Report 2

My Understanding of the Unity Model of Marriage

By: Chad Garhartt

Instructions for this report are at:

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy21/409b-g21-report2.htm 

Question 5

Select six student reports on marriage from Generation 20, as listed in the Readings section of the Lecture Notes.You must select any two students from Report 1, any two from Report 2, and any two from Report 3. Summarize each of the six reports. Be sure to put a link to the students' reports. Add a General Conclusion Section in which you discuss your reactions to what they did (a) their ideas, (b) their method, (c) their explanations. What did they gain from doing their reports? How do their ideas influence what you yourself think about these issues?

First Report From Generation 20-

The first report I choose from generation 20 was report one by Ann, her report can be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/ann/report1.htm. As she started her first report she discussed the three fold self. She talks about the The four components ofgcognitive scriptsh, gbehavioral routinesh, gcognitive appraisalh, and gemotional intelligenceh. Then mentions how the cognitive script is behavior that one has internalized to determine onefs motive of affect. Behavioral routines is role that we have acquired to play a role for different situation in society.

In the next article Ann discusses how rage and violence are used many time against women. Ann also gives a cultural example of how women are abused in Afghanistn and are made to cover their body. This section can be related to the dominant model. There are a lot of cultures, including the United States that have a male dominated society. As long as there is a dominant partner someone will always be getting hurt and will not be able to get their feelings across to their partner. Ann uses previous articles to get a better idea of the three fold self and how to set up her report.

In Anns introduction Ann gives examples of the three-fold self in action between couples. Ann continued to go into the aspect of the male trying to find his conjoint self. I found this section to be similar to my ideas from out lecture notes. I agree with the fact that as long as a male is independent and acting from himself, the couple will never be able to reach the unity model.

In the next section, Ann discusses ten different articles that help explain what gender differences actually are. I will give a few examples from her articles to show what gender differences are. The first article looks at gender differences in a biological or nature view. She discusses how women are better able to feel other peoples anger and be more empathetic. She also discusses how mens thought process is more logical and more rigid. I definitely agree with this concept because I learned in my neuroscience class that men and women different thought processes. For example, women are better at verbal test while men are better at spatial tests.

The second article discusses how men are naturally more aggressive than women, which leads to more men being in the dominant role while more women being in the submissive role. Ann continued to discuss how aggression could lead to more rapes and sexist feelings by men. These violent attitudes definitely show how aggression is more common in men . Even if men are not acting out on these aggressive feelings, these feelings still will come out to dominate a relationship.

In article six, Ann discusses how men are more aggressive drivers than women. By taking Driving Psychology with Dr. James, I have learned that men are naturally more aggressive drivers. Not only is this an innate characteristic, but are also effected by society. There are many video games, movies and television programs that promote aggression.

In Anns conclusion, she talks about how these ideas can be related to her personal life. Ann discussed many issues on gender differences that she found interesting and would be able to relate to her own life.

Conclusion-

Anns Ideas-

I felt Anns ideas came from her own view and paralled many of the articles that she read. She defiantly gave good examples of how men and women have gender differences due to innate characteristics.

Anns Methods-

Ann used the method that all students who take Dr. James classes. Her Paragraphs were separated and the titles of each section were clearly stated. This allows for easy reading and allows for readers who might not be familiar with Dr. James classes to understand the material, even if they dont have a lot of knowledge on the topic.

Anns explanation and Benefits-

The three-fold self was a big part of Anns explanations. She discusses how the four concepts of the three-fold self are useful in finding out to not have so many problems with gender differences. Ann benefited from this report by having some questions answered from the articles she read. For example, Ann was curious about some of the violence toward women. Ann realized that a lot of violence toward women stems from natural aggressive tendencies in men. Anns question about divorce was also answered in this report. Ann learned that people mainly get divorced due to differences in the affective model.

My opinion-

I have always felt pretty strong about the biological aspects of why males and females are different. Her articles on gender differences in driving and aggression gave me a better understanding of why there is a difference. I was also unaware of why couples would get divorced even though they were in love in the beginning the marriage. I have had many friends whose parents were divorced and I never really got the real details on divorce. Learning about how the affective self is a big part of the reason really gives me a better understanding.

Second Report from generation 20

The second report I choose was report 1 by howard. http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/howard/report1.htm. In the preface of Howards report, he summarizes three different prior generation articles. The first article is about the three fold-self. He explains how if people cant understand why they are thinking what therere thinking, then they will not be able to realize why they act like they act. The next article discusses some aspects of violence relating to gender differences. In the last article of the preface Howard discusses how there are gender difference in driving among male and females.

In the introduction, Howard discusses how the information from Dr. James can be very helpful to allow other couples to reach the unity model and conjugial love. One important aspect of reaching the unity model is for both couples to understand their three-fold selves. I give examples of a few different articles that can give couples a better idea of how to reach the unity model and conjugial love.

The article on Gender Differences in language by Deborah Tannen, discusses how men and women talk differently which causes them to learn differently in the classroom. Tannen first discusses how girls who go to all girl schools perform better than girls integrated with guys. The main reason for this is because men are in more of the discussions. Tannen discusses how in casual conversations females talk about their problems and want to have their feelings heard. Males tend to put each other down more and are more sarcastic in conversation.

The next article I choose was by Cara Lucy, http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/459ss97/clucey/report2.html. Cara discusses how gender differences of dominance can be seen in driving. Cara discusses how a lot of women will let their male partner drive, which shows how the couple is in the dominance model. A couple in the dominance model will have the male controlling the women by having her thoughts and actions parallel that of the husbands. In one of the surveys Cara choose, the statistics show that women are better at following directions and that men are better are dealing with stressful situations like traffic and accidents. Once again, the material illustrates how men and women are different not only through cultural norms and gender norms, but a lot of the difference is just biological. Men and women are built differently mentally and Physically. Driving psychology is just another way to illustrate men and womens biological difference.

The next article I choose from Howards report was on Dr. James article on discourse, the affective, cognitive and sensorimotor aspects. Dr. James states that what we say depends on how we are thinking and feeling. The environment which surrounds us influences how we are thinking or feeling. For example, when we are driving our thoughts and feelings will be different than when we are sitting in the classroom. When we are driving we will be on alert and will thinking of our driving, or should be anyways. In the classroom, our thoughts and feeling will be on the topic being discussed. Dr. James discusses how the idea of thought control is an impossible idea.

In the conclusion, Howard talks about how it will be hard for people to get the information on gender differences. Most people will not seek out this information, and with Dr. James not there to help explain the information, the material would be hard to understand.

Howards Ideas

Howards overall idea of keeping a positive bias on the material is a very different view from some of the other generations. Howard is telling the readers to view the material as possible. I feel this is a great message to give, because one cant take every piece of information and believe it is going to work. It is better to know some ideas are possible for some people and not so helpful to others. Like Anns report, Howard also felt the three-fold self is a very important piece of information to understand the differences between gender relationships.

