Gender Unity:

Annotated Bibliography

by Suzanne Howard

 

Instructions for this report may be found at: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy20/g20lecturenotes409b.htm

 

1.  Preface

 

I am a student in Psychology 409b, instructed by Dr. Leon James, at the University of Hawaii.  This course teaches about many aspects of gender relationships, including gender discourse and how men and women relate to each other through the three-fold self.

 

Dr. James has taught many prior generations, and I am in Generation 20.  This is the first semester that this particular course is being taught, since Dr. James is constantly revising and updating the course material.  Other generations have written about such topics as road rage, internet psychology, and self-monitoring techniques.  I am glad that the previous generations have put their work on the internet.  It is helpful to be able to look over their work for tips on how to do our reports.  I am glad that I can contribute to this pool of information with my own work.

 

The following are student reports from the previous generation that have something to do with gender relationships.

 

1.  Bridget Antonio (Generation 16)

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bs2002/antonio/report1.htm

Antonio describes the three fold self as what we are feeling (affective), what we are thinking (cognitive), and what we are doing (sensorimotor).  She says it is important to understand what we are feeling, so that we can think and act rationally.  I agree that it is important to understand all aspects of the three fold self.  For example, if we do not first understand our motivations and feelings, then we will not understand why we are thinking a certain way.  If we do not understand why we are thinking the way that we are thinking, then we cannot understand why we are acting the way that we are acting.  It is important to remember that all of the aspects of the threefold self are interrelated.

 

2. “Special K” (Generation 16)

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409bf2002/boyer/bibliography.htm

The main theme of this report is rage, but it also contains the specific theme of rage against women.  In India, a young girls falls victim to rape.  “Special K” says that no matter where you live, rage and crimes against other individuals are ever present.  In India, women face many types of harassment, such as wife abuse, wrongful confinement, abduction, and rape.  “Special K” was shocked about all of the violence that occurs in this part of the world.  I too, was shocked by this horrible treatment of women.  I knew that women were being severely abused all over the world.  However, it is still shocking to learn about the explicit details of this abuse.  I feel helpless that I cannot do anything for these unfortunate women.  Hopefully, future generations will not be so tolerant of abuse of women.

 

3.  Czarina Naranjo (Generation 8)

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/459s98/naranjo/webnet.html

Naranjo discuses some of the difference between men and women drivers.  She says that the people in the group discussions are sexist against women.  She says that they over generalize the number of bad women drivers just because they have witnessed a few bad female drivers.  The people in these groups have biased opinions, because studies have shown that men tend to drive more aggressively than females do.  I believe that Naranjo is being sexist towards men in her commentaries.  She is ignoring the data.  Even though the data shows that there are more “aggressive” male drivers, it says nothing about “bad” drivers.  Maybe the women are not “aggressive” drivers, but they can still be considered “bad” drivers because of such things as not putting on their turn signal, driving under the speed limit, or not paying attention to the road.  I think that Naranjo should not just dismiss the opinions of the people in the group discussions just because they are contrary to evidence because there is always room for new data.

 

2.  Introduction

 

The main topic of this course is gender relationships.  We discuss how men and women talk differently, by reading Deborah Tannen’s book Gender and Discourse and by reading articles on the web from the class home page.  We also discuss how men and women relate by learning about the concepts of the three fold self and of the model of gender unity, a concept from the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg and elaborated upon by Dr. James.

 

I feel the purpose of this course is not to be persuaded to believe these concepts, but to keep a positive bias by knowing that they are possible.  It is important to understand the threefold self: the sensorimotor, cognitive, and affective elements of each of us.  We must understand what the threefold self is and how it works in order to have a clear understanding of gender relationships.  I think that Dr. James feels very strongly about passing the knowledge that he has learned from Swedenborg about gender relationships on to us.  He has learned of the benefits of a unity relationship from first hand experience.  He wishes that we would all have a greater understanding of the concepts that have made him and his wife so happy.

