Report 2:

My Understanding of the Unity Model of Marriage

By: Naomi Mitake

Instructions for this report are at:

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

Introduction

In this report, I will answer five out of thirteen given questions from the report 2 instructions, which was given to the class by our professor, Dr. Leon James. In these questions, I will relate the topics to the unity model of marriage, which was discussed in class and in our lecture notes.

---

Question 1

It is sometimes wrongly asserted that men have less feelings than women. Show that this is not true by discussing the threefold self and the role of the affective in relation to the cognitive and sensorimotor. Illustrate your argument with examples that come from (a) your personal life and (b) from the media. Do men and women have the same awareness of (a) their own feelings and (b) their partner’s feelings—how do they differ? How does this difference affect the dynamics and progress of the relationship?

In a relationship between a man and woman, whether in a dating or marital relationship, it is at times wrongly asserted that men have fewer feelings than women. I believe that this is not entirely a true statement that has concrete evidence to back it up. To prove the statement false, I begin by discussing the threefold self with its three domains.

The threefold self is responsible for our gender behavior we display in relationships. It contains three domains that interact with one other, which include: affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor.

The affective is the deepest and most determinative out of the three. It is considered the most determinative because the affective selects and guides the other two domains (cognitive and sensorimotor). The affective takes a role in guiding and influencing the direction of operation in the cognitive, so that what we think and how we justify our actions, is selective and responsive to the affective motives. The affective also operates our feelings and motivations that we maintain in our gender relationships. Or to be more precise, it maintains a selected amount of motivations and desires in harmony with our primary needs and satisfactions. The cognitive operates the thinking and reasoning we do in gender relationships. What it does is it basically adjusts itself to support the affective. The cognitive and affective, in turn, work together to select and determine the evident sensorimotor behavior of our obvious actions, appearance, words, and styles. The idea of this is that “Our actions, is the result of our thinking, which in turn, is the result of our feelings.” The sensorimotor is what operates our sensations, perceptions, and motor acts that we perform in our relationships.

From my personal experiences in a couple of relationships, I can tell you that every individual differs and is unique. Men and women may overall have approximately the same amount of feelings, but that only applies to the general population and is subject to scrutiny. In one of my previous relationships, I can tell you for a fact that both my ex and I had about the same amount of feelings and emotions, but in the end, it seemed that mines was stronger. I loved him and was always happy when I was with him, and would always speak my mind, whether I was angry, sad, or happy. When we went our separate ways, I still had feelings for him, while at the same time I resented and hated him. I may have thought that I had more feelings, but I did not necessarily know at that time if that was true or not because I had no way of looking into his heart. Upon looking at this in a different perspective, I have realized that I might have had fewer feelings in the relationship than he had. He was in more distraught after the breakup than I was. It seems that he let other people influence his decision to end our relationship, and after he had actually gone through with it, he regretted it deeply and he was depressed for a long time. He resented his friend for talking him into the breakup, and most of all, he was furious with himself. All of these emotions and feelings (of anger, resentment, love, etc.) illustrate the fact that men do not have fewer feelings than women. It only may appear that way because we want to believe it to be true.

Another example would be the current relationship I am in. My boyfriend and I have about the same amount of feelings, although he tries to hide his soft side and feelings by putting up a stereotypical “macho” or male front. For example, my boyfriend usually tries to make me jealous, which never works because I know better, but when I in turn, say a comment to make him jealous (because he did it before), he hides his jealousy with anger towards me. Or last Christmas, when I hand-made or sewed a blanket and pillow for his present, he gives me a big smile and tells me the compliments his mom and aunty gave me rather than his own. So what I am trying to say is that perhaps we get the notion that “men have less feelings” because they tend to hide their feelings since society today does not find an emotional man acceptable versus a macho, manly man.