Howards Methods-

His methods were very similar to Anns report. His method of the positive bias was a little different than other classmates, but I felt is was a very good idea. All of the information was presented in clear and understandable format.

Howards explanation and Benefits-

Howards explanation of the reports written by Swedenborgs conjugial love and Leon James article on Discourse were explained very clear and precise. I believe Howard benefited from this report by learning how to actually develop a relationship into the unity model. By researching information on differences in discourse, biological differences and language, I feel he has a better understanding of the three-fold self and the unity model of marriage.

My Opinion-

I feel the idea of keeping a positive bias was the greatest piece of information I gathered from this report. Not only should a person reading these reports keep a positive bias, but people should keep a positive bias about all aspects they feel might help them throughout life.

Third Report from Generation 20-

The third report I choose was report 2 by Jocelyn Hostetler. I choose Jocelyn because in the pre-face she discusses what the first report was about, but also discusses how she feels the unity model is not relevant to society because she does not believe god as the creator of man and woman. I thought it would be interesting to see a non-religious persons point of view of conjugial love and the unity model.

The first part of report 2 was to self-witness someone close our their own three-fold self. Jocelyn observes her two friends who are going out. She observes how long they spend together and what activities they performed together. She then looked at dominance and control through the sensorimotor self. The couple did not seem to have control issues. They both like certain acitivies and had fun together. The next part was negotiation areas of the cognitive self. The couple shows a little difference in the cognitive self. The womans goals are to finish school and get a degree while the male has two kids from a previous relationship and his focus is on his kids. The next part of the experiment was on mutual trust through the affective self. They are both getting up in the morning, but by the start of the day their reasons for their actions are on two different levels due to cognitive differences listed above.

In the analysis and discussion section, Jocelyn states by observing the couple she found a better understanding of gender relationships in a biological view, cultural view, and in terms of the unity model.

Jocelyns ideas-

Her ideas were very clear in the sense that she wanted to find out how the equity model could be better understood by observing a couple and their three-fold self. Jocelyns ideas in the beginning were a bit different because she made it clear she was not religious and many of the ideas by Dr. James presents have religious undertones.

Methods-

Her methods were like the rest of her classmates and the setup given by Dr. James. Her report was very organized and clear in fact that if I were an outsider to the class, I would be able to understand the content of the information.

Explanation and Benefits

Even though Jocelyn is not a religious person, this report has allowed her to have a better grasp on gender relationships. It has even allowed her to form a better relationship with her homosexual father.

My Opinion

I have also learned about gender relationships by looking at the couple in the experiment. They showed me how even though a couple want to have a relationship in the unity model, some outside factors can overcome the deepest love. In their case it is children, age and a previous marriage. All of these factors will allow both to think on a different cognitive level.

Fourth Report From Generation 20

The fourth report I choose was the second by Chris M. In Chriss preface he discusses the objectives of his report 1. This information is valuable because it gives the reader an idea of the information Chris has been studying. Many of his ideas of report 2 might stem or relate to report 1. Chris states how todays society is in an emotional spin cycle. A lot of people are in such a hurry these days, their emotions are on a roller coaster ride. In order to get their emotions under control, a lot of people are trying to become more spiritual. Chriss experiment was a collection of daily logs from generation 16 who were doing a similar report to his.

A main part of his experiment was the bridge technique.The bridge technique is a technique to bridge the negative and positive feelings of others/world and yourself by using the sensorimotor, the cognitive, and the affective for which we have control over. This bridge technique has two zones: red and blue. The red zone is used to cross negative to positive thinking about others, and the blue zone crosses negative thinking to positive of self. The red zone is how we view others and the world around us, and the blue zone is how we see ourselves emotionally.

Chris then used a global emotional scale which scales our general moods. He then viewed his emotions over a four day period and gave himself a score. He tried to use the bridge technique when he was driving and when he was waking up. For Chris waking up is alto easier than driving. He discusses how he has used this bridging technique through out his whole life. He didnt know turning a positive into a negative had an actual scientific name.

In the discussion and analysis, Chris goes over some of the lessons he learned from the experiment.

Chriss ideas-

Chriss ideas were much more systematic and concrete than any of the other reports I read. By this, I mean there was actual data to show why Chris was thinking the way he was. The reader can view his dissatisfaction of other people, the amount of productivity he felt and his general mood. This allows the reader to see what Chris was feeling and give them a better estimation of what he was thinking through his feelings.

Chriss method-

His method was much more scientific. There was data and analysis which gave the report a different look from the rest of generation twenty. There was a lot of information to follow throughout but I didnt have any problems following the information from the tables. Chriss report was defiantly more complex than any other report and that is why it might be a little more difficult for outsiders to Dr. Jamess class to read.

Explanation and Benefits-

Chris defiantly got a lot out of this report. He learned a lot about his three-fold self. He learned that he has many negative emotions but has the ability to change them. He feels that many people including himself are setting unrealistic goals for themselves and when they fall short they are too hard on themselves. He also learned the three-fold self is always in constant motion. This is a very hard idea according to Chris and I would have to agree with. He also feel the bridge technique is a very good idea to overcome gender differences. If people can always pull some light out of bad thoughts, feelings and actions, society would be a better place.

My Opinion-

I have definitely learned about the three fold self and more importantly the bridge technique. This is not a new technique to me but a hard one to practice. A lot of times when negative feelings come about, they are hard to let go.

Fifth Report from Generation 20

The fifth report I choose was the third report by Jennifer Combs. In the preface of Jennifer's report, she talks about her previous report and its conclusion.  Jennifer explains her view on the gender unity model. Jennifers view is that a couple in the unity model has a relationship that is united spiritually and physically forever. She believes that unity is much smoother in this model and that the couple must endure the two other stages of Dominance and Equity to reach Unity. The third section is on some class presentations and lecture notes of her fellow classmates. Here she talks about some of the ideas she liked and disliked of her classmates. For example, she was not in agreement with the idea of how conjugial love does not come to us naturally. She was fond of the idea of the unity and conjugial love.

The fourth section was her proposal for Anti-Value Ratings for Television. AUVs are based on a particular scale pertaining to something that is related towards anti-unity, which doesn't relate to unification. For example: Living together unmarried, having children out of wedlock. making each other jealous on purpose and adultery for various reasons. Jennifers objective was to watch a television program called Every Body Loves Raymond As Jennifer was watching the program she observed to see if any of the AUVs were present in the episode. First she found manipulating the partner through deception. In the episode Raymond deceives his wife by lying to her. Then she found the AUV that men are more important than women. Next she found the idea that men are more rational than women. The last AUV she found was the idea that it is ok to agree or disagree about certain topics. As commercials would run, Jennifer would look at the rating of the AUV scale and put each AUV she observed from the show onto the scale. In the conclusion, Jennifer discussed how the report helped her in her own life.