 

I think that the information that has been presented in this course is very interesting.  It seems that, if applied, could be very useful in one’s life.  I think the topic of gender relationships is applicable to everyone.  So far, this course has opened my eyes to concepts that I do not think I would have even given a second thought to.  I have learned not to keep the negative bias, think that this is not possible, but have learned to keep an open mind by using the positive bias.

 

3.  Annotated Bibliography on Gender Unity

 

CATEGORY 1

 

The Doctrine of the Wife    by Leon James

 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/doctrine-of-the-wife2.htm

 

The Doctrine of the Wife, based on the Writings of Swedenborg, refers to a spiritual guide for husbands intended to help them overcome their resistance to conjugial love.  Conjugial love is a love that internally and eternally unites the minds and hearts of a husband and wife.

 

1.      The Doctrine of the Wife states that a woman is born with an internal longing for marriage and spiritual union.   Men, on the other hand, are born with an inclination for having multiple sex partners.  The Doctrine says that men are born more resistant to conjugial love.  I feel that even though this statement may be true in general, there are many men and women who do not fall into these categories.   There are many women who do not want to marry and who do enjoy multiple sex partners.  Also, there are many men who truly want to be with only one woman.  They care so much for her that they would never want another sex partner.  I believe that there are too many exceptions for this to be taken literally.

 

1.      The Doctrine of the Wife says that a person is only truly and completely human when they are at the unity stage in a marriage relationship.  An unmarried man should think of himself as a “pre-husband,” and know that marriage is an essential step to becoming fully human.  I do not agree with these beliefs.  Any human being is a person.  This includes single, divorced, or widowed people.  Even murderers and rapists are human.  I believe that a conjugial love relationship is a great thing.  However, I do not think someone has to be in one to be considered fully human.

 

2.      The Doctrine of the Wife says that when a wife requests something of the husband, he must oblige even if he does not agree with it.  It states that the affections of a woman are from God and the affections of a man are from himself.  That is why a husband must accept any affection of the wife.  This does not make sense to me.  It implies that a wife’s affections are infallible.  However, we know that women do make incorrect decisions.  A man could be right in many circumstances in which a woman is wrong.  I do not think that a man should have to agree with everything his wife says. 

 

Conjugial Love Stories   by Emanuel Swedenborg

http://www.swedenborgdigitallibrary.org/CL/conjunc.htm

 

In Conjugial Love Stories, Swedenborg tells about conjugial love, which he says is the greatest love between a man and a woman.

 

4.       Swedenborg states some of the benefits of conjugial love.  For example, he says conjugial love joins two souls and two minds into one.  At the end of the list of benefits it says these blessings are not at all possible except in a marriage of one man and one wife.  I must disagree with this statement.  Many people can be in a unity relationship.  Unmarried, dating couples can be in a unity relationship.  I think that gay men and lesbians can be in a unity relationship.  These couples can receive all of the blessings of conjugial love, the same as a husband and wife can.  I do not think a conjugial love relationship should set limits and exclude unmarried couples or gay and lesbian couples.

 

5.      Swedenborg says that a husband’s seminal fluids contain his soul.  Therefore, a wife receives these fluids from her husband and in turn leads a life of progressively greater harmony with her husband.  This statement is hard for me to understand because there are many couples in which sexual intercourse is not possible.  Many people have had terrible accidents which have left them paralyzed and obviously unable to have sex.  Many older couples cannot have sex.  There are others who are born with certain abnormalities which will never allow them to have sex.  Does this mean that they cannot be joined as strongly as couples who can have sex?

 

6.      Swedenborg says that a man and a woman have separate duties, and that a man cannot join into the duties of his wife nor can a wife enter into the duties of her husband.  He says that duties appropriate for husbands involve understanding, thought, and wisdom; the duties appropriate for wives involve will, affection, and love.  For example, he says that women’s duties are to take care of the upbringing of young children.  In today’s society, this concept of separate duties does not make much sense at all.  There are too many single family homes for duties to be only for men or only for women.  For example, it is impossible to tell a single father that he should not raise his children because that is a woman’s job.  Many families need men or women to take care of everything.  These duties cannot be split between a man and a woman.

