. In each case their wives make a
point of stroking their egos and making them feel that they approve of them.
Consequently, these men practically worship their wives.”
This husband is operating
in his cognitive self. He thinks that men have “delicate psyches” which woman
should stroke once in awhile. I can’t really pinpoint which phase of marriage
he’s in because he doesn’t state any oppression on these four husbands and
their wives. He could possibly be thinking in either the dominant or equity
phase because he needs to focus on his relationship versus others. He thinks
that by woman stroking men’s ego’s that ultimately will bring happiness to the
equation but obviously, love goes both ways.
Quote #5:
“Honey, it is part of your job as my wife to remind me of any duties I am
not fulfilling, just as it is my job as a husband to remind you of your duties.
You know I try my best, but if I don’t know what I’m not doing, how can I do
it, much less do it right? There is a difference between complaining and
informing, between criticizing and reminding.”
I believe that this husband
is operating in his cognitive self according to the equity phase. He
understands that he has responsibilities to his wife but he believes that it
has to be a fair trade-off in letting him know what he’s doing wrong. He also
seems to be operating in his affective self because he’s summoning his feelings
and motivations and telling his wife that if she isn’t direct with him, then he
feels less motivated to get the job done or done in the right way.
(c) Quotes in the
Form of Anti-Unity Values (AUV’s)
Quote #1:
“I’m sorry, but us men, we are the way we are. Women would like to
believe that in some lifetime they will be able to change men and make them be
their servants but that will NEVER happen. If women wanted us to be more like
other women, why don’t they all become lesbian? (Although I hope that doesn’t
happen). The point I am trying to make is that there are a lot of things we
would like to change about women but don’t because we love you for all the
ridiculousness and stress you place on us. Just accept that we want sex all the
time (we understand sometimes when you don’t want to give us some), we like to
sit down by the couch, drink a beer, and watch sports, and we like go out by
ourselves once in awhile. I don’t think that’s a lot to ask.”-Shane
An Anti-Unity Value (AUV) is
values that threaten the Unity dynamic as presented by Dr. Leon James (2007).
James (2007) has compiled a list of several AUV’s he feels are detrimental in
the advancement towards a Unity marriage. If couples continue to adopt these
AUV’s, then their marriage will remain in the dominance and equity phase. The
AUV displayed about is located as #14 on Dr. James’ AUV chart. This is an AUV
because it states that couples should promote the idea that one should not try
to change one's partner but should accept them with their faults, etc. There
are many instances where you see this mentality appear in Dr. Laura
Schlessinger’s book The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands but the
point made here is that a partner should be willing to expound from the
boundaries that culture and society has reared them into. Men and Women should
try to set higher standards that help them to expand their potential. Partner’s
in relationships complain that it’s wrong for the other person to try to change
them, but sometimes it’s the qualities you posses, or the ones you develop
after you’ve established the relationship that become detrimental to health out
it. The US Army doesn’t even run campaigns saying for soldiers to “be who they
are” but rather for them to “be all that they can be.” This same mentality
should go into relationships as well.
Quote #2:
“You know what I can’t understand? Why does a man need to be around me
24/7? All I want is one day where I can hang out with my girls and go clubbing
without him always being there by my side. He acts like such a lost puppy
sometimes and when I’m not with him for one day he always gets sad. He doesn’t
yell at me or stop me. I told him why I wanted time alone and told me
understood and even encouraged me to go out and have a good time, but I know
he’s upset that I leave and he feels guilty. There was one time when he and I
had made plans but my friend wanted me to go with her to a concert and it was
the only chance in my life to see it. Once again he encouraged me to go despite
me breaking our plans, which I knew he was somewhat upset about. I had a blast
though! I love him very much but I don’t want to feel tied down in a
relationship and I want my own sense of independence. I think having interest’s
independent of the other person are healthy for the relationship to grow and
prosper and gives the other person a break.”-Barbara
The
AUV’s explored here are #7 having a same sex best friend who is placed ahead of
the partner or in competition for certain things, and #11 Separate interests
and activities accepted for partners. Although her husband seems very
understanding of her separate interests, she knows deep down inside that it
upsets him and still refuses to take his feelings into consideration. She
breaks plans with her husband, but he still remains encouraging and understands
that she wants to have a good time. She states that it’s essential for her to
have time with the girls and leave her man at home. Barbara is not a Unity
wife/girlfriend because her actions and feelings hint that she is not fully committed
and desires to be independent. She wants her own sense of independence and
hates the feeling of being tied down in relationships which are thoughts that
govern woman’s attitudes towards non-commitment. She could possibly be in an
Equity relationship where she competes with her husband/boyfriend to establish
fairness in her extra-marital activities and time spent with him. In a unity
relationship, a woman must first commit to a man and let go of independent
feelings and work to conjoins herself with her husband, as well as trying to
get him to conjoin with her. When a man has conjoin and enters the Unity phase,
he respects and honors the wife’s affective self or her needs and desires.
The Question that I am
answering is Question 6
(a) Consider Section 5.1 Sexuality: Love of the Sex vs. Love of One of the
Sex in the Lecture Notes
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy26/409b-g26-lecture-notes.htm#sexuality
Describe the difference between the two types of loves as explained there.
(b) Go to Dr. Phil's Web site www.drphil.com/shows/show/378
and look at the synopsis of his advice to several women who are seeking his
advice on how they can improve their sexual relationship with their husbands.
As for example here: www.drphil.com/slideshows/slideshow/2009/?id=2009&isTip=&slide=1&null=null
You can also look at some other materials by him. Now analyze Dr. Phil's
approach to sexuality in relation to your answer in (a).
(c) State your conclusions and recommendations.
(a) Love of the
Sex vs. Love of One of the Sex
Dr.
James (2007) begins to illustrate the intensity in the topic of sex (or
sexuality) in the media, especially across the World Wide Web. The issue of sex
is enamored in today’s society and because it’s constantly being addressed,
understanding differences between exclusive and non-exclusive sex are becoming
more and more distorted. Dr. James works to clarify this difference of
sexuality in Section 5.1 of The Unity Model of Marriage. He claims that
sex occurs in 4 Phases, all moving along the path towards the Unity Model.
Phase
0 Sexual Activity: Sex Without Intimacy (not on the diagram above)
Non-exclusive or indiscriminate sexual activity with a succession of
partners at different times.
Phase
1 Sexual Activity: Sex With Sensorimotor Intimacy Only (dominance phase)
Exclusive sexual activity in the male dominance phase of marriage or
dating.
Phase
2 Sexual Activity: Sex with Sensorimotor and Cognitive Intimacy (equity
phase)
Exclusive sexual activity in the equity phase of marriage or dating.
Phase
3 Sexual Activity: Sex with Sensorimotor, Cognitive, and Affective Intimacy
(unity phase)
Exclusive sexual activity in the unity phase of marriage or dating.