Jennifers Ideas

Jennifers ideas were very clear and the experiment was very clear. I thought it was pretty creative to relate a popular television show to stereotypes about women. The shows content is definatley overlooked by constant humor which could be giving our society the wrong message.

Jennifers Methods-

Her set was the same as other classmates except for her experiment. The experiment was in a clear and organized setup. She was able to show her data very clearly by having the gender charts before the experiment.

Jennifers explanations and Benefits.

This experiment allowed Jennifer to see how the media can show gender stereotypes in a family type of show. The use of comedy allows viewers to not really mind these stereotypes. Jennifer will try to now look for AUVs in the media and not just pass by them. She will realize they are negative stereotypes and sort of block the message by not enjoying over learning.

My Opinion

I never really thought about looking for AUVs before reading this report. Most of the time I have wathced shows for pure entertainment. When I watch them I am not looking for stereotypes about women, but I will probably become more alert about AUVs due to Jennifers report.

Sixth report From Generation 20 My Proposal for Tv Ratings and Anti-Unity Values.

The sixth report I choose was from Ruby Englebrecht. http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/ruby_skies/report3.htm. In the preface, Ruby discusses the effects of media on our society. Ruby uses the show on HBO called Sex in The City to show how modern society views gender relationships. Ruby also believes the show illustrates the social inequality for women in todays patriarchal society. In the next section, Ruby discusses her objectives for report 2.

 

The introduction states how the unity model is basically the highest point a couple wants to reach in their relationship. Ruby believes the model of unity can be reached by aligning the male and female together to become one. She continues to discuss the three-fold self and the three aspects of biology, culture and socialization that affect the three fold self.

 

In the next section, Ruby looked at three reports and listed point of agreement and disagreement. When Ruby observed Howards report, she disagreed with the section on conjugial love from Dr. Jamess Doctrine of The Wife. Ruby believe that some of Swedenborgs ideas are a bit sexist. Ruby did agree with the concept that the male must give himself of up a 100% in order to for the couple to reach a stage of conjugial love.

 

Her experiment is based on the fact that men and women have the need to be loved. There is a hard and soft spot in each individual and it takes getting to know all sides of person to reach a point where a successful relationship can be achieved. She starts her experiment by discussing what AUVs are. In her opinion AUVs are apart of the three-fold self of an individual that is opposing to unity values. She also states how Sex in The City is an extremely feministic point of view. Ruby used the list of AUVs provided by Leon James and made note of any AUVs presented as normal in the show Sex and the City. For example, a character in the movie, who is a female, had intercourse with a man and then asked him to leave right away. The AUV was objectifying the man and the woman. The evaluation was that men use women for sex so women should play their game as well.

 

Rubys Ideas

Rubys ideas are clear, but I would have to disagree on the fact that the show Sex and The City takes a feminist point of view. The character who narrates the show and the other characters who are involved are not feminists. They all like to date men and many times are in the submissive role while in a relationship. No feminist would be in the submissive role in my view. Her main idea of the report was that society does have an impact on the way men and women interact together.

 

Rubys Methods

 

Her presentation of the report was very clear. She clearly stated the objective of the experiment and how her ideas were related to the objectives. She followed the outline given by Dr. James very well. I believe and outsider reading this report would have a clear understanding of the material.

 

Rubys explanations and Benefits

 

Ruby gained a better understanding of why some feminists have such a strong feeling toward men. She believes feminist dont see a foreseeable change in men. Ruby says that men do need to change in order for women to train them to become conjoint and united with the wife.

 

My opinion

 

Again, I feel the show was not from a feminist view, and also feel that Ruby goes to much into feminism and doesnt concentrate enough on gender relationships. I do believe that the media gives off many stereotypes and negative information to men and women. Negative messages of sleeping around and using people can only give people the wrong message.

 

Question 2

Contrast the three views of gender relationships expressed by Deborah Tannen in Gender Issues, Laura Schlessinger in The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands, and Leon James in The Doctrine of the Wife. Give a summary of your analysis by creating a chart or table that shows the differences between them in a systematic way. Give your opinion on the elements or entries in your chart. How do your own views compare to whats in the chart? How are your ideas influenced by these three different perspectives on marriage?

In question 2 I used three different charts to illustrate the views of Deborah Tannen, Laura Schlessinger, and Dr. Leon James. For each chart I listed three aspects of gender relationships that would express the view of each author. The first section was the husbands perspective. The second section was the role of the wifes perspective. The last section is the couples perspective. All three sections show how to enhance gender relationships between couples. In the analysis section I contrasted and compared the three tables to show the different view of each author on gender relationships.

Flow Chart 1 Dr. Leon James, The Doctrine of The Wife Chart. Dr. James Doctrine of The Wife Talks about how a couple need to be conjoined as one. Enlightenment and Wholeness are big factors in reaching the unity mod

Husbands Perspective

        The role of the husband is a very important factor in gender relationships in marriage. In order for a couple to reach the unity model the husband must perform many acts of unselfishness.

        The husband was not born from love, so he must learn from his wife.

        Dr. James has stated in class that men before enlightenment, are very selfish and reckless.

        The husband must act from his wife and not from himself. Husbands must give in to their wife internal wisdom of love.

        According to professor James, couple that are more Feminized have deeper and more intimate relationships than say a couple that is Masculinzed.

        In order for the male to act form the wife, he must leave his man hood and learn to think as a woman.

        Once the male has been enlightened or has reached his conjoint self, he then will be able to enter the unity model with his wife.

Wifes Perspective

        Since women are already born with the love to align themselves with their husband, they are almost in a teacher position.

        Women must realize their internal knowledge is much superior to mens.

        The wife must be patient and teach her husband the internal knowledge they possess.

        The wife must never let the ego of the husband overpower the internal wisdom she possesses.

        The wife must be patient while the couple is in the dominance and equity model, because it take time for the husband to learn and really love to learn to act from the wife. The husband cannot just say he going to act from his wife to make her happy. He must want and love the fact he will be uniting with his wife and acting from her.

Couples Perspective

        The husband must not follow the typical male view of dominating the relationship due to the fact he is a male. Our society tells us the male has to make all the decisions and is the leader of the house. This puts the wife in an automatic submissive position.

        Our culture views acting from the wife as being weak. Many males would not want to admit they are acting from their wives because it would give the impression that they are whipped or tied around her finger.

        It is the wifes duty to train her husband to not align himself with these cultural norms and stereotypes.

        It is the husbands job to help his wife train him how to act from the wife. The husband can accomplish this by listening to his wife, not arguing, explain to her his feelings and take constructive criticism well

Flow Chart Two, Deborah Tannens, Gender and Discourse. Deborah Tannen uses language between couples and cultural normalities to show the difference in gender relationships between men and women.

Husbands Perspective

        Men tend to make less eye contact with speakers while talking.

        Men prefer to talk when others are not talking.

        Men smile less and dont like to ramble

        Men find it difficult to understand women.

        Men are more sarcastic, use generalizations more and are less patient while talking

        Men interrupt more than women.