From the media, like this one Japanese TV drama show called “Love Revolution” that I used to watch, I believe that the main character (a female doctor) had more feelings that were evident to the viewers than the other character (a male news anchorman). But in another relationship in the drama, the man (a government candidate’s assistant) had more feelings than the woman (government candidate’s daughter). But that man, in the beginning, was portrayed as somewhat of a weakling versus the news anchorman character.

In another example from a Korean TV drama called “Full House”, Han-Jien (female) seemed to have more feelings than Young-Jae (male). However, if you were the viewer, that did not seem to be the case because Young-jae also had about the equal amount of feelings. I think Young-Jae just kept those feelings to himself, part of it probably due to sheer stubbornness and the other due to the ruining of his self-image An example of this would be if Han-Jien was late coming home from seeing Min-Hyuk (male friend who also liked Han-Jien). Young-Jae would pretend that he doesn’t notice her coming home and pretends not to care or be jealous. He hides that with anger pointed towards her coming home late and failing to cook his meal. I’m not sure if the Asian culture is similar in the relationship aspect, but it seems that men and women are portrayed as having almost the same amount of feelings, only the man hides it and denies having as deep feelings as the woman. This is probably because society, even the Asian ones, give each gender a set of socially acceptable norms to follow, one being that men should not show as much feelings and emotions as women.

In relationships, women tend to be more aware of their own feelings and motivations than men. This is partly due to the fact that women are more motivated to spending time to figure out how they really feel and/or what they really want in a relationship and out of life itself. Women also tend to be more aware of the man’s feelings and motivations than they; themselves are of their own feelings and motivations. The differences between men and women as to how conscious they are of their own feelings and emotions, or of their partner’s is that women “specialize” in becoming more aware of the men’s feelings and emotions. They are motivated to practice more the men. These differences creates a clear active gender dynamic in the relationship where the woman has the motivation to nag the man in becoming more aware of both his and her feelings/motivations and strives to conjoin. The man resists the woman’s nagging and finds it unpleasant and objectionable, which in turn, creates a constant strain on the relationship. The constant strain could lead to a breakup or divorce. Either way, it will be a totally unsatisfying experience for the woman.

In conclusion, although women may be more aware of their own feelings and motivations, including the man’s, it does not mean that men have fewer feelings than women. Both men and women have the same amount of feelings and emotions. This concept/principle was discussed and examined through the individual’s threefold self that contains the affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor domains. There were also given examples from my personal life and the media to prove that point. Society, in that nature, is what triggers the gender stereotype thinking that men have fewer feelings the women.

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 what’s in the chart? How are your ideas influenced by these three different perspectives on marriage?

The three views of gender relationships that are expressed by three out of the four authors discussed in class: Dr. Laura Schlessinger (The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands), Deborah Tannen (Gender and Discourse), and Dr. Leon James (The Doctrine of the Wife) are quite different in many aspects and similar in a few. The table below shows several characteristics in which the three models differ from one another.

Different Characteristics of Gender Relationships	Dominance Model: Dr. Laura Schlessinger	Equity Model: Deborah Tannen	Unity Model: Dr. Leon James
Allowing each other privacy and engagement in separate activities	Yes	Yes	No
Belief of both partners being equals	No	Yes	No
Rewards and punishments are used	Yes	Yes	No
Caring about each other	Yes	Yes	Yes
Roles of dominant and submissive are played within the couple	Yes	No	No
Each freely expresses themselves without hesitation	No	Yes	Yes
Disagreements are common and okay among each other	Yes	Yes	No
Sex comes first beyond anything else in the relationship	Yes	No	No

In my opinion, the three different models of gender relationships tend to overlap a little, especially the dominance and equity model. The dominance model focuses on changing the woman, and the woman being submissive to the man. The equity model sees man and woman as equals and requires neither to change. The unity model focuses on the man to change for the better of the relationship and become “enlightened”.