When a sexual relationship
occurs in Phase 0, Dr. James (2007) refers to this as the Love of the Sex
state of mind. Both partners have sex without establishing any mental intimacy
or exclusivity. These people can then venture off and have sex with multiple
partners regardless because feelings of intimacy are not established. However,
it’s this attitude of ONLY LOVING SEX that seems to remain consistent in the
dominance and equity phases. This type on non-exclusive sexual behavior is
believed by Dr. James to be along the same level of animalistic sexual
behavior. Pinel (2006) stated that animals as well as humans diverged into two
different sexual species: promiscuous and monogamous species. Most animals
display promiscuity or when mating arrangements in which both sexes
indiscriminately copulate with many different partners during each mating
period (Pinel, 2006). Animalistic promiscuity is meant more as love of the sex
for purposes of reproduction and passing on one’s genes than it was for
pleasure, although you cannot deny inabilities within animals to experience
sexual pleasure. Monogamy, however, is found in animal relationships as well.
Since we cannot understand the true nature of an animal’s mind in determining
whether intimacy is involved, we can assume that there are particular reasons
why some animals wish to stay in monogamous relationships.
The Love of the Sex
involves people who don’t wish to experience the spiritual and intimate benefits
of exclusive sex. There is no disregard that these people aren’t experiencing
pleasure from non-exclusive sex. However, it’s theoretically believed that once
you habituate to the same condition under the same circumstances, pleasure
becomes harder to find and it’s not as exciting as it was when you first
experienced it. The love of sex thus becomes a game when you find yourself
sticking to feelings of non-exclusivity and yet trying to find ways to spark
interest in something that is imminently similar each time. Thus people become
involved in forms of exclusivity when they start to engage in relationships. If
a person feels compelled to be with their partner for lengths of time, they
begin the path towards mental intimacy in the traditional dominance and equity
phase. In these phases, thoughts of non-exclusive sex are not diminished
because both partners still try to claim their independence. In the traditional
dominance phase, men place their concerns on the sole purpose of getting sexual
satisfaction through exclusivity with their wife. This is referred to as Phase
1. The couple achieves sensorimotor intimacy through emphasis on sexually
pleasuring the husband, but they have not reached cognitive or mental intimacy
which inhibits their chances of experiencing heightened levels of sexuality
spiritually and affectively.
Couples
need to experience intimacy from all levels of the threefold self. It cannot be
focused primarily on just one or two levels. In the dominance and equity phase,
only two levels of intimacy (sensorimotor and cognitive) are being used but
without the presence of affective intimacy, unity cannot be achieved and the
couple will not advance sexually in this physical world as well as the
spiritual. Dr. James claims that couples who operate at the dominance and
equity phases of marriage have lower levels of intimacy which is not accepted
in the spiritual world. Many times, men believe that women should give sex on
the basis that they provide for them financially (traditional dominance) or on
the basis that if they do something for them, then their wives should give them
sex in return (equity phase). Dr. James believes that these types of behaviors at
the sensorimotor and cognitive levels are called sexual blackmail. Sexual
blackmail inhibits husbands to achieve Unity with their wives because they are
using their wives for their own personal and sexual gain. Instead of focusing
on the affective areas of a woman, they retain independence disrupting the path
towards conjunction and enhanced sexual satisfaction. When both the wife and
husband have reached affective conjunction, they both feel satisfaction from
sex because they both begin to understand, appreciate, and love each other
more.
Affective unity in an
exclusive sexual relationship is also referred to as the Love of One of
the Sex. This mentality separates us from most animalistic behaviors in
that couples engage in sex for enhanced sexual pleasure due to the fact that
they have achieved affective intimacy and value their friendship with each
other. Swedenborg calls this “conjugial love’ or a spiritual love which he
believes humans are supposed to involve themselves in on the basis that “humans
were created and therefore born to become spiritual.” Even though everyone is
born with these underpinnings, culture and society rips these inner desires
from your mind and teaches you to adopt love for the sex. Therefore, when
couples enter relationships, their culture has influenced them to begin in the
dominance phases and move through the equity phase. When a couple can finally
achieve mental intimacy, Swedenborg states that “with those who are spiritual,
love of the sex is expelled and conjugial love insinuated...” The difference
between animals and humans is that animals are not proven to possess the
rational consciousness of humans. Because humans are able to reason through
rationality, when they find that their naturalistic behaviors are irrational
towards the desire in achieving Unity with an exclusive partner, they abandon
naturalistic behaviors for more spiritual and intimate ones.
In Dr. James (2007)
perspective of “dualism,” those who achieve Love of One of the Sex
have understood that their physical reactions and behaviors are only temporary
and limited to what the mental characteristics of person offer in an infinite,
eternal world. Thoughts and feelings cannot be seen or heard so they cannot be
accounted for in the laws of empiricism. This logic bears with it a negatively
biased assumption that we should only engage in behaviors that are physically
felt and seen. This is why it’s virtually impossible for couples to start off
in a Unity relationship because society does not tell men and women to place
emphasis on things we cannot see. However, the key to remember is that the
physical world is only temporary, whereas the spiritual and eternal world is
infinite. Those who can expand rationality that characterizes spirituality as a
key component will understand how essential and amazing sex is with another
partner. There is always that empty feeling of having sex without the
implications of intimacy. However, that void is filled when mental intimacy is
involved thus allowing marriages to venture through the physical world and into
eternity feeling completely conjoined.
(b) Dr. Phil and
Section 5.1 Sexuality: Love of the Sex vs. Love of one of the Sex
Dr.
Phil is popular talk show host Oprah’s protégé. He is a psychologist who has a
talk show of his own where he gives advice in hopes that people will find the
courage to overcome their problems. In the episode titled “A Candid
Conversation” (synopsis found here: www.drphil.com/slideshows/slideshow/2009/?id=2009&isTip=&slide=1&null=null),
four women came on the Dr. Phil show to ask for advice on how to get more
intimacy and sexual satisfaction from their husbands. Dr Phil gives advice,
especially to one husband, on the importance of trying to achieve mental
intimacy with your spouse. His approach follows many aspects of the Unity
model, but there are points where he contradicts the Unity model, saying that
it’s understandable for couples to fall out of love once in awhile. With his
approach to an overall indefinite acceptance towards the occurrence of unhappiness
in relationships, this misleads viewers to follow in the direction of The
Love of Sex instead of the Love of One of the Sex.
Annette is a newlywed who
claims that since she got married to her husband, their levels of intimacy
(both sexually and mentally) have greatly reduced. Such factors have interfered
with their time together such as raising kids. Before they were married,
Annette’s husband used to do things for her that made her feel important and
loved. Now he’s stopped doing those things because he believes she doesn’t need
them because they are married. When another wife named Melissa agrees that
romance has been set on the side to take care of adult responsibilities, Dr.