        Men rely on direct obvious tactics to communicate.

        Men are less empathetic and find it harder to express feelings, especially to women.

        Men make less facial expressions and are not able to talk as long as women

        Men talk at further distance than women.

Wives Perspective

        Women are born with a better verbal intelligence than men

        Women make more eye contact than men.

        Women tend to talk at a closer distance than men do.

        Women use more indirect tactics to communicate

        Women are more cooperative in conversation

        Women smile more frequently than men.

        Women talk in more detail as men generalize more.

        Women have more conversations that contain non-stop verbiage or a flurry of questions and statements.

        Women have the need to talk more often than men.

        Women are more empathetic and can relate to the listeners feelings and thoughts.

        Women are better at talking while other people are talking.

Couples Perspective I used the list of AUVs provided by Leon James and made note of any AUVs presented as normal in the show Sex and the City. I also added other AUVs to the list when necessaryI used the list of AUVs provided by Leon James and made note of any AUVs presented as normal in the show Sex and the City. I also added other AUVs to the list when necessary

        Tannen believes that couples must realize that everyone is different when it comes to conversation.

        It is important to have one speaker at a time. If the wife is talking then the husband must be listening. Even when couples are arguing they must take turns. This allows each person to have their opinions expressed.

        Couples must learn about biological differences in language. This will give each partner a better understanding of why the other is acting or speaking as they do.

        Each partner must be willing to let the other speak their mind, but must not allow one or the other to take a submissive role where one individuals ideas are dominating the conversation.

        Each partner should not be afraid to express their opinions to their partner.

Flow Chart Three, Dr. Lauras, The Proper Feeding and Caring Of Husbands Dr. Laura. Looks at enhancing gender relationships through the role of the wife. Dr. Lauras view is more submissive for the wife. She places a lot of emphasis on the duty of the wife and less on the husband.

Husbands Perspective

        Dr. Laura does not focus as much on a male perspective. Her book mainly is on a wifes perspective on how to keep the husband happy.

Wifes perspective

Analysis Of Three Charts

The three authors had three totally different type of ideas about gender differences. Dr. Leon James takes an approach where the female takes the lead in the relationship and it is up to the male to absorb the females internal knowledge of love. In most relationships, the women is waiting for the male to find his conjoint self to move into the unity model. I feel that every couple must pay their dues in a way. Practice makes perfect and this can be applied to relationships as well. Couples must go through the dominance and equity models in order to reach the unity model. Some couples may reach the unity model quicker than others, but it all depends on the husband. I agree with Dr. James and his ideas on how the male must act from his wife and not himself in order to reach his conjoint self. I believe it is a hard concept to grasp and reach, especially being a young male. I do believe that as males get older and wiser they will be more willing to want to act from another woman.

Deborah Tannnen discusses how men and women speak differently due to biological and cultural make-ups. I also agree with Deborah Tannens ideas because they are more scientific. It makes total sense that men and women can have differences just based on discourse. Some of the concepts how men look away and interrupt more were new ideas for me. I would never realize these concepts if I didnt take this class. Some times I find myself looking at people in conversation and try to distinguish any of these concepts. I would have to agree with most of the information from Tannens chart. One of the most important aspects of a relationship is how people communicate with each other. If more couples understood these biological differences in language, I believe there would be a lot less divorces and more happy couples.

Dr. Lauras chart shows how a wife should treat and understand their husbands in order to have a successful relationship. The difference from Dr. James is that Dr. Laura puts more of the work load on the Wife. Dr. James believes the wife must train her husband but with the help of the husband. I feel like Dr. James put the female on a higher level than the male. Dr. Laura seems to put the husband on a pedestal for the wife to obey and understand. Her concepts of allowing the male to have guy time sounds good from a guys perspective, but after understanding the unity model, it clearly shows that allowing guys to act from themselves will not help the relationship. Overall I would have to agree with more of Dr. James concepts when compared to Dr. Lauras. Dr. James concepts can be more helpful to relationships, while Dr. Lauras ideas seem to undermine the wife.

Question 6

Consider Table 6 in the Lecture Notes, which is in the Section on Making Field Observations. It gives 20 examples of Behavioral Indicators of One's Relationship Model, along with Yes/No specifications for the three models. First explain what this table is trying to show and how it is doing that (give a couple of examples to illustrate concretely). Include brief explanations for what the three models are. Second, create a similar table of 20 new items that you make up yourself, and fill in the Yes/No columns. Calculate the percent overlap. Third, Discuss what your results show and how such an approach could be expanded to help couples be more aware of their interaction pattern.

Table 6-


One's Relationship Model

1
Dominance Model

2
Equity Model

3
Unity Model

Partners tolerate role differences, either culturally defined or by personal preference

Yes

Yes

Yes

Partners tolerate some disagreements as something normal and inevitable

Yes

Yes

No

Partners tolerate status differences between a man and a woman

Yes

No

 No

Partners insist on exclusivity so that neither may carry on close friendships with others

No

No

Yes

Partners allow each other privacy or separate activities that the other is not involved in

Yes

Yes

No

Partners believe themselves to be married in this life and in the afterlife in heaven to eternity

No

No

Yes

Each partner is tolerant of some of the other's faults and tries to live with them

Yes

Yes

No

The man always cooperates with the woman's attempts to change him

No

No

Yes

When partners disagree they negotiate to reach a consensus 

No

Yes

No

When partners disagree the man gives in to the woman's way of thinking 

No

No

Yes

Partners can't stand being separated even for a few hours, and get very anxious

No

No

Yes

Partners are mutually interdependent and complementary in all areas

No

No

Yes

Partners have total confidence in each other, feeling free of any criticism ever

No

No

Yes

Partners never try to punish each other or retaliate for anything

No

No

Yes

While making seating choices for guests at a wedding, splitting up the married couples

Yes

Yes

No

Partners assume responsibility for each other's feelings and emotions

No

No

Yes

Partners try to make each other happy

Yes

Yes

Yes

Partners allow each other to have incompatible opinions about various topics

Yes

Yes

No

Partners never diminish in enthusiasm and admiration for each other

No

No

Yes

The original passion of love decreases as the years go by

Yes

Yes

No

Etc. (add your own here)

 

 

 

 

This type of contrastive analysis shows that the dominance model has an 84% overlap in answers with the equity model but only 16% overlap with the unity model. Similarly the equity model has only a 16% overlap with the unity model. This shows that the unity model is most different from the other two. It is also the most difficult to achieve unless the husband is spiritually enlightened and has the afterlife in mind regarding their eternal conjunction.

 

Explanation of table six- On the left side of the table, there are behavioral indicators of ones relationship model. In the right columns there are the three models of marriage relationships. The three models are dominance, unity and equity. Below each model there is either a Yes or a No. The table illustrates whether each indicator is an example or not an example of each individual model. I will give a few example to show what this means.