Compared to the chart above, my view of relationships is not just one of the models. It is more like a combination of all three models, but leaning more towards the equity model at this point in life. However, I do not agree with Dr. Laura’s remarks about how the wife should be held accountable for the husband and his happiness and/or actions (e.g., affair). The dominance model is based on the focus being on the self (in this case, the man). I do not or rather, cannot agree with having to satisfy the every need of a man and being submissive. I would feel deprived and suffocated in a relationship that lies within the dominance model, which Dr. Laura finds ideal.

Deborah Tannen, and her views of the equity model are leaning towards my view on relationships. I like the fact that in this model neither partners have more power over the other, both partners are free to express themselves equally, nor is any change is required on both halves. But I do not like the fact that the model is focused on intellect, and is very similar to how politics operates itself in America, a masculinized society. So even if the couple separates their power and responsibilities amongst the two of them, it will somehow, when convenient, lean more towards the man’s words. He, in the end, will stand with more power in the relationship, although it claims to be equal.

Dr. Leon James’s unity model is the most ideal out of the three. I like this model because it contradicts almost everything that Dr. Laura says in her book, The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands. In this model, the man has to give up his affective independence and be willing to change or become enlightened to become one with his wife (conjoint self). However, seeing as this is time-consuming and requires a tremendous amount of commitment on both halves of the relationship, I do not feel that I am ready at this point in life just yet. Although someday, I hope to become “unified” with my husband as Dr. James is with his wife.

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.

Questions	Yes	No
Does the man contradict what the woman says?	X
Does the man interrupt while the woman is talking?		X
Does he embarrass her in front of others?		X
Does he get frustrated when she does not get “right to the point”?	X
Is there conflict between them?	X
Does he give in to her way of thinking upon a disagreement?		X
Does he get mad and yell or pout?	X
Does he walk away to cool off and stays away out of anger?		X
Is there an ability to come together at cognitive & affective level?	X
Does he insist on his own prerogatives as a man?	X
Does he leave her to do his own thing with his friends?	X
Does he insist or put pressure on her to do something she doesn’t want to?		X
If he does not get what he wants, does he sulk or give the silent treatment?	X
Does he try to make her jealous on purpose?	X
Is he more physically intimate with her?	X
Does he verbally show his affections?		X

In a dating relationship, the interaction between couples is not usually internal, but rather external. We do not think to go further beyond that point until after we settle down and marry. The reason for that, I am uncertain. But as a couple, we can situate ourselves with our significant other in three different models: dominance, equity, and unity. For those who are unfamiliar with the terms, the dominance model assigns the more dominant/powerful role to the man and a submissive role to the woman in the areas defined by the given culture they reside in. The equity model assigns equal power and responsibility to both man and woman. The unity model assigns the lead role to the woman, but she does not take part in a dominant role as the man in the dominance model, but rather operates through the man’s voluntary submission to her. Through these three different models, I have conducted a mini-experiment, where I analyzed my own relationship with my boyfriend.

To analyze my own relationship, I basically observed how my boyfriend and I interacted while together. I held my experiment based on a whole afternoon spent at my house studying, taking a nap together, and shopping with his mother and brother at Ala Moana Center the day after Thanksgiving. I concentrated on the questions above located in the table for this question. In addition to this mini-experiment, I input my knowledge of what I already know about my relationship with as little bias on my part as possible.

While analyzing the way my boyfriend and I had a conversation, I found out that while he does respect me as his girlfriend and friend, he will disagree with my opinions if he feels strongly that he is right or if I have no proof to back up my opinion. For example, when discussing the topic of same-sex marriage, I told him that there is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage and they should be able to marry the ones they love. He, on the other hand, feels strongly that all countries should ban same-sex marriage. He said clearly that God created man and woman to be together, and not for people of the same sex to be together. We argued about this topic for quite awhile until I made my point strongly and he gave up. However, we did not reach a compromise or agreement on the topic of disagreement. If we were in the unity, we would not be having this kind of heavy argument because we are supposed to hold the same opinions/views regarding various topics, and if not, the man should be willing to give in to the woman’s way of thinking. The way my boyfriend and I acted throughout the conversation demonstrates our position in the equity/dominance model.