Phil claims that the wives are having problems trying to figure out what their
priorities are. If you were to take Dr. Laura’s stance, then she would say that
wives need to put their husbands at the top of their priority list and do
things for them that will make them feel motivated to give the wives whatever
they want. However, Dr. Phil doesn’t clearly take a dominant or Equity stance.
He asks them the wives have tried to work at making their relationships more
intimate. Melissa replies saying she’s tried many strategies to enlighten their
intimacy but her husband still makes her feel neglected and unappreciated. This
is where Dr. Phil takes a stance that misleads viewers into the love of the sex
and leaves the wives, as well as other viewers confused on how to get their
spouses to have Love of one of the sex.
Dr. Phil offers advice that
it’s okay for couples in their relationships to fall out of love for one
another. This advice promotes the idea that sometimes it’s okay to just have
love for the sex. Its okay to want sensorimotor intimacy, or by allowing
yourself to engage in animalistic tendencies without rational understanding of
the person’s thoughts, feelings and desires. These women feel that there is not
enough love and intimacy that they’re receiving to make them feel complete or
conjoined to their husbands. Dr. Phil doesn’t understand this and believes that
his rare account of meeting someone who was married to a man for 50 years and
claims to have fallen out of love several times is sufficient evidence to
believe that marriages will prosper even if there are moments where love is
lost. When love seems lost, there is a problem of affective intimacy in the
relationship. It is not something to ignore because when couples subject
themselves to lower levels of thinking, they inhibit their chances of advancing
from the temporary physical world in eternity with their partner.
Karen is a wife who claims
that her husband makes her feel vulnerable by exploiting her sexually and
refusing to give her the affective intimacy which she desires. Dr. Phil asks
her if she has done anything to help her husband see that he is making her feel
vulnerable and she responds with “Definitely, but it doesn’t matter.” Through
the pain and torture she’s had to endure being a wife who must submit to her
husbands needs and relinquish her own has influenced her to have an affair. She
states, “I just want something to jolt him to go, ‘Oh my gosh. Wait I can’t
live without this person. What was I thinking?’” What she wants is for her
husband to adopt the value of having love for one of the sex (particularly
her). The last wife, Dana, also had an affair on her husband because he
abandoned her feelings, and not because he was deployed. Dana’s husband is
apparently upset over the ordeal but still wants to maintain an exclusive
relationship with his wife. Dr. Phil interjects and tells Dana’s husband that
he needs to let go of his negative emotions towards Dana’s infidelity and be
the kind of partner that Dana desires. He is trying to help the husband in
seeing that his selfish actions and behavior are causing discourse between him
and his wife and he needs to give his wife total intimacy if they want their
marriage to continue successfully. Both husbands need to adopt love of
one of the sex!
(c) Conclusions
on Section 5.1 and Dr. Phil
The Love of the Sex
is our own irrational acceptance that we are humans who succumb to the forces
of nature and that is where our potential lies. When we begin to discard these
barbaric thoughts, we can understand that the potential of human beings is in The
Love of one of the Sex. We as human beings have not forced ourselves to
let nature build the paths of our lives. History has shown that we are taking
control of what’s given to us and making it prosper thus far. We as humans,
through rational thought, have built buildings, made medicines that combat
natural diseases, prolonged life, found valuable means of transportation,
established freedom amongst the masses, etc. So why is it so difficult for two
people to work in productive partnership that will help the enhancement of mind,
body and soul? People have to stop accepting the means to which things come
naturally to us and expand our potentials, especially as lovers. If it’s enough
to accept the love of the sex, then you’re saying it’s enough to accept
stagnation over enlightenment. I recommend that people need to stop
contradicting their actions and follow a path where they can achieve love in
all ways shapes and forms. Whether you feel brainwashed by the media in acting
in ways that are only SEEN as being accepted, and then it’s vital to follow
your intuition and feelings to provide a better relationship for you and your
partner.
Benefits of love should not be detrimental to your partners well being. Dr. Phil needs to understand that happiness should remain consistent and not be allowed to stop. There is only so much a person can endure before he/she feels physically and mentally dead in a relationship. Then you have to ask yourself, can the relationship go any further? When relationships are happy and prosperous, their feelings are infinite and expose no boundaries. Habituation does not occur with happiness. Happiness will continue in an enlightened conjugial state.
The Question that I am
answering is Question 12
(a)
Select three couples that you know, in such a way that one is going to fail,
one that is going to succeed, and one that has mixed components (success and
failure, up and down).
(b)
Explain why you think that the couples are failing or succeeding. Show how the
unity model (with three phases) helps you understand the relationship dynamics
for each couple. Give specific examples of their behaviors in the threefold
self regarding conjunctive and disjunctive interactions. How would you advise
them to help them succeed?
(a)
The Successful Couple, The Failing Couple, and the Couple We All Hope
Makes it Through
There are three couples whom relationships I have been
familiar with for quite some time. My manager Visahka and her Husband Arjuna
are the married couple whom I believe will be successful in having a happy
relationship throughout their lives and eternity. They would be equivalent to
what Dr James (2007) refers to as a Unity couple. My mother and her boyfriend
Bernard are what I believe a failing couple, or one that won’t make it past
this physical realm and into the spiritual one together. They probably will
stay together till one of them dies, but their relationship is highly governed
by traditional and domineering ideals. Lastly, I find that one of my best
friend’s Nona and her boyfriend Rudy will be a couple with mixed components.
They are quite a delightful and happy couple but they are growing together and
realizing certain aspects of each that could possibly threaten their success of
a long-term, unified relationship.
(b) The Dynamics of Each
Relationship
Visahka and Arjuna are reaching their one year anniversary.
So far, their marriage has been filled with joy and happiness. These two have a
substantial age difference (she’s 22 and he’s 35), but they have not allowed
such matters to get in the way of their commitment to one another. It all
started out when he showed up drunk at her work place and asked her if she
wanted to hang out. She agreed and they soon developed an extremely close bond.
After two weeks of dating, they moved in and began their life together.
Visahka, who was extremely hurt from a previous marriage, like the idea of
living with Arjuna, but very much needed him to understand that her
independence and freedom was a major priority for her. She was skeptical of
Arjuna’s deep emotions and love he developed for her so early in the
relationship. She wasn’t entirely she if she was willing to commit because she
would then have to sacrifice getting herself hurt. When Arjuna proposed, she
reluctantly accepted being his fiancé. Soon after the engagement, she told
Arjuna that she may not be ready to commit once again to someone she wasn’t
entirely sure would be the right one for her. Arjuna desperately pleaded with
Visahka to give him a chance because he wanted to prove to her that he was
committed to being the man that she ultimately desires. She gave him a chance
and after living with him for a year, they were married in May 2006.