 

The first indicator I choose was that partners are mutually interdependent and complementary in all areas. For the dominance column there is a No in the box. The No means in the male dominance model, the couple is not mutually interdependent or complementary in all areas. In the dominance model the male is usually basing the relationship on more of a physical attraction basis. The mental union should be the first primary focus in a relationship and in the dominance model physical attraction, or an individual using mental or physical abuse to control the partner. In the equity model a couple is focusing on the mental union but are still not totally interdependent and complementary. There might not be a dominance factor but the couple is still competitive and still not thinking as one. In the equity model the husband is still trying to find his conjoint self and is still thinking from a male point of view instead of acting from his wife. Throughout the first two stages it is usually the male who is holding the process of conjugial love up. The male must not only want to reach the equity model for his wife but must really love the fact he is acting from his wife.

 

When partners are mutually interdependent and complementary they are in the Unity model. The couple will think as one and will balance each other out. Many times a couple who is in the e model will know what the other is thinking and what the other will say.

 

The second indicator I choose was when partners disagree they negotiate to reach a consensus. A couple in the dominance model would not be able to perform such an act. That is why there is a No in the dominance column. In the dominance model the couple is on an unbalanced plane and are not able to come to a common ground. A perfect example is in the dialog of question 13 between Johan and Marianne. Many times during conversation or argument between couples, both parties will use their individual styles to gain power over the other. Every individual has their own verbal strategies that is a characteristic of their three-fold self. The individuals threefold self is a mixture of biology, socialization, culture and spiritual make-up. This is the reason why in the dialogue, Johan and Marianne use two different type of styles or sensorimotor characteristics. Neither use physical harm but both use their styles to hurt the other through tone and words. Johan is sarcasm, irony, pontification, generalization, and abstraction. Marianne is unconfident, uses romanticism and non-stop verbiage in her dialog. The crossing of these two different styles created conflict between the couple. They are never able to reach a general concensus because one or both partners is trying to control the other. In the equity model there is a yes for the indicator above. Many times in the equity model one or both of the couples will give in even if they dont disagree with the other. They might not want to hurt the other partner or afraid to have there voice heard.

 

This is why there can be a consensus reached because one of the partners will give in or concede to the others opinion. In the unity model there is No for the indicator above. Now you might be thinking that if they are in a unity model they will be able to come to a consensus. When a couple is the the unity model the husband will be trained to be in line with the thoughts and feelings of the wife. Both partners will strive to agree and understand each others goals, justifications and beliefs. There is a No in the second indicator because the couple will never be in disagreement when they are in the unity model.

 

The last example I choose to illustrate to help form a better understanding of table six is the man always attempts to have the woman change him. Women are born to love and are already able to be in touch with their conjoint self. Women are more in touch with their emotions and are capable of teaching their partner to love and think as they do also. In the dominance model the wife is under constant control of the man and the male would never except the fact that his wife has the ability to change him. In the dominace model, the wife is constantly molding her actions, thoughts and beliefs from that of her partners. The wife knows what the males ideas are and what feelings he will have over certain actions. For example, if one husband does not like to watch a certain program, a wife under the dominace model will not watch theses type of programs even if she really enjoys them. In the Equity model there is also a No in the column. Once again, the male is still thinking from a male point of view. Even though the couple will be more united than the dominance model, they still are competing with each other on certain issues. A good example would be when a husband is still going out once in very great while with his friends for a guy night. In the unity model the husband would never want his wife to be left out of any experience with him.

 

In the unity column there is a Yes. In the unity model the husband is in touch with his conjoint self. There has been a reformation and the husband now has a spiritual connectedness with god and his wife where he is able to think from his wife. He is in love with the fact that he can learn from his wife and let her teach him how to love as she does.

 

My Table Six

 

 

 

Behavioral Indicators of Ones Relationship Model Dominance Model Equity Model Unity Model

 

1. Partners are allowed to have friendly relationships with the opposite sex. Yes Yes No

 

2. Partners should have the same beliefs when raising a child. No No Yes

 

3. Partners should only pursue goals that benefit the relationhship No No Yes

 

4. Partners deeply in love should be able to finish each others sentences. No No No

 

5. Males are entitled to decide the projects around the house. Yes Yes No

 

6. After a couple is no longer able to have sex they cant love as much. Yes No No

 

7. Partners should talk to a close friend when having marriage problems Yes Yes No

 

8. The male should use techniques like taking constructive critiscism to help wife train him. No No Yes

 

9. Partners should have some secrets they keep from their partner. Yes Yes No

 

10. Partners dont have to keep the same manners around partner since they are close. Yes Yes No

 

11. Partners should never get jealous, because jealousy is a bad feeling. No No No

 

12. The wife should overwhelm the husband with her feelings as soon as he gets home. Yes Yes No

 

13. If one partner never becomes jealous then this means there is a lack of love. Yes Yes No

 

14. Partners use their individual styles to control the other partner. Yes Yes No

 

15. The male should accept nagging as a good aspect of the relationship. No No Yes

 

16. Partners should know about gender differences in conversation with each other. No Yes Yes

 

17. Partners should always sit next to each and be with each when in public. Yes Yes No

 

18. The male should want to give up 100% of himself to his wife. No No Yes

 

19. If partners have go away on a trip alone, it is very stressful for both parties. No No Yes

 

20. Partners should be very concerned when not having sex. Yes Yes No

 

Calculations From Chart: The overlap of the dominance model with the unity model was 55 percent, according to my calculations. The overlap of the dominance model with the unity model was a suprising zero percent. The overlap between the dominance model and the unity model was only ten percent.

 

Analysis of Calculations: These calculations show that like the model Dr. James had in the lecture notes, the unity model is the hardest model to attain for couples. The reason this model is so difficult to grasp is because the wife is usually waiting for the male to reach his conjoint self. Dr. James has stated in class lectures how it has taken him years to develop the unity model and reach conjugial love with his wife. Dr. James had to find his conjoint self by being trained by his wife. He states how young men are pretty much reckless and irresponsible. It takes the love and knowledge of a women to train a man to become conjoint. The dominance and equity model is where the majority of couples tend to be in. The dominance model is the most frequent because we live in a patriarchal society. There are a number of strong and successful women in todays society, but society still favors males in areas like the economy and politics. A wife in the dominance model, usually gains some power and begin to question some of her husbands thoughts and motives and starts to compete with the husband. Now they are in the Equity model. The equity model is not as popular as the dominance model, but is still more related to couples than the unity model. Couples in the equity model are in agreement and out of agreement. The husband is still acting from himself and the wife is trying to educate him away from this thought process.

 

How these tables can be expanded to help couples throughout their marriage- Tables like the two above could be very useful for couples who are just starting their marriage or are currently married. At the beginning of the marriage a couple can decide what aspects of their marriage they believe are important. They can basically make a chart like the one I have above. Then they can fill out the right columns with yes and nos. This way the couple will know and agree what indicators they should work on. I believe if a husband was to do this at the beginning of a marriage and understand how to achieve the unity model, it would speed the process up. As the marriage continues they can reevaluate the chart and see how they have improved on each indicator and make sure there is a constant positive progression toward the unity model.