After we were done looking around at Ala Moana, we were all tired. My boyfriend’s mother and I went to grab some coffee and pastries at the Pineapple Room in Macy’s. We were both enjoying our coffee and talking when my boyfriend joins us. He was already tired and in quite an irritable mood. I guess I knew this and was just staring at him to make eye contact. I suppose he found that irritating and gave me a “What!?” and was somewhat pouting because he wanted to go, but couldn’t, since we were waiting for his brother. He continued to stay in an angry/irritable mood so I just let him be until he fell asleep in the car and his mood lifted. When we got back to my house, he didn’t remember snapping at me, and just told me that he felt “tired” and that I should understand. I left it at that. This incident in the Pineapple Room demonstrates an act from the dominance model. Unlike the unity model, the man is entitled to feel this way after the woman “tortured” him by going shopping the day after Thanksgiving, knowing it would be packed everywhere.

At my place, he insisted on taking a nap and cuddling in my bed, when I did not want to. He ended up saying, “Fine, I understand” and gave me the silent treatment until I sighed and gave in to his childish demands. You can see here that although he does have good intentions, when he does not get his way, he resorts to acting like a child throwing a tantrum to get the toy he wants. It’s a clever tactic, and it works too because I hate the silent treatment. It’s like a punishment given to me, which I don’t deserve. In the unity model, punishment would never occur and the husband/man would understand the woman’s needs and look at things from her perspective. A woman/wife is not there to please the man/husband.

At the end of the afternoon, he was picked up by his friend to go to hang out with the “guys”. He left me to go night surfing at Waikiki and crash at his friend’s house. He never invited me, but I was not expecting him to because he knows that I do not like swimming or surfing in deep water, especially at night. I left him to have his guys’ night out with his friends so I could have time to myself to relax to do homework at home. Deriving from the equity model, we each respect each other’s need for privacy and the need to hang out with our friends. Both of us trust each other. In the unity model, this would not happen. This is natural because a couple in a unity model insists on exclusivity so that neither can form close friendships.

In conclusion to the results that I have found from this mini-experiment, I have come to understand that my relationship is far from being in what is known as the unity model. Although I do not believe that we completely reside in the dominance model, I know that our current relationship lies someplace between the equity and dominance model. My boyfriend attempts to listen to my advice to not swear, control his anger, be more courteous, eat with his mouth closed, and more. He listens, but forgets. Thus, I repeatedly have to tell him again, which grows quite tiresome. Reaching the unity model will take work on both ends of the relationship. Both have to want to turn their relationship around for the better and to make the other happier and satisfied. My boyfriend would have to willingly come to me and want to be enlightened. So if you are in a relationship and want to see for yourself where you stand, perhaps you could examine for yourself what goes on in your relationship to find a way to enlighten yourselves to become united as one with everlasting conjugial love and heavenly love. It will be quite an experience itself to be connected in such an intimate way.

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?

Report 1 – Gender Unity: Annotated Bibliography, by Brigitlynn Duclos

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/duclos/report1.htm

Summary: In the beginning, Brigitlynn briefly summarizes three reports she read from earlier generations (generations 15, 16, and 19). The first two reports were based on the Emotional Spin Cycle by Kristin Ching and Nicole Reaves, and the third was based on Coping with New Information Behaviors by Bellew. She then had 4 different categories under the Annotated Bibliography on Gender Unity section, which was followed by a conclusion and advice to future generations.