It’s almost a year since they’ve
been together and the amazing thing I’ve noticed with their relationship is
that there wasn’t any complaints concerning her marriage towards Arjuna. To
this day, she is blissfully in love with him and he continues to keep his
promise in being the man that she ultimately needs. My observations have shown
me that as a Unity husband, he considers and appreciates their sensorimotor,
cognitive and affective conjunction. His never yells at Visahka and he displays
his outwardly affection whenever Visahka feels comfortable for it to be
expressed. He rarely argues with Visahka on anything, and listens to what she
needs him to do. There was an instance where Visahka told him that he needs to
clean the bathroom and he told said, “Yes, of course I will do it.” As a Unity
wife, Visahka has given up her interests that are independent of Arjuna and
makes an effort to allow him to be more apart of her world. She always takes
him along on any outings she has with her friends. Arjuna is always encouraging
of her living out her youth, but Visahka feels strongly that she needs to
respect Arjuna’s feelings and not go to places where she can put herself in
possible danger of committing an AUV. Arjuna is always there for Visahka
whenever she is sick or gets into a situation that affects her mental
well-being. Whenever he makes mistakes, he doesn’t just send flowers, he changes
his behaviors.
In contrast of Visahka and Arjuna’s
blissful relationship, my mother and her boyfriend Bernard have had their fair
share of ups and downs, considerably down. I’m not trying to use this
explanation of their relationship as bashing against Bernard, but the truth is
that he governs my mother and has kept her for years in treachery of the
dominance phase. My mother and Bernard met when she was about to get a divorce
from my father. My mother was still married to my father when she started to
engage in an extra-marital affair with Bernard. When my father moved out,
months later Bernard started to move in and thus the turmoil began. My parents
divorce was messy and what didn’t help was Bernard’s behavior towards it.
First, they committed AUV #1 when they began living together unmarried. Despite
my mother struggling to support two kids, she got pregnant from Bernard and
committed AUV #2, having children out of wedlock. Because of my father’s
unstable mental condition, my mother was compelled to get an abortion because
she didn’t want to cause disruption and unwanted stress due to an unneeded
responsibility of caring for more children. Bernard was quite upset about her
decision and started to blame my mom including her children about the abortion
of his unborn child. He did not support my mother’s feelings and pain that she
suffered through that ordeal and only focus on himself.
Their explosive relationship
continued until Bernard suffered a major heart-attack that almost killed him.
Before his heart-attack, my mother and he had a huge argument and my mother was
determined to leave him. She has endured several years of mental and physical
abuse at the hands of him. In Dr. James’ (2007) four rules of conjugial
interactions, the first rule deals with a husband/boyfriends commitment in
treating his spouse throughout their marriage like he did when they first met.
Bernard used to shower my mother with gifts, flowers, and took her to hotel
getaways every weekend. Now, my mother would be lucky if he even prepared her
dinner because she rarely gets the gratitude or appreciation which she
deserves. He doesn’t try to make her feel youthful. He always argues with her
about things she needs him to do. He only wants her to be his friend and hates
the fact that she has other friends and never acts friendly towards them. He
breaks the second rule of conjugial interactions. They are still unmarried
today and both have broken their commitments by cheating on each other.
Bernard, frustrated that my mother wouldn’t have sex with him, had his sister
come over to my mother’s house, yell at her, and call her a bad spouse for not
having sex with her brother. This put my mother is a hurtful bind on the basis
of sexual blackmail.
My mother and Bernard are a couple
whose relationship I fondly believe will not expand in eternity. I believe that
when both passes on, they will have to find the person they were meant to be
with in the spiritual realm because they do not resemble a couple who has
achieved Unity. They still remain unmarried to this day.
Lastly, my best friend Nona and her
boyfriend Rudy are believed to me to be a couple who share mixed components in
their relationship path. They have been dating for a year now and are going
through their ups and downs. Rudy has since returned from a 7 month deployment
and Nona is excited to begin her life with him. Their relationship seemed
perfect until the day he left and then they started to encounter some problems
that begin affect their feelings.
Before Rudy left, he told Nona that
because of a previous relationship, he feels that it’s impossible to trust
anyone. He loves and appreciates Nona but he clearly exhibits his dominance by
disregarding Nona’s feelings for his own. Nona felt uncomfortable towards this
assertion but submit to his logic and was committed in trying to show Rudy that
she would be a faithful and trustworthy girlfriend. Each second she waited for
Rudy, sent him food and gifts for him to enjoy while he was deployed in
They started to fight and the
tension kept building until Nona found an e-mail Rudy wrote to one of his
friends that suggested that he was going to break up with Nona. Nona felt
heartbroken and consulted me for advice. Using the concepts I’ve learned from
the Unity Model of Marriage, I advised her that she should ask Rudy what he
meant and that he needs to start being straight-forward and honest with her.
Because Rudy’s friends weren’t respecting Nona as his girlfriend, I suggested
that she ask Rudy to start making his friend mutual friends with her, and that
if they continued to disrespect her then it would be wise for him to terminate
the friendship, seeing that that person doesn’t respect progress of their
relationship. Lastly, I suggested that she should tell Rudy that it’s not
helping the enhancement of their relationship if he doesn’t begin to trust her,
because she feels she has proven herself in that respect. After she discussed
her wishes to Rudy, Rudy agreed to start making his friends mutual with Nona.
He says he is willing to work with Nona on his trust issues and he will be more
honest and straight-forward. However, Rudy asked that Nona respect his feelings
also and not have certain men made disrespectful comments as well. He also felt
hurt that Nona came to me for advice and as he says, “drags other people into
their problems.”
He thinks that it’s fair for him to be completely
straight-forward and honest as long as she brings her problems straight to him
and works with him solving it. Right now they are at the threshold of the
Equity Phase and if they continue to trust one another as well as Rudy being
more sensitive, appreciative and understanding of Nona’s love for him, their
relationship will progress into the Unity Phase and they’ll live happily ever
after.
My advice for Visahka and Arjuna is to keep up what their
doing and treat each day with meaningful appreciation and greatness in that
they are a couple who has achieved Unity. My mother’s boyfriend needs to start
understanding, respecting, and appreciate my mother’s love and commitment she
has given him. Through his surgeries and near-death experiences, she has stayed
by his side and does everything in her power to make sure he is well taken care
of. Bernard needs to respect and honor her feelings and desires. He should try
to make their relationship feel as if it were when they first met and focus
more on achieving greater levels of mental intimacy instead of aspiring to be a
dominant spouse. My mother needs to try to help Bernard see that being a Unity
husband/boyfriend is essential for both of them, especially if they want to
spend eternity together. Nona and Rudy need to work at their relationship, letting
go of each other’s independent values and trying to completely understand each
other. They need to place more emphasis on trust being that this is a main
component in commitment and the motivation one gets in aspiring to be a Unity
couple. But they, as well as my mother and her boyfriend have a long rode ahead
of them. Hopefully things will change.
The Question that I am
answering is Question 13
(a) Go to this site: www.ard.net/Inspirational/Marriage_Stages/marriage_stages.shtml
You will see a brief article The Four Distinct Stages of Marriage.
Analyze each stage in relation to the nine zones of the ennead chart. What is
missing in each stage they describe? How could their Stage 4 be modified (or
Stage 5 added) in order to indicate even greater success of the marriage?