 

Question 4:

Select one or more techniques explained in the Lecture Notes in the last section called Making Field Observations. Do a mini-experiment in which you use the techniques to analyze interactions between couples either yourself in a couple relationship, or some other couples you know. Describe what you did, what you found, and how you explain it. Be sure to use the unity model in your explanations, but you can also give alternative explanations, in addition to your explanations with the unity model.

For question four I used an observational experiment to show how making field observations can be used to illustrate how couples in the dominance and equity model can learn how to reach the unity model from couples in the unity model. I used my girlfriend and myself as a couple that could be in the equity model and my parents who are in the unity model. The experiment was held at TGI Fridays where my girlfriend and I met my parents for dinner. I was taking mental notes on certain actions and characteristics of each couple. There were four main areas I concentrated on. The first section was the mode of talking between my parents and my girlfriend and myself. I looked to see if there was any contradictions, embarrassments etc. Secondly I observed to see if there was any conflict between the couples. If there was, how does each couple deal with the conflict. The next section, I observed to see how my father acted from my mother and then try to compare them to my own actions. The last section was to observe physical actions like touching, kissing, hugging etc. Now there is obviously some observer bias because I am observing myself with my girlfriend. I already have some preconceptions on how we interact together and how we could improve to reach a unity model.

First Section: Mode of talking.

As I first observed my parents talking, we were talking about college and what we were going to do and what my parents did when they were in college. They were talking about the old days. My parents were both talking to us as one, but my father was always allowed my mother to speak freely and then when she was finished he put his two cents in. My mother was giving us advice about some graduate school options and different postitions to think about. My father would always agree with my mother and seemed really confident if her ideas and suggestions. My father was talking about maybe working right of college and waiting to go to graduate school and my mother immediately responded by telling me I should go to graduate school and the benefits of going straight to graduate school. My father was not upset at all and even admitted my mothers idea was actually more logical. To my girlfriend and I my mother was alwayss in the lead role. For example, my father ordered his meal and my mother politely interrupted and told my father to not order fried food because it was bad for his cholesterol. My father is a healthy guy and can eat fried food once in a while, but he was more than willing to switch to a healthier choice. This shows how couples in the unity model will discover and strive to agree with each others opinions and justifications. My parents never disagreed there was never an akward moment between them when they were speaking together.

Both of their individual of styles helped to counterbalance the others. My father is a very low-key type of person when he speaks. My mother likes to get her point across and have her thoughts be heard. These two styles work well together because my mother will get her point across and my father will follow up after and doesnt mind giving my mother the lead because it is his nature to not be chatty or loud like my mother. In an argument these type of style might cause a dominance issue, but my parents dont fight, so its not an issue.

When my girlfriend and I were speaking to each other and to my parents, I was always leading the conversation and dominating the situation. At one point my girlfriend and I were fighting about where we were going to graduate school. I said how I was definately going back home for graduate school in New York. My girlfriend was discussing how she wanted to see where I was going, but really would like to stay at UH. This disagreement really shows how I have more control in the relationship than my girlfriend does. I am pretty concrete on how my next four years will be. I have no thoughts about where my girlfriend wants to go. I am going home and that is it. I realized my cognitive self is definitely in the dominance model. My thoughts were pressuring her to make a decision she does not want make. The only reason she woiuld go to school anywhere else besides UH would be to please me. She know my perogitives and is willing to follow them. I am giving her no other option by not even thinking to compromise. Obviously my parents are more conjoined because they are married, but I did realize my relationship was more in the dominance model than I had realized.

The individual styles of my girlfriend and I are definitely more contradicting. We both have sarcastic type of styles and both like to have our thoughts heard. It is very difficult for one of us to take the back seat and allow the other to take the lead. Most of the time it was myself who was interrupting and disagreeing with her statements about the graduate school conversation. There was a definite akward moment after my girlfriend and I were done talking about our plans for graduate school. This discussion leads into the second section.

Second Section: Conflicts and Dealing with conflicts:

I just discussed how my girlfriend and I had some conflicting conversation but my parents didnt disagree once. My girlfriend and I discussed how they always seemed to be on the same page and level of thinking. We both agreed it was sickening. By my father being able to act from my mother, they never had to disagree about anything. Never arguing with your partner is a definite motivator for a husband to act form his wife and give up his male thinking. I will have to admit that I am unable to do this at my age and that is why I believe it takes a lot men some time to find their conjoint selves. When my parents were speaking, it was almost as though they were making it a point to agree and give each other confidence in their ideas. I have previously discussed the argument my girlfriend and I had gotten into an argument about graduate school. The argument didnt affect my girlfriend and she continued to be charming and witty in conversation. I dealt with the situation by being silent toward my girlfriend. I was frustrated with the conversation and wanted her to feel the same way. After my silent treatment, my girlfriend was affected by my actions toward her. She was basically silent unless my mother or father asked her a question. She was frustrated and sad due to my actions not the argument.

Third Section: Observing father acting from mother.

While taking notes after dinner, I wrote down some notes on how my father was acting from my mother and not typical male characteristic or thoughts. Its not the fact my father allowed my mother to lead in conversation, it the fact that he loved allowing her to do this. Everything my mother talked about was no surprise to my father. He knew exactly what she was talking about and was able to finish her sentences. My father asked my mother if she needed anything and if everything was alright a couple of times throughout the dinner. As my parents discussed what tourist attractions they were going to the plans were totally based on my mothers wants. My parents were going shopping in the morning and then going to the beach in the early afternoon. My father said if my mother were willing to golf they would maybe go to Kooalau for nine holes in the early evening. My mother responded by saying how they would probably not have enough time and would have to another time. My father was not upset or angry. In general, my father seems to flow with my mothers thoughts, actions and beliefs. Its easy for me to say I just have to act like my father to strengthen my relationship with my girlfriend. I have realized you have to love the fact you are action from your partner. Even if I always try to agree and act from my girlfriend, it wont be the same as my father because he loves and is devoted to the fact of acting from his wife.

Fourth Section: Sensorimotor Zones between both couples.

In the last section I observed actions like facial expressions to thoughts, coordination in movements, physically intimate actions and interaction of dynamics. For the last section I also observed my parents first, and then compared my actions with my girlfriend, looking at a unity model in my parents and a dominance model in my girlfriend and I. I first noticed my parents facial expressions when they would react to what each had to say. There was a lot of smiling and nodding yes. My mother would be speaking and my father would be smiling and nodding and vice versa when my mother was talking. Both my mother and father have dry sense of humors. They laugh at the same type of content. A couple of times my father made a couple of political jokes that werent very funny but my mother found amusing. It was like they had their own language or sense of humor. My girlfriend and I would smile at each other and laugh, but there was definitely a lot more plain expressions than compared to my parents. While observing for coordination in movements I didnt really notice that many noticeable actions. They did walk in and out together in stride and both hold their utensils the same way. My girlfriend and I walk together and both hold our utensils the same way, but I dont believe these actions are best indicators of sensorimotor unity.