 

The Revolt of Woman   by W.L. Gladish

http://www.newchurchissues.org/wip/MF/mf15wg.htm

 

The Revolt of Woman gives the New Church’s position on men and women’s relationships.  (note: The New Church is based on the Writings of Swedenborg.)

 

 

7.      The teachings of Swedenborg say that each soul comes into contact with God for certain things.  The Lord gives the man understanding, for which he must give to the woman.  The Lord gives the woman love, for which she gives to the man.  Therefore, the man and the woman are dependent on each other.  The statement is fairly hard to grasp.  It seems quite strange to think that a man cannot love unless he gets that power from a woman.  Conversely, a woman does not have understanding until she receives it from a man.  This statement does not seem logical to me, however, this is what Swedenborg wrote and this is what the New Church believes.

 

8.      The New Church says that husband and wife are to be united in conjugial love; neither must be dominant over the other.  This belief is contrary to the statements in the Book of Genesis that says the husband shall rule over the wife.  The position of the New Church makes sense to me because even though the man and woman receive different gifts from God, they need each other to receive the gifts that they did not receive from God. 

 

9.      Despite the New Church’s stance of an opposition of dominance between husband and wife, there are church doctrines that seem to support the inferiority of woman to man.  One doctrine says that because wisdom and understanding are divinely given to men that women do not speak from wisdom.  This document goes on to say that when men talk about such intellectual topics women only remain silent and listen.  This statement sounds sexist and is offensive to me.  It seems as though it is acceptable to push women out of certain conversations just because their wisdom is not divinely given.  This seems to be in opposition of conjugial love.  In this case it seems that the man would then become dominant over the woman.

 

Teacher’s Classroom Strategies Should Recognize that Men and Women Use Language Differently    by Deborah Tannen

http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/tannend/chronicle061991.htm

 

Tannen shows that men and women talk differently and therefore learn differently in the classroom.  Teachers should understand these differences and take them into consideration when teaching the different genders.

 

10. Tannen is troubled by the fact that women who go to single-sex schools do better in latter life than those who do not.  Also, in the classroom, the males talk more than the females do.  This does not mean that all men talk more than all women do, however the greater percentage of discussion is done by men.  This fact is not so surprising to me.  I went to a co-ed school from kindergarten through eighth grade.  Then, I attended and all female high school.  It did seem like many of the speakers in eighth grade were male.  The females tended to be more quiet and reserved.  In high school on the other hand, women who were more reserved in grade school, tended to speak up more.  I noticed that I was even more inclined to participate in these single-sex discussions than I was in the co-ed discussions in grade school.

 

11.  Tannen described the differences in men and women’s casual conversations.  In America, many women bond by talking about their troubles, whereas men bond by exchanging put-downs in a playful way.  I have noticed this phenomenon in my own interactions.  It is more common to observe women talking about their problems than it would be to observe men doing the same thing.  I can’t even remember when I have heard a group of guys talking about what is bothering them.  As for the last time I have witnessed women talking about something troublesome, I just got of the phone with my friend doing just that.  Although, this does not mean that the only way women communicate is by discussing problems nor does it mean that the only way men communicate is by verbal sparring, these techniques seem to be prevalent in daily conversations.

 

12.  Tannen says that one reason why men speak more in classrooms is that they feel more comfortable in a public setting.  Women, on the other hand, feel more comfortable speaking in private with a small group of people that they know well.  This statement seems as though it could be true.  It would be accurate to say that men do take up most of the discussion time in a classroom.  However, there are exceptions.  Cultural differences play a part in classroom discussions.  For example, many men and women from Asian cultures are less likely to engage in conversations with other students.  I think this has something to do with culture as well as insecurity about language proficiency.  Also, many women, including myself, enjoy making contributions to a classroom discussion.