(b) Analyze the seven stages of marriage in this Readers Digest
article on the Web:
www.rd.com/openContentCategory.do?contentCategoryId=703
For each stage, look at the list of items provided and evaluate them from the
perspective of the unity model. Be sure to analyze them or group them in terms
of the threefold self and the type of interaction (phase).
(a)
The Four Distinct Stages of Marriage
The first stage of marriage is referred to as the romance
period, where the fairy tale begins and both sexes have dreams, hopes,
aspirations and wishes they soon hope to see fulfilled through their chosen
mate. It’s a self-centered, blissful mentality that each person develops when
they first enter the relationship because they initially have a very little
desire to get to know the other person. They desire the fact that they’ve
picked someone whom they feel will eventually complete them. In this stage,
each person places idealistic expectations of what their partner is like or
will be, regardless of the truth that their partner may act in a completely
different way. This period is believed to last only shortly after the couple
has been married, because after living and being together, the truth in the
behaviors and actions of each spouse starts to unfold.
The romance
period relates to Zones 1, 2, and 3 on the ennead chart. The major thing that
is missing is whether male dominance particularly occurs in this stage
according to them. In the Unity Model of Marriage, Dr. James (2007)
believes that all relationships begin at the dominance level (corresponding to
zones 1, 2, and 3) where it is the husband who holds an unrealistic image of
what he wants his woman to be like therefore subjecting her to an array of dominant
behaviors. The wife however wants to conjoin with her husband and stays
committed in trying to make him see that conjunction is essential for their
life in eternity together. However as stated before, the romance period relates
to zones 1, 2, and 3 on the ennead chart. In zone 1, the couple has achieved
sensorimotor dominance. They clearly have made their relationship exclusive and
therefore govern their actions through self-centeredness and blissful
expectations. The couple falls under zone 2 of cognitive dominance because the
husband probably believes his wife should act a certain way to fit his needs
and the woman will strive to get her husband to understand that her beliefs are
meaningful in their relationship. Lastly, this couple probably develops
affective dominance (zone 3) because neither one cares, feels, or is motivated
by mental intimacy or the emotions of their partner. Every action and belief is
highly self-centered.
After the
romantic period takes place, the couple enters what’s called the tug-of-war
period. The couple is then forced to realize that the person they married
doesn’t fit into their idealistic perception of a mate. Both parties feel that
they have been paired with someone who not only doesn’t fit their standards,
but to whom they feel cheated from and thus appear to not have any interest in
fulfilling the expectations their partner has. This stage is referred to as a “tug-of-war”
because each partner in the relationship must now feel the burden of trying to
get the other person to understand how they feel without feeling cheated into
adopting something that goes against what they believe in. This stage is highly
governed in the zones 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the dominance and equity levels.
In zone 1
of sensorimotor dominance, a man’s actions are governed solely by his wishes to
impose his will and expectations on his wife. Again, this article doesn’t
specifically claim which partner imposes its will. However, relating this
article to the nine zones of the ennead chart in Dr James’ Unity Model of Marriage
will show that it’s the man who imposes his will on the wife in the beginning.
It is also the man who refuses to believe that working to fulfill his wife’s
expectations is essential for prolonged happiness in their marriage (zone 2 of
cognitive dominance). This stage also states that the one partner (particularly
the husband) feels only motivated to fulfill their needs and desires and
refuses to consider the affective self of he other person (zone 3 of affective
dominance). Although most of the actions seem to be primarily in the dominance
level, this article suggests that each couple should engage in equitable
conversation. According to zone 4 of sensorimotor equity, the interactions of a
couple are in constant competition, but in the equity phase, each person in the
relationship now has a chance to speak their mind and have their opinions heard.
The tug-of-war stage states that when a couple reaches this point in their
relationship, they need to open equitable lines of communication. Both people
need to consider each others thoughts and feelings in respect of their
individuality (zones 5 and 6).
The third
stage is referred to as the “giving up on each other.” Both couples
start turning their frustrations with the other person inward and focusing on
what they can do within themselves to make their OWN life better. They start to
involve themselves with new friends, hobbies, becoming involved in outside
activities, and creating a lifestyle separate of their partner. These actions
and motivations rest solely upon the equity phase (zones, 4, 5, and 6) but can
enter the dominance phase if a partner develops interests that completely
alienate them from their spouse. Both people are in agreement that each person
has a right to separate interests and as long as they communicate honestly and
fairly with one another. However, if a person separates themselves too
dramatically from their marital equation, they fall back into the dominance
phase because they are not being completely fair at including their spouse with
their affairs. But mostly this phase claims that couples must be separated in
order to come together and appreciate each other more. This stage is missing
logical reasoning and asserting myths on the success of relationships. It goes
against the logic of the Unity model, because although the equity phase agrees
that couples will try to retain their separate identities, it does not
encourage couples to live separate lives without including their spouses.
Lastly, the
fourth stage is called the new romance. This stage claims that couples
begin to discover new aspects of each other and appreciate them for who they
are. They know that this type of romance is not an illusion because there aren’t
any unrealistic expectations involved. Both partners work together, with awareness
and respect of each other’s thoughts and feelings, to create an ideal marriage
that most people strive for. It’s assumed that this article has described the
final stage that couples should strive for, but it still lacks one key component:
AFFECTIVE INTIMACY. This last stage still states that it’s perfectly
fine for couple’s to have separate interests because eventually they will
become interested in their partners. This claims that they have achieved
cognitive intimacy but still haven’t acquired affective intimacy of Zone 9 of
the ennead chart.
According
to the expectations that the Unity Model has for couples, the “new romance”
stage would not be the ending point for couples. It would be essential for a
fifth stage to be created which states that in order for the couples to sustain
a truly idealistic marriage, they incorporate aspirations for their marriage to
continue beyond the physical and into the spiritual realm. They also need feel
mutually motivated to rid themselves of their need to have separate interests
and create those which both couples can enjoy doing.
(b)
The Seven Stages of Marriage according to the Reader’s Digest
The First Stage is when both
partners feel complete passion towards one another. Most passion occurs at all
three phases of the Unity Model especially if you’re in an exclusive
relationship, but because all relationships begin in the dominance phase, this
is where the initial passion is governed by sensorimotor dominance. When people
initial place emphasis on the excitement and physical pleasure they receive
from their relationship, they are discussing the actions that go on in the sensorimotor
self. The sensorimotor self interprets sensations and physical interactions,
incorporating it into a person’s well being. This stage involves itself
entirely in the sensorimotor self but will not complete an individual until all
of the selves are working together.