Category one is titled Articles on Gender Relationships and contains five different articles with a discussion of the main points for each. Leon James and Diane Nahl title the first article, Rage-Depression Survey Results—Gender. Duclos basically expresses her ideas on the article, giving explanations on tables 1, 2, and 18. She relates herself to the third point she made, which was regarding gender differences on feeling out of control. George H. Woodard titles the second article, Masculine and Feminine. She mainly focuses on reciprocity within a marriage between couples. Duclos mentions each gender having its own proper functioning and duties, which they cannot abandon. She also mentions that the man has more understanding, while the woman has more will. Sarah Headsten titles the third article, The Difference Between the Sexes from Divine Revelation and from Experience. This article discusses similar concepts of what we discussed in class. Women, being the so-called carrier of conjugial love, are lovers of their husband’s wisdom, and constantly strive to become united with them. There is a stereotypical portrait of a man and woman. Duclos mentions, “Men are goal oriented and find fulfillment in accomplishments. They value power, and achievements and are motivated when they feel needed.  The woman are people oriented and find fulfillment in helping others and value relationships.” Leon James titles the third article, Doctrine of the Wife for Husbands-A Spiritual Practice for Achieving Unity--Part 1. We discussed this concept in class, but what Duclos emphasizes here is the unity model and how the husband must give in to the wife’s wisdom and inner perceptions to become regenerated, to later become conjoined. Leon James, also titles the last article, The Doctrine of the Wife (shorter article). The main focus of this article is the man’s perspective on conjugial love. Duclos highlights the difference of the man and woman in regards to creating an internal union. She also briefly mentions the conjugial commandments.

Category two is titled, General Curriculum: Student Reports on Gender and Driving and contains two articles that also contains discussions for each. Sheri Lieberman titles the first article, Gender Differences in Driving Norms: Are Men More Aggressive Drivers than Women? Duclos mentions the biological cause for gender differences in aggression, being testosterone. She also mentions how the article stated frustration being a major factor in causing aggression and gives statistics to prove male aggression levels are higher compared to females. Jason Thompson titles the second article, Gender Differences in Driving: Subjective or Concrete? Duclos points out some stereotypical comments that were made in the article about men being less likely to ask for directions and women are more likely to. She also makes a comparison to how society was back then versus now. Firmly stating, “about 50% of motorist in the United States are women.”

Category three is titled, Articles on Analyzing Talk by Leon James and again, contains two articles with discussions included. The first article is titled, Instructions for Studying Discourse in Talk Topic, Argument, Setting and Relationship. Duclos mentions the five elements of discourse being topic, argument, sequence, relationship, and setting. She briefly mentions the concepts of “why we talk” and “analysis of topic” in points two and three. The second article is titled, The Behavioral Technology of Discourse Analysis. For this article, Duclos mentions discourse being the visible organization of the invisible mental and affective feelings. Then in contrast, she talks about language and how it is a way to express ourselves by giving clues and such.

Category four is titled, Generational Curriculim: Student Reports on Analysis of Talk, which contains just one article titled, Daily Round Archives. Duclos mentions daily round archives being past thoughts and feelings of UHM psychology students, which is quite similar to what a time capsule is. Past students used to talk differently from current classes, with more forms of pidgin language used and overlap/interruption.

General Conclusion:

(a) Ideas – Her ideas were overall good. From what she presented in this report, I felt as though she related more to the dominance and equity models rather than the unity model.

(b) Method – Her method for this report were clear, simple, and well organized. She basically input three or four ideas for each article, in each category. I liked it when she could relate herself and her experiences to one of her ideas. It gave me the sense that she really was able to grasp the material.

(c) Explanation – She did not really give any explanations of her own for this report. Rather, I think she just jotted down some of the important facts from the article and put it in the report. It’s a shame the links for the articles on her page do not work. That would have provided more insight to what she was referencing in the report.

What did they gain from doing their reports?

I believe that she was able to learn the vast difference between man and woman in many aspects (biological, cognitive, behavioral, etc.). I’m sure that after completing this report, she was able to grasp the idea of conjugial love in correspondence to the unity model. She now should know how to get to that level of heavenly love and be more aware and “in tune” with her own feelings.

How do their ideas influence what you yourself think about these issues?