 

 

The Enjoyment of Sexist Humor, Rape Attitudes, and Relationship Aggression in College Students   by Ryan and Kanjorski

www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m2294/n9-10_v38/20914088/p1/article.jhtml

 

This article explores the relationship between the enjoyment of sexist humor and rape-supportive attitudes, sexually coercive behavior, and courtship violence in college men and women.

 

13.  Ryan and Kanjorski found that rape-supportive and sexist attitudes may be found in young men’s enjoyment of sexist humor.  The article said that in cultures where rape is a joke are cultures that foster rape.  This is quite surprising.  Many young people, including myself, would consider sexist jokes harmless.  Sexist jokes are a commonplace occurrence among young people.  I would never have thought there to be a relationship between sexist jokes and sexual aggression.  However, this research is correlational; therefore we cannot be sure of the cause.

 

14.  The article says that sexual jokes may be used to test the waters with potential sexual partners, express repressed desires, or they may be used in a hostile manner.  Some people may tell sexual jokes in order to make another person feel inferior.  When the audience laughs, this affirms the point of view expressed by the joke.  I am not sure that I agree with this statement.  I think many people just laugh at these jokes because they find them funny, not because they are trying to affirm a sexist attitude.  In this culture, I think that young people are conditioned to find these types of jokes comical.  Most people do not take offensive to them because it is not socially acceptable.  However, now that we know that this kind of humor can have potentially dangerous effects we must not be so quick to dismiss sexist jokes as innocent fun. 

 

15.  Ryan and Kanjorski say that sexual jokes, teasing, and remarks are the most common form of sexual harassment.  Sexual harassment is never innocent fun.  We definitely cannot take sexual jokes lightly if they are used as sexual harassment.  Depending on the context in which they are told, I can see how these jokes can become sexual harassment.  Most times sexual jokes are told innocently between friends.  However, they can become harassment if they are directed at a person or if they are repeated frequently.  We must understand that these seemingly innocent jokes are not amusing when they are used as a form of sexual harassment.

 

CATEGORY 2

 

Gender Differences in Driving: Does Sex Matter    by Wendy Tagomori

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/459f98/tagomori/report2.html

 

This report was by a student of Dr. James.  She created a questionnaire about the gender differences in driving philosophies.

 

16.  Tagomori found that the total score for the males on aggressiveness was significantly higher than the females.  The range for women was very wide (ranging from 0-8), whereas the range for men was more narrow (ranging from 4-8).  The author surmised that men tend to drive moderately aggressively, while women drive both aggressively and passively depending on their personalities and their moods.  I think that these hypotheses make sense based on her data.  These statements also agree with my own personal observations.  Most of the men I have witnessed drive relatively aggressively.  The individual women that I have witnessed drive generally aggressively or passively.  However, depending on their moods, I think both men and women can drive either aggressively or passively.

 

17.  In this survey, females stated that they do not compete with or challenge other drivers on the road.  Males were split on this question.  I am a little surprised with these results.  I do know more men who compete with other drivers, but I also know women who engage in this activity.  Also the author said that all of the females and all but one male said they comply with traffic rules.  I find this extremely difficult to believe.  If obeying traffic rules means following the speed limit and coming to a complete stop at stop signs, then I do not believe the subjects were telling the truth while completing this survey.  I think almost everyone speeds from time to time, and some people speed almost all of the time.  These results must be biased in some way.

 

18.  This article said that all of the men claimed that they can tolerate bad drivers and that they do not rush on the road.  The author hypothesized that men are more tolerant and patient in general, but when they are tested, they act more aggressively than women do.  These results and this hypothesis do not make sense to me.  Other data has shown that men are more aggressive drivers than women.  If men are so tolerant and patient, then why are they so aggressive?  People are not aggressive when they are tolerant.  I do not think the subjects understood the question on the survey.

 

Gender Differences in Driving Norms   by Cara Lucey

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/459ss97/clucey/report2.html

 

 

This report was by another student of Dr. James who also created a questionnaire about gender differences in driving norms.