When it comes to interaction of dynamics, my mother definitely makes an effort to dress my father along with her attire. For years my mother has dressed my father. They always coordinate well when it comes to attire. On the other hand, my girlfriend and I would never coordinate ourselves to each other and both agree we would feel out of place dressing in the same color or shad on purpose. We like to wear what we want to wear, regardless of what the other partner is wearing. Being independent like this shows how our cognitive processes are different and leads to different sensorimotor actions. The last aspect of sensorimotor actions I observed was physically intimate actions. While observing my parents I noticed they would touch each other more often than my girlfriend and I. My mother would constantly have her arm around my fathers with his hand over her hand. They both really enjoyed this position. A couple of times my mother gave my father a light tap on the arm when he agreed or laughed with my mother. There were some moments when my father had his arm around my mother, and they seemed really comfortable with each other. My girlfriend and I are also affectionate toward each other but not like my parents. My parents can keep these affectionate actions going throughout a whole night. My girlfriend would put her arm around mine or put her head on my shoulder but would eventually go back to her normal position.

Analysis and Conclusion:

The objective of my experiment was to see why my parents were in the unity model and why my girlfriend and I were in the dominance and Equity model. The main reason I found was because my parents are on the same level in every aspect of the three fold self. There thinking and reasoning are the same. They have the same beliefs and even when my mother disagreed with my fathers advice about graduate school, he was able to understand why her approach was better. Their feelings and motivation to feed off each other and to adjust these feelings and motivations to be one allows them to be in the unity model. This aspect of affective conjunction has mainly to due with my father acting from my mother. My father has found his conjoint self and strives to make my mother happy and be on the same page as her. In the last section I discussed how many of their sensorimotor actions were in coordination and were always in a loving and friendly context. Overall, my parents were very comfortable with each other. I could tell this is the way they would act in a room alone together. There was no acting to make it seem like they were conjoined.

Now one major reason why they are in the unity model is because my mother has had years to train my father to think from her. This experiment shows how it is the women training and waiting the male to find his conjoint self. I am young and not ready for marriage or the unity model. I know this , and my girlfriend knows this. It was very beneficial to actually see a couple who is in the unity model. It gives a good realistic and observable view of how a couple in the unity interacts in the unity model.

Question 13:

Create three dialogues between a husband and wife. Each dialog should represent one of the three models of marriage discussed in the Lecture Notes. 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. Each dialog should contain at least 6 talking turns by each of the two partners, and no more than 12 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.

Dialog One: The first dialog I choose was from Deborah Tannens Gender and Discourse, pgs. 152-153. In this dialog, the partners represent the first model of marriage called dominace, discussed in the lecture notes. The first level relates to the conjoint self, which is external and involves the senorimotor reciprocity and joint achievement. When a husband or wife is in disharmony, the woman is usually in a state of pain and feel hurt. Both males and females will go to friends and vent about the sensorimotor reciprocity with their parnter. The first dialog I chooses shows how both individuals use the sensorimotor self while speaking to each other.

Marianne: We speak the same language. Thats why we have such a good relationship.

Marianne: Were pretty honest with each other, you and I. Arent we?

Johan: Sarcastically- Oh yeah we are perfect together.

Marianne: No I didnt mean that actually. In fact, I meant the opposite. You see how badly I express myself.

Marianne: Do you like coming home?

Johan: (Trying to be nice) Is everything so awfully complicated today? Your being so emotional.

Marianne: Did you want your life to be like this?

Johan: I think that life has the value you give it, neither more nor less. I refuse to live under the eye of eternity.

Another short dialog between Johan and Marianne.

Johan: Must it be that two people who live together for a long time begin to tire of each other?

Marianne: We Havent tired.

Marianne: (kissing him) You have your great moments, but in between youre horribly mediocre.

Johan: At our age tens of thousands of brain cells snuff out every day. And theyre never replaced

Discussion: The sensorimotor self exhibits injurious or hostile actions and words against the partner, when there is negative reciprocity. Many times during conversation or argument between couples, both parties will use their individual styles to gain power over the other. Every individual has their own verbal strategies that is a characteristic of their three-fold self. The individuals threefold self is a mixture of biology, socialization, culture and spiritual make-up. This is the reason why in the dialogue, Johan and Marianne use two different type of styles or sensorimotor characteristics. Neither use physical harm but both use their styles to hurt the other through tone and words. Johan is sarcasm, irony, pontification, generalization, and abstraction. Marianne is unconfident, uses romanticism and non-stop verbiage in her dialog. The crossing of these two different styles created conflict between the couple. Johan uses sarcasm to control the coversation and really hurts Marianne with his words and tone of voice. Johan knows that Marianne is not very strong with her words which I believe can relate to ones affective self. Johan was showing exploitative feelings towards his wife. He was exploiting the fact that his wife is unconfident when expressing herself. Throughout the passage Johan generalizes women as a whole to put blame on Marianne. This type of expression can be seen through the cognitive self. Johan was using sexist thoughts that

Stereotype women and was hurtful to his wife. On the other hand Marianne, can gain control in the relationship when she uses non-stop verbiage and uses devices like touching and kissing to gain control in the situation.

Dialog Two: The next dialog is one between my parents who were recently fighting about the election between Geroge W. Bush and John Kerry. I felt this was a perfect dialog for a couple in the unity model but still have differences. This dialog also involved the cognitive self because it included factors of how they think, how they reason, and how they justify things. In the lecture notes Dr. James talks about how a couple can be married for years but still different beliefs and attitudes. The cognitive self of the three-fold self, is how one operates the thinking and reasoning in relationships. In this dialog my mother who is a democrat argues politics with my father who is a republican. Both have their views that are based the development of their views in politics. I believe my mother is more a liberal person. She has attained these characteristics through the society she grew up in and the stereotyped gender behaviors she was exposed to. My father is a republican and was always the more strict parent and resembled in a lot a lot of way a stereotyped rigid republican.

Richard: Chad, can you believe your mother is going to vote for John Kerry.

Marion: Rich, I voted for Clinton and have always sided with the democratic party. I should never tell you who I vote for.

Richard: I know you have the right to vote whatever way you feel, but do you really feel safe with John Kerry in office.

Marion: Do you feel safe with our son maybe going into the military if Bush is elected?

Marion: There is no reason to argue over this, it happens every election and you know which way I vote.

Richard: I know, I just thought that maybe this election would be different. Clinton, I can understand but Kerry is not legitimate.

Marion: The only reason you side with Bush is because of the business. Obviously a small business owner will side vote for Bush.

Marion: I understand why you vote for Bush and dont have a problem with it. You should understand my decision and not ask questions about why I am voting for the Democratic party.

