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 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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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
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-
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
Partners tolerate role differences, either culturally defined or by
personal preference |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Partners tolerate some disagreements as something normal and
inevitable |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners tolerate status differences between a man and a woman |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Partners insist on exclusivity so that neither may carry on close friendships
with others |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners allow each other privacy or separate activities that the
other is not involved in |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners believe themselves to be married in this life and in the
afterlife in heaven to eternity |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Each partner is tolerant of some of the other's faults and tries to
live with them |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
The man always cooperates with the woman's attempts to change him |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
When partners disagree they negotiate to reach a consensus |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
When partners disagree the man gives in to the woman's way of
thinking |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners can't stand being separated even for a few hours, and get
very anxious |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners are mutually interdependent and complementary in all areas |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners have total confidence in each other, feeling free of any
criticism ever |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners never try to punish each other or retaliate for anything |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
While making seating choices for guests at a wedding, splitting up
the married couples |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners assume responsibility for each other's feelings and emotions |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Partners try to make each other happy |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Partners allow each other to have incompatible opinions about
various topics |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Partners never diminish in enthusiasm and admiration for each other |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
The original passion of love decreases as the years go by |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
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