 

19.  Lucey says that aggressive driving has gone up 7 percent since 1990.  Aggressive driving is not only violence which causes physical damage but also abuse which causes psychological damage.  Lucey says that aggressive driving is becoming more prevalent because it is becoming more of a social norm.  By saying that aggressive driving is okay we are encouraging this aggressive behavior.  I agree with these statements. If we encourage aggressive drivers, or even if we do not reprimand their driving, we are encouraging the progression of these violent behaviors.

 

20. Lucey also reported a comment that was discussed in her class: “Women choose to have the men drive.”  She said this is an example of women accepting a submissive relationship role.  I do not think that this statement is true.  There are many women who drive while men are the passengers.  Lucey also says that when women acquired their role as drivers men felt a loss of control and damage to their pride. I know many men who are completely comfortable with having women drive.  Many women do not feel that they are trying to dominate the men in their lives when they choose to be the drivers.  The roles of gender relationships are changing in our society and I feel that men and women in general are comfortable with this.

 

21.  Lucey had asked the participants in her study to elaborate on their answers to her questionnaire.  The women had commented more about their moods than the men had.  The female drivers were more aware of their moods and other external sources that had an effect their driving behaviors.  None of the men commented on moods or external sources.  I found this information to be very interesting.  Perhaps the reason why men are more aggressive drivers is because they are not as in tuned to their moods and motives as women drivers are. 

 

CATEGORY 3

 

The Behavioral Technology of Discourse Analysis   by Leon James

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499s2000/banaag/file15.html

 

Dr. James discuses the levels of organization of discourse: sensorimotor, cognitive, and affective.

 

22. Dr. James states that overt discourse depends on our inner mental states.  In other words, what we say depends on what we are thinking and feeling.  We can understand what people are thinking based on what they are saying.  This idea makes complete sense to me.  Our sensorimotor (actions), cognitive (thoughts), and affective (feelings) behaviors are all interrelated.  Therefore anything that someone says is directly because they are thinking or feeling it.  Also, we can get some insight into what someone is thinking or feeling by observing what they say.

 

23. Our thinking is influenced by social reinforcers.  In other words, what we think at any one time is influenced by the environment around us.  For example, we think about different things when we are driving, in a classroom, or when we write a letter.  Our environment shapes the way we think and what we think about.  Depending on where we are, our attention is needed for specific things.  For example, when we are lost and trying to figure out where we are, we cannot daydream or let our minds wander.  However, if we are watching television at home it is acceptable to daydream.  The environment is an important factor in shaping the way we think and therefore what we say.

 

24. Thinking is influenced by social reinforcers in our environment.  Many people believe in the idea of “thought-control,” in which the individual is not free to select social reinforcers.  However, this is not the case.  People are free to choose their own values and priorities.  Hence, there is no thought-control.  I found this idea very interesting.  I never did believe in thought-control, and this article shows how it is an impossible phenomenon.  It makes sense that only the owner of the mind could control his or her thoughts.  If we are the only ones who control our thoughts, than we are the only ones who control our talk.

 

The Empirical Investigation of Conversation: The Closing Problem    by Leon James

www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499cl97/march/f5.html

 

This article considers how conversations come to an end and what the participants do to bring an on-going conversation to a close.

 

25. Dr. James says the beginning of the closing section is marked by a foreclosing proposal.  The foreclosing proposal can be initiated with the use of transactional idioms, such as “well…” or “O.K.”.  The first participant brings up this foreclosing proposal.  The second individual can either go along with the proposal to end the conversation, or he or she may decline the foreclosing proposal and continue talking about the same topic or introduce another topic.  I find it quite interesting that discourse can and is analyzed so explicitly.  I do recognize the existence of foreclosing proposals and transactional idioms in my own daily conversations.  They seem to play an important role in bringing about the end of a conversation.