The Second Stage is when
both partners start to realize certain characteristics about each other. This
article claims that for the first time couples find their spouses to be
irritating, boring, or lacking motivation to keep the fire going. Partners
begin to realize that their expectations won’t be easily met. They have to
constantly negotiate things with each other and ask themselves if this is the
person they really want to be with. In this stage, the couple is still located
in the dominance phase in the Unity Model. One or both partners lack motivation
to keep the fire going and find that each person forgets the reasons why they got
married to their spouse in the first place. One person in the relationship
(particular women) have to fight for what they believe in while the other
person takes advantage and manipulates what the other sacrifices. They are
starting to act within their cognitive self. They contemplate and realize that
each spouse has different thoughts and expectations that aren’t easily
attainable.
The Third Stage is when both
partners begin to resent the other person and rebel. This stage operates in a
person’s sensorimotor and affective self, but does not rationalize with the
cognitive. One or both partners are governed by their physical interactions
which are causing extreme discourse in the relationship. They may pursue having
an affair or completely dissolving their marriage. They act within their
affective because either one or both spouses (particularly men in this case)
want to hold on to their independence and pursue separate interests. When a
couple has reached this stage, they are primarily governed in the dominance
phase, but if both partners agree that each person has a separate mindset that’s
important to consider, then they can start advancing to the equity phase.
The Fourth Stage is when each
spouse starts to consider the contributions and mindset of the person they are
married to. Unlike the dominance phase, the couple who has entered this stage understands
each person’s right to an opinion, but the tasks of daily force them to have
different priorities. They both have to handle taking care of kids, paying
bills, etc. These tasks can sometime become overwhelming and both partners have
to work together to make it work and seem fair. But like the Equity model, in
this stage they are probably competing to see that one person doesn’t take on
more of the load than the other. They probably strive to make things fair and
reasonable which would show that they both use their cognitive self. They start
to think along the lines of what is fair.
The Fifth State is when the
couple starts to relax after the kids have grown up and moved out of the home.
Their interactions are still primarily in the Equity Phase. They try to hear
what each person has to say without interrupting. They perceive their spouse
more as a business partner than they do a soul mate. There concerned with the
materialistic aspects of their relationship versus what they can achieve with a
spiritual mentality. Their sensorimotor and cognitive selves come in to play in
this stage. Their verbal interactions are fairly considered and each person
listens to what the other has to say without trying to dominate the
conversation. However, this stage does allow the couple to negotiate and work
towards a conclusion which is fair and productive. Their cognitive self governs
their thoughts of believing that they are with someone to achieve an equal
partnership rather than expanding their beliefs that their marriage is more
than that.
The Sixth Stage is when a
stroke of luck or catastrophe befalls the couple. I believe that this stage
doesn’t really fall under any particular phase of marriage but governs the
affective self of both partners. If something were to happen such as one of the
spouses has a life-threatening illness or they win the lottery, it would change
both spouses’ motivations and desires. If a spouse were to incur a
life-threatening illness, then the other spouse would be assumed to be more
motivating in doing all they can to make sure that that person’s needs and
desires are fulfilled. This could immediately place the couple into the Unity
Phase, but in some cases, the ill spouse will take advantage of this treatment
and continue to inflict dominance over the other (dominance phase). These events
that are likely to occur in one’s life will affect a person’s feelings and
motivations in handling what is bestowed upon them.
The Seventh and Last Stage
is when couples don’t have to worry about taking care of kids and worrying
about career choices. Hopefully, their finances are in check and they can
finally focus on their health and happiness together. The descriptions in this
section was once again vague and only describe the couple and feeling relieved
from most of their adult responsibilities. I believe that in this phase, the
couple still hasn’t achieved Unity, but can work in the Equity Phase in coming
to a conclusion about how they want their marriage to be. There interactions or
sensorimotor self should be calmer and more conjunctive. There thoughts should
start to become synchronized and both partners need to start carefully consider
the other’s beliefs (cognitive self). The husband needs to start motivating himself
to do whatever the wife desires because this will ultimately help them achieve
mental intimacy of the affective self. They need to understand each other’s
feelings and do things that make the other person feel good.
The Question that I am
answering is Question 14
(a) Explore the song analysis technique used by students in the 1982
generation: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/student3/amyl/public_html/499/songls.html
Describe the technique they used for song analysis and their conclusions. What
is your reaction in relation to AUVs and UVs?
(b) Explore the song analysis technique used by G24 students in 2006:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/ See
their Report 1, section (e).
Describe the technique they used for song analysis and their conclusions. What
is your reaction in relation to AUVs and UVs?
(c) Read the article titled "Why Britney Spears Matters"
at: www.gwu.edu/~medusa/2001/britney.html
Summarize and discuss what the article says. Discuss the article in relation to
the unity model and the three phases.
(e) What are the social implications of all this, e.g., for you, your sisters, young women. What do you recommend as a way of dealing with the situation?
(a) Song Analysis
from the 1982 Generation
Dr. James’ 1982 generation of this psychology class analyzed several songs of the time and saw how they related to some of the Anti-Unity Values (AUV) and Unity Values (UV) which are portrayed throughout the media. Some of the songs which were analyzed were popular hits like “Evergreen” by Barbara Streisand, and “The Greatest Love of All” by Whitney Houston. Their technique was to analyze each verse of the song and state how it related to the mentality of its protagonist.
In the song “In my Room” by the Beach Boys, the protagonist in the song is a male who keeps his feelings secret from his wife. He creates his own world where he goes to his room, locks himself away and lets all of his emotions spill out. There is a line where he says “Do my dreaming and my scheming.” The student who analyzed this song believed that he was thinking of ways to get revenge. This is seen as AUV #3, where the spouse tries to make the other person jealous on purpose. The analysis by the student concludes that this song portrays a man who hides himself away from his problems to overcome his intimidation through interior dialogue. Instead of exposing his emotions, he tries to work it out on his own. Unity husbands must follow rules to conjugial conversation and one rule states that a husband must fight the urge to negate and argue with his wife. He must have jovial thoughts of his wife when she’s not around or with him. In this case, the protagonist seems to apply this concept of interior dialogue, but still continues to hide his affective self from the world and doesn’t think pleasant thoughts.
In contrast to the negativity of “In my Room,” Barbara Streisand wrote a song called “Evergreen” that shed light on some Unity Values (UV) discussed in Section 21 in Dr. Leon James’ Unity Model of Marriage. In “Evergreen,” Streisand’s protagonist has found a love that she feels completes her. The song states that love does not come with surrealistic expectations of what you hope your spouse would be like, but rather through work you’ll see something incredible grow (aka Evergreen). She uses a spiritual dimension in her song by saying “love is ageless, and evergreen.” If I we’re to compose a list of UV’s, understanding that you will live with your spouse together in eternity would be one of them. In order to be a Unity couple, you have to adopt a spiritual regard that your relationship is never-ending. In the verse “you and I will make each night a first,” gives the message of an UV for husbands who should follow the first rule of conjugial interactions and make their wives feel like they are meeting the man of their dreams over and over again. This ultimately contributes to the happiness of the couple and their journey into eternity. The student who analyzed this song comes to the same conclusions as I that this song represents many aspects of what couples should strive for in trying to be a Unity Couple.