Her ideas, for the most part do not affect the way I think, particularly about the issues that she was able to point out. But I can say that I agree with most of her presented material. I do believe that men and women are entirely different beings and require different things to satisfy their needs. Although, to some extent, we could be more similar than we would hate to admit. I do not agree with the fact that men are more goal-oriented than women. I think women can be just as goal-oriented. We can find fulfillment in other places besides in people relationships. I believe that like men, some women (although not all) value power. I suppose it really matters from what perspective you take a look at these concepts.

Report 1 – Gender Unity: Annotated Bibliography, by M. Liwai

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/liwai/report1.htm

Summary: Like Duclos, Liwai starts off first, by summarizing three articles written previously by three different generations. The first report by Krista Guiteras-Duncan, focused on the difference of men and women from their way of problem solving, to the way they communicated with other individuals. The second report by Bridget Antonio focused on the Emotional Spin Cycle and took a look at relationships through the threefold self. The third report by Ryan Higa on fight pessimism and depression, which was basically like a journal that contained weekly reports of what happened and his frustration towards learning new computer programs. Following the brief summary of these three reports was her introduction and third section labeled Annotated Bibliography on Gender Unity, which contained four separate categories with articles beneath each of them.

Category one has five separate articles: Teacher's Classroom Strategies Should Recognize that Men and Women Use Language Differently, The Doctrine of the Wife, The enjoyment of sexist humor, rape attitudes, and relationship aggression in college students, The Essential Feminine, The Difference between the Sexes from Divine Revelation and from Experience. The first article, Teacher’s Classroom Strategies Should Recognize that Men and Women Use Language Differently, is based on communication and its effects in the classroom (learning ability and academic skills). In article two, The Doctrine of the Wife, Liwai pinpoints the notion of how men often reject conjugial love and what it has to offer. They think of it in terms of being “whipped” or losing their freedom. Liwai also points out a vital point of how conjugial love can only be attained if the husband is willing to submit to his wife. This concept was reviewed many times over class discussions. The third article, The Enjoyment of Sexist Humor, Rape Attitudes, and Relationship Aggression in College Students is the same article Duclos mentioned. Liwai makes reference to how gender differences in regards to sexual topics affect an individuals view on what is and is not offensive. Liwai mentions that there are two forms of humor: non-tendentious and tendentious. Liwai also goes on to mentioning how men tend to “blend sexual and aggressive themes” with the target of those jokes being either women or homosexuals. It’s basically a “no-win” situation for women. Reverend Dandridge Pendleton wrote the fourth article, The Essential Feminine. Liwai mentions how the Rev. Pendelton points out the different qualities each gender possesses that the other does not have. It is because of these different qualities that men and women, when conjoined, can attain conjugial love. The fifth article, The Difference Between the Sexes from Divine Revelation and from Experience, was also mentioned in Duclos’s report. For this article, Liwai mentions the vast differences between men and women. There are several aspects in which the two genders are different, which is as follows: problem solving techniques and/or strategies, needs, method of communication, reactions, level of comprehension/understanding. Liwai briefly goes over those differences.

Category two has two separate articles: Gender Differences in Driving Norms. Are Men More Aggressive Drivers Than Women? and Gender Differences in Driving. Sheri Lieberman (G-11) wrote the first article, Gender Differences in Driving Norms.  Are Men More Aggressive Drivers Than Women?. The article is about what the title gives. Liwai highlights the differences between the two genders when it comes to driving and how aggression plays a role. Liwai points out that there are three main explanations for aggression. One, being testosterone (biological cause), and the second, deriving from the “frustration aggression theory”, where if an individual is prevented from reaching a goal, frustration arises, which lead to aggressive responses. Third, being that men have the innate need to reciprocate the action, which was at the root of the aggression. Inkyung Yang wrote the second article of this category, titled Gender Differences in Driving. Liwai points out from the article that men and women are different in quite a number of aspects, a few being: cognitively, behaviorally, and emotionally. Liwai also mentions that aggressive driving behaviors can be attributed to an individual’s attitude, but at the same time, social norms/expectations, as well as stereotype, must be taken into consideration.