           

26. Telephone conversations have a different structure of closing conversations than do face-to-face conversations.  In a face-to-face conversation either party may attempt a foreclosing proposal.  However, in telephone conversations if caller does not state his reason for calling, called may not attempt a foreclosing proposal at the risk of seeming rude.  This also makes sense to me.  It would be rude if I called someone and was still talking while they attempted to end the conversation.  Also, there are certain unusual circumstances that may allow a phone conversation to end which do not work in a face-to-face conversation.  For instance, you can end a phone conversation by saying, “I am getting another phone call.  I’ll have to call you back.” 

 

27.  In everyday face-to-face conversations participants may initiate a foreclosure proposal by raising a topic that can be seen as a last topic.  For example someone may ask, “So…are you going to go to the party?”  Reintroducing an initial topic can be seen as an ending topic statement.  I have found this strategy useful in my own conversations.  It is appropriate to reintroduce a topic without being rude.  The other party usually understands that you are reintroducing the topic because you are trying to bring the conversation to a close.

 

CATEGORY 4

 

Island Memories   by Gregg Suzuki

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/409as97/greggs/499/greggshome.html

 

This is a semi-autobiographical account of Hawaii in the 1970s. Suzuki first records a dinner conversation with his family.  Then, he analyzes their discourse.

 

28. Suzuki says that the topics first discussed at the dinner table are trivial and brought up just for the sake of starting a conversation.  As time goes on, topics become more intense and involved.  These statements make sense to me.  From my own observations, that seems to be the way conversations are formatted.  It would seem weird to start a conversation with a “heavy” topic.  It seems more natural to start with a generic comment such as “How are you doing?”  I agree with Suzuki in that many topics are just starters for other topics more worthy of discussing.

 

29. Suzuki says that the rules for topic talk vary greatly for different people.  The rules for his family include not discussing anything vulgar or revolting at the dinner table.  They usually start the conversation by talking about the happenings of their day.  He also says that it is not acceptable to interrupt a conversation as an attempt to change a topic.  I agree with Suzuki when he says that the rules for topic are different for different people.  For example, you would not walk up to your professor and start talking about your relationship problems.  However, this would be an acceptable topic to discuss with a best friend.  Also, a conversation with a professor would have a much more formal style than that of a conversation with a best friend.

 

30. Suzuki says that the setting in which a conversation occurs is directly related to the type of conversation that can take place.  For example, dinner time is the only time when the whole family is gathered together.  The family can discuss private family matters during this time.  Suzuki also says that conversations depend on the people around you.  This makes sense to me.  I would not be comfortable talking about some topics with my best friend with my professor nearby.  If you want to have a private conversation with someone, you will make sure that no one is around to hear it.  This is why the setting affects the kind of conversations that may take place.

 

4.  Conclusion

 

By learning this material I have a greater understanding of the differences between men and women and of gender relationships in general.  I believe that if someone truly understands this material and puts effort into incorporating the concept of a “unity” relationship into one’s life, this can help the person in achieving a great relationship with their significant other.  I believe that this material could have a great impact on gender relationships within our society if it is proven and accepted as science.  However, I feel that the definition of romantic relationships, which is confined to those between a man and a woman, are not applicable to everyone in our society.  Many people may feel excluded and may not accept this belief because of its exclusiveness. 

 

I feel that if this idea spreads, gender role stereotypes may persist and may even worsen.  People may get the wrong idea about gender roles if they do not fully understand this information.  I am afraid that this will happen because this information is complicated and the public will not likely have an expert, like Dr. James, to personally explain this information to them.  However, if this concept is fully understood by the masses, then I do believe that women will benefit greatly.  Women will no longer be treated as inferior to men because people will understand the crucial role that women play in the lives of their husbands.  As for myself, I will continue to think and learn about these concepts.  I will evaluate my gender relationships in respect to this newly acquired information.

 

5.  Future Generations

 

My advice to future generations is to keep a positive bias!  Remember that Dr. James is not trying to persuade you into believing any of this.  He just wants you to know that these concepts are possible.  Also, do not get discouraged by the large amount of reading and writing required by this class.  Take your time and space the work out.  Do small amounts every day.  That way, the topics of the course will stay fresh in your mind.

 

 

My Home Page

 

G20 Class Home Page