(b)
Song Analysis From the 2006 Generation
Skip Saito analyzed lyrics from Eminem and Usher and found that they conveyed AUV’s. His technique was to state what types of AUV’s were demonstrated in both artist’s songs. In Eminem’s song “Jealousy Woes II,” Saito explains several AUV’s displayed throughout the song. Some of these AUV’s are making a spouse jealous on purpose, and flirting with other gender as retaliation against one’s partner (or other reason). He analyzes the dynamics between the husband and wife. The wife refused to commit to the husband through her actions of cheating on him. However, the husband continues to hold on to his hurtful feelings and continues to use language that degrades and threatens her threefold self. Saito believes that this couple is stuck in the dominance phase of the Unity model. I believe that many of the songs that Eminem writes promotes AUV’s without any regrets to whomever his words may affect. He wrote a graphic song explaining how he wants to murder his wife and rape his mother. Eminem needs to truly consider what his right of free speech influences others to coerce and prohibit the rights of others, especially towards women in a male-dominated society.
Carly Kanemura analyzed songs from Atlantic Starr and Jay-Z. She begins this section by explaining her beliefs that music displays many AUV’s. She believes that people are so sensitized to listen to songs with explicit lyrics that they don’t necessarily catch the messages that are being portrayed. She also states that people continue to enjoy these songs despite how these songs could possibly be influencing their mentalities. Her techniques for analyzing these songs are trying to relate the different occurrences where people hear them. The song “Secret Lovers” by Atlantic Starr is commonly heard on easy listening radio, which is commonly played at workplaces or professional offices. I’ve seen a commercial recently for T-mobile that used this song for a comical ad campaign. A boyfriend confronts his best friend about why his friend has his girlfriend in his “top 5” people that his friend calls. His friend claimed that they were just friends, then the phone rings and the ring tone is surprisingly “Secret Lovers.” The person who is calling happens to be the girlfriend and the friend of the boyfriend stands there looking dumbfounded.
Kanemura explains that one of the AUV’s demonstrated is adultery for various reasons. When someone in the relationship has an affair, they relinquish their commitment to their spouse. There are not committing to having an exclusive relationship with someone and placing their self-centered needs above the person that they claim to be in a relationship with. They commit the AUV where a person develops a heterosexual relationship at which they place them ahead of their partner’s needs. I believe that you cannot have secret relationships or affairs with other people because it threatens all aspects of commitment and reason for being in a so-called exclusive relationship. If someone feels compelled to cheat on their spouse, then they need to consider reasons as to why they still want to be with their spouse. For the decency of the other spouse, the partner who wishes to commit adultery should consider the feelings of the other person and end the relationship before causing extreme emotional damage. Kanemura examines Jay-Z’s song and how it displays many AUV’s. Some AUV’s that are portrayed are viewing women as inferior to men and influences them to manipulate women for their own prerogatives. When I was 13, I loved this song and would dance to it at school functions.
Jay-Z’s music videos, especially with “Big Pimpin,” are very explicit and portray women as looking like “sluts” as a means of being sexy. This artistic expression further degrades women and influences men to govern interactions and behaviors that exploit them. Kanemura believes that it’s hard to escape the effects of music because music is an integral part of people’s lives. Sometimes people appreciate music for the beats and sound while not paying particular attention to the message they are trying to promote. She believes that these values expressed through music continue to promote illogical strategies that happiness is acquired to the exploitation and degradation of another person. I think pop-culture is so confused with morality and positive ways in achieving happiness with a partner. These songs tell society to adopt self-centered attitudes and easy, less meaningful mechanisms to achieve some feelings of happiness. But what people begin to realize is that when they continue to use strategies that are insufficient in maintaining prolonged happiness. They are constantly left feeling incomplete because in order to have a complete relationship, they need conjoin and try to develop mental intimacy with their spouse.
(c)
Why Britney Spear’s Matters
When Britney Spear’s exploding onto the pop-culture scene in 1998, no one expected that her squeaky clean persona could be tainted by indecent behavior guided by her misunderstand of what a idol to thousands of girls and woman should resemble. In article, Why Britney Spear’s Matters, the author discusses her beliefs on why Britney Spear’s misleads younger women into thinking that in order to be desired, you have to adopt submissive behaviors and expose yourself in a risqué way. Britney Spear’s promotes many ideals focused in the bottom dominance level of the Unity model of marriage. In her song “Hit me baby one more time,” the title itself promotes what could possible be seen as physical abuse. This song stayed on the top 10 charts for months! When I was 12, I felt completely enamored by this song and my friends and I all tried to act like Britney Spear’s by doing sexy dances in front of boys. The author tries to ask if whether or not these behaviors are healthy in the personal and social development of young woman. What types of expectations are being placed on young women and how are the newly profound pressure of trying to sexy affecting a girl’s sense of inner being?
As compared to the feminist movement, which began in the 1960’s, girl groups of that era were influencing young girls with their lyrics on lust and love. Back then however, sexuality wasn’t as glorified as it is today. Singers like Aretha Franklin in her song “Respect” were pushing women to step out of their boundaries and get men to start respecting them for who they are and what they have to offer. There were songs that Britney Spear’s sang which promoted female empowerment such as “Stronger,” but mainly her songs continue to promote male dominance and the traditional submissive role women are subjected to. In her song “Toxic,” the chorus of the song goes “you’re toxic and I’m sinking under…” This is clear evidence that whether or not she’s consciously aware of her actions, they are still promoting Anti-Unity Values and behavior in younger women. Unlike Aretha Franklin and other artists and other artists like Mary J. Blige and Kelly Clarkson, Britney Spears lacks execution of messages that promote higher levels of relationship bliss that can be found in the equity and unity phases. Her words and visual images primarily support love of the sex, which is the lower, natural, and animalistic ways in which people think and govern their actions. Sexiness is not found in wearing skimpy outfits and talking about sexually suggestive acts; it’s about gaining mental intimacy and trying to motivate people in aspiring to become a Unity couple. All of those non-degrading sexy behaviors come with couples who are Unity because they have created atmospheres where both people feel totally comfortable with one another.
Britney Spears as well as the media needs to start focusing on higher levels of thinking and behaving and stop promoting women to act upon unreasonable standards that continue to put them under lower levels of social acceptance.
(d)
Britney Spears and the Social Implications in its Affects on Today’s
Female Youth
Britney Spear’s offers misinterpreting messages to younger females of our generation that in order to be sexy, one has to wear skimpy clothing and carry themselves in a sexually matured way. When I was 12, I first saw Britney Spears dancing provocatively in a sexy schoolgirl outfit. This caused an uproar with organizations concerned with morality that asked how 16 year old Britney Spears promoting a “Lolita-esque” image is beneficial for her peers. They also asked what were the costs of her behavior towards her peers and younger generations. Britney Spears as well as other pop princess’ claim that they are trying help girls feel confident and sexy with their bodies. They use the feministic excuse to justify their behaviors and standards that some girls find hard to achieve. When your fan base are pre-teen and adolescent girls, you have to question how their development is affected by this. How are you placing idealistic standards into the hands of adolescent boys who shouldn’t be concerned on what a perfect woman should be like? These boys will get into relationships expecting their girlfriends to resemble sexy vixens and dismiss the average everyday girl who possesses qualities that go beyond the physical. These image of expand men’s sensorimotor dominance where their needs are primarily focused on getting sex.