Richard: arrrhhhh

Marion: (wisely) Its going to be a close election and every vote counts.

Richard: (sternly) Marion.

Discussion: This was more of a conversation than an argument and politics is the only topic my parents dont see eye to eye with. Neither are very into politics either. This dialog shows how two people who in my opinion are in the conjugial love stage, but still have their own way of thinking and how they reason. If a couple has many differences when it comes to their cognitive selves and the second unity of marriage then I believe they will have problems. Differences in how a couple should deal with money, raise children and religon would be a big difference in sedimentary thoughts, which in turn could lead to a lot of problems. I would have to say I have seen my parents fight only a couple of times. They are both calm people and know how to talk about things. Even when I used to get in trouble, my parents always calmly sat me down and never raised their voices. Throughout the dialog both speaker clearly show there different thoughts and reasons for these thoughts. I believe the two individuals are in the second unity of marriage because, the conversation is handled in a very fun and almost teasing type of tone. They understand each other very deeply and neither crosses the line. Everyone knows it is hard to keep ones cool when discussing politics especially in this day in age.

Even though my father has his own ideas and philosophy he still never blames my mother for not having the same feelings and vice-versa.

Dialog Three- The last dialog is from Dr. Lauras radio show, This dialog relates to men needing their own time with friends. This dialog can represent the dominance model and the affective self. The affective self is the individuals feelings, motivations, loves, future goals and overall feelings about the relationship. The only way the inmost unity model can be reached is when the couple both have conjoint feelings of love, loyalties and goals. The dialog was from a listener named Terry. The dialog is not exact because I couldnt write down every word but is pretty exact. Terry called in complaining about how her husband wanted more guy time for himself. The way she talks sounds like she wants him to be with her every waking hour. Dr. Laura gives her advice on how to deal with the issue.

Listener: My husband David always has to go to his friends for poker night and plays golf the following Saturday morning every weekend. I feel like at the end of the week, we should have quality time together.

Dr. Laura: Was your husband always playing golf and poker on these nights when you were dating him or did he just start when you guy were married?

Listener: He always has played golf on Saturday mornings but just started playing poker because he has gotten a new job and has met some pretty nice people at work. He invites me to come over when they play but I would feel uncomfortable and wouldnt want to intrude on him and his friends.

Dr. Laura: Well he wouldnt ask you if he didnt want you to come. It may be something you guys could to together. Do you guys spend a lot of time together during the rest of the week?

Listener: Yes we are always together, a lot of times we meet each other for lunch and always have dinner and stay up together. I not really that concerned about the guy time, I was just wondering if it is normal.

Dr.Laura: Other women have called in and wrote about similar stories. I always tell them that the animal you chose to bring home is what attracted you to him. Many women like guys who are outgoing and active. It is completely normal for a guy to want to be with friends and also be active. Try asking him to go on a hike or another active activity you can do together.

Dr. laura: Wives always want their husbands to bend for them and sometimes forget the feelings and interests of their men.

Listener: So I shouldnt be worried about it.

Dr.Laura: Well Terry, you need to talk to David and explain to how you feel and see what he says. Have you told him how you feel

Listerner: Well, not really, he always expects me to do something with my girlfriends and I like to out with them but sometimes I just want to spend time with David.

Dr. Laura: You definitely need to talk to David and explain to him how you feel before it gets to be a problem or more of a routine that is hard to get out of.

Discussion- The dialog between Terry and Dr. Laura illustrates a marriage that is fairly new and has not reached the inmost level of unity. Now the husband is socializing without the women but did ask her to participate. I disagree with Dr. Laura in the sense that men NEED guy time. I agree with Dr. James when he talked about how couples in the inmost level want do be with each other every moment. A husband that is in the inmost level of unity and the stage of conjugial love would not want to miss a moment with their partner. They would feel good when in situations with partners, continual strive to improve the relationship and feel guilty when not with their partner. This dialog shows the opposite of how a couple would act when in the inmost level of unity. I found it very shocking in the dialog was how Dr. Laura seemed to take the guys side and does this many times in her book as well.

Discussion and Analysis of the three dialogs- In all three dialogs, the couple involved were all using the three levels of the self: sensorimotor, cognitive and affective. I believe that in each dialog there is a dominating level of the three fold self that can be seen. In the first dialog the husband uses negative sensorimotor conjunction to dominate the wife. Normally in sensorimotor conjunction the man takes the lead and shows the dominant role. This was the case in the first dialog but it was in a negative way. Johans motive was to please himself by having to have power and dominance by using sarcasm and generalizations from his individual style. Mariannes motive was to keep the relationship going and had a sense of camradarie in her individual style. The second dialog is a relationship that is in the stage of conjugial love but still has differences due to the cognitive conjunction between my father and mother. In the lecture notes it states how the cognitive donjucion is more visible than the affective conjunction because it comes out in agreements and disagreements. Normally the women would need to conjoin with the male to please him, but in my parents case, they are way passed that stage. Even though my father has given up his male instincts to achieve affective conjuction, there still exists a part of him that is embedded into him no matter the person or situation he is dealing with.

This has to do with his cognitive self. From growing up and learning from society, media and ideas, he will always be a republican. The last dialog has not reached the affective conjuction because the male is unable to give up male prerogatives. In order for David and Terry to reach affective conjuction, David needs to get his feelings parallel to Terrys. This can not be done when both are going out with different people on the weekends. He should be dying to be with his wife by the end of the week. This couple is not in trouble, they are both seem pretty young and many couples have the same issues. Our society allows men to be able to have independence from wives and is almost a must. I believe it is professionals like Dr. Laura who help spread this idea. The male is not supposed to dependent on how the wife feels or what her desires are. Dr. Laura agrees with this type of actions. The couple is definatley in the lower stages of the enneaded model. I would guess that the couple is definitely in the dominance model. If men can learn how to move up the chart by listening and telling their wives what they are thinking, more couples would be in the Unity Model.

Conclusion

This report was very informational for me because I dont ever really think about how to deal with a wife and how to make a relationship strong. Even though I dont really plan on getting married anytime soon, this class has definitely give me a great deal of information on the understanding of women. I have always been one to believe a man should take the role of leader and should be the leader. I realized society has made me believe these stereotypes. I really enjoyed readings from Dr. James, Swedenborg, and Deborah Tannen. I didnt really like to read Dr. Lauras book, but it wasnt the worst reading. I would definitely recommend this course to all couples, not just married couples. This course will teach couples how to understand each other. I dont know any couple that wouldnt like to reach the unity model and conjugial love.

To Future Generations

Future generations should realize this class is for everyone, males and females. One message I would give would be to keep up with the reading and dont get behind on reports. Speak loud and clear when giving oral presentations. Most of the information is interesting and can be applied to real life situations.

Class Home Page: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy21/classhome-g21.htm 

My Home Page: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bf2004/garhartt/home.htm