Category three also has two separate articles: Instructions for Studying Discourse in Talk Topic, Argument, Setting and Relationship and The Empirical Investigation of Conversation: The Closing Problem. In the first article, Instructions for Studying Discourse in Talk Topic, Argument, Setting and Relationship, the primary focus was on the topic of talking/conversation and language. Liwai mentions that there are five elements of a conversation: topic, argument, sequence, relationship, and setting. With the knowledge of the five elements, a conversation can be carried out effortlessly, automatically, and spontaneously. The second article of this section, The Empirical Investigation of Conversation: The Closing Problem focuses on the problems faced when engaging in a conversation, such as letting the conversation come to a halt when someone desires. Liwai brought up three vital points. One, being that the conversers must coordinate the close within a conversation carefully so that the conversation itself can come to a halt smoothly and comfortably. Second, being that each of the conversers need to signal their willingness to end the exchange of conversation. Third, being that if one of the party members signal a STOP and the other still has more to say, they can say so in a nice, polite manner.

Category four only has one article titled Transcript. This article is a transcript of a conversation, which took place during dinner. Liwai mentions how at this time, food, can be a topic of conversation or “filler” when another conversation is not taking place to cover the uncomfortable silence.

General Conclusions:

(a) Ideas – Liwai’s ideas were straightforward and overall good. Most of all, I found them to be in a format/language that was easy to comprehend.

(b) Method – Liwai’s report was very well organized and easy to follow. The format of her report made everything easier for me. However, perhaps she could have added some examples and relate her own experiences to a few of the ideas.

(c) Explanation – Her explanations for each point was good and easy to understand. Her answers are brief, but at the same time, easy to understand and clear. She gets right to the point that needs to be discussed.

What did they gain from doing their reports?

Liwai should have gained a better understanding of the changing dynamics present in relationships between both genders. She also should have gained a better sense of what it takes for a man and a woman to truly be happy and satisfied in their marital relationship (and stay that way). I think she also gained a good insight to conversation and its closing problem. She must know what NOT to do when trying to end a conversation and to not drag on the conversation even after signals are sent to end the conversation.

How do their ideas influence what you yourself think about these issues?

It was very interesting how she mentioned that in comparison to the dominance and equity models, she does not imagine the possibility of the unity model becoming a widely known and accepted concept between both genders, particularly men. I agree with Liwai that the unity model has a lot of opposition to overcome in order for it to have an impact on relationships across the globe. Like her, I also am uncertain if this model is for me. While it would be nice to reach this level of conjoining, it would be hard to find someone at this age and time that would be willing to submit to me.

Report 2 – Applied Project: Mapping the Threefold Self in Gender Relationships, by shortcake

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2004/shortcake/report2.htm

Summary: Shortcake begins her second report by talking about what she did in her previous report and her plans for this report.  She also gives readers some background information on her previous marriage to a husband who had a drinking problem. She mentions she knew that he was not the one for her. She also shares some information on her husband in her present marriage, the basis of her report.

The next section was titled, Introduction: Self Witnessing and the Threefold Self.  Shortcake goes on to give a definition, which is as follows: “self witnessing is taking a very close look into yourself, the way you think, act, and react to everything and everyone around you.”  She then proceeds to giving examples of the Threefold Self by showing two charts and suggests three of her classmates report 1 that are related to the threefold self topic.

In the Experiment section, there are three subsections, which are, the experiment design, the data, and the analysis and discussion.  She begins with the experimental design section where she explains how she would go about conducting an in-depth study of her and her husband’s thoughts and feelings of their relationship, why they act and how they act and react to each other. 

The Data section states the questions she was asked and then gave responses for each question in correspondence to her data collection.  The questions fell under one of three categories, which were: sensorimotor self, cognitive self, and affective self.