The Unity model is not saying that women shouldn’t have a right to exhibit themselves as sexy, attractive, and desirable for their partner. It’s trying to destroy images the subject women to resemble whores, harlots, “sluts,” or pressure them to live up to unreasonable standards. Britney Spears is not the only person at fault for her actions. The Media continues to feed the masses images of women being degraded and men being the cause of it. They reinforce these behaviors by telling our generation that in order to be beautiful, you have to degrade yourself or feed into the animalistic desires of males. The only way for both sexes to be complete with themselves and with another partner is to appreciate mental intimacy versus sexual. People are not complete unless they’ve met a partner that completes their world, and the only way to obtain a true sense of totality with another person is to respect, honor, and desire mental intimacy with them. Just look at Britney Spears today. She thought she met the man of her dreams and yet her indecent antics have now thrown her into a public divorce. Again you have to ask: What are we as a generation promoting and why?
My Report on the Current Generation
(G26)
Samantha Voss Report 1 found at: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2007/voss/voss-409b-g26-report1.htm
Voss (2006) begins her report by explaining the ennead chart which, through personal experience, is quite difficult to understand. She then compares the movie A Knight’s Tale (2001) with the movie Prime (2005) and found many contrasts between them. She found that the couple’s relationship in the movie Prime was more involved in the dominance and equity phases, whereas the couple’s relationship in the movie A Knight’s Tale was enlightened in the Unity Phase. She believes that movies portraying male dominance and exploitation of woman definitely have effects on younger generations. It took Voss a long time to figure out a movie that would contrast male dominance and promote Unity. This alludes to the fact that majority of the film all generations view today violate the ideals of Unity and promote male dominance and disjunction. Voss however believes that it’s up to the parents and adults to work together to monitor, limit and explain the affects of their children are viewing and reinforce moralistic behavior.
After summarizing the
reports of prior generations, which all maintain a group consensus that media
has an affect on the behaviors and mentality of youth, Voss discusses her
beliefs that adults need to educate youth. She believes children are like
sponges and they will absorb any information you tell them. What I believe in
expansion to Voss’ beliefs is that if people continue to reinforce disjunctive
behaviors, then children are more likely to perform them. Voss feels that we as
a society should try to stop feeding them misleading facts that the tries to
impose on society. She was horrified when young girls were suckered in to
resembling the overindulging behaviors of
After discussing the what conjunctive and disjunctive interactions were, she believes that a “sexy speech” (not sexual speech) is better received than unsexy conversational styles. She has found that in her relationship, she appreciates her boyfriends conversational style because he considers what she has to say and makes her feel as though her thoughts and emotions are important. She feels that couples should want to feel happy and have elated feelings of love and trust in their relationships. This, she believes, should be everyone’s goal if they want to be a Unity couple.
She feels great
appreciation for taking Dr. James class because it’s helped to realize how
lucky she is to have a boyfriend who follows the path of Unity. She is proud of
her parents who have been married 36 years and continue acting like a Unity
couple. She believes that Dr. James’ work is helpful to anyone in a
relationship.
Lester Papalii Report 1 found at: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2007/papalii/papalii-409b-g26-report1.htm
Lester Papalii (2006) analyzed the movie Prime (2005) and the movie Fever Pitch (2005). He charted the instances of each interaction to the corresponding zone of the ennead chart. He found that there weren’t any substantial differences between both of the movies. He believes that effects of movies such as Prime and Fever Pitch depends primarily on other factors such as age, parental involvement, peer influences and length of exposure. As someone who works at a movie theater, he has seen young children sneak into “R” rated films. These children could possibly be influenced by the behaviors portrayed on film. He believes that since some movies that illustrate disjunctive actions aren’t popular amongst teens, these movies don’t have as much of an effect, but nonetheless, other movies do.
After summarizing what other generations said about AUV’s affecting younger generations, he relates his experiences as being a “television junkie” towards this topic. He believes that television does affect perceptions of gender roles and marriage relationships particularly in youth. He believes that television is not like it was in the past. With television shows today raising the limits of what should be shown, TV is more harmful and affect’s younger generations who are stimulated by what they see. He feels that movies today are created with the agenda to push false stereotypes upon us. Because there are so many issues that adults are society is involved with today, especially in families, it’s hard to pay particular attention or monitor what your children see. Parents view television as a means to occupy their child’s time versus giving more personal attention to their welfare.
Papalii discovered research articles pertaining to the issue of disjunctive behaviors in adolescent youth. One article that sparked my attention was “Watching Sex on Television Predicts Adolescent Initiation of Sexual Behavior.” Youth 12-17 years of age who watched higher levels of sexual content appeared like adults 2-3 years older than them. It bring up questions of whether adolescent boys and girls are growing up to fast or creating unnecessary sexual behavior and desires at such a young age.
Lastly, Papalii finds the threefold self interesting because it thoughtfully puts together concepts of interactions in relationships. He feels that he can benefit from these concepts and filter out instances where he experiences situations that threaten conjugial happiness. He believes that some concepts should be modified to incorporate information on subjects like dating before reaching intimacy and the role of children in marriage.
Advice to Future
Generations
For success in Dr. Leon James The Unity Model of Marriage class, you really need to keep on top of your assignments. Some of these assignments should be carefully thought out and considered in order for you to get something out of this class. Take everything his lecture notes say with a “grain of sand.” Some of the topics that he’ll bring up seem very controversial or you may not be used to his ideals because you, like most people, have been brought up to believe that love is supposed to follow a certain path. Here he offers another path and only wishes for the person to use this information to enhance their personal relationships throughout life. Whether you agree or disagree, just understand that his model may help you to discover things about yourself and allows for a person to openly express what’s considered ridiculous in a modern and traditional society.
Again, as I’ve stated before in my first Report, use what you know and what you’ve been taught throughout your time as a psychology major. You’d be surprised to find that a lot of what you believe contradicts the Unity Model of Marriage actually compliments or is stated. The Unity model focuses highly on a spiritual factor which Dr. James believes to play a role in the positive bias a person can have when encountering things that cannot be physically explained or seen. Just because you may think highly on one side of either the nature or nurture debate, if you pay close attention to what Dr. James is trying to say, you will see that he incorporates both factors into his model. Good Luck and may unity be with you.
Links
My Home Page:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2007/sasser/sasser-home.htm
G26 Class Home Page: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy26/classhome-g26.htm