Gender
Unity:
Annotated
Bibliography
By: Ryan Lau
View
the instructions to this report.
1. Preface
This paper is part
of a research seminar class that is focusing on a specific model used to study
gender relationships. This model is
called “The Threefold Self,” and it is being proposed by Dr. Leon James from
the
Dr. James has
developed what he calls a generational curriculum, which he started ten years
ago. Each semester students are required
to publish three papers online. I am
part of the twentieth generation. As a
generation twenty student, my job will be to add my own ideas and opinions about
“The Threefold Self” to the already existing knowledge base. You can visit the previous generations by
accessing the generation’s
directory from the G20
class home page. I am proud to be a part
of this ongoing online learning experience.
This class is a great benefit to the students because it helps them
publish their ideas on the web for others to view. The following are reports that I have viewed
prior to writing this paper.
Special
K from G17 (fall 2002)
Special
K says that Dr. James and the generations before him have given him a broader
perspective of emotional experiences. This learning experience has given him,
and anyone else who reads his report, a more positive, rational way to respond
to different situations that will optimize their well-being in our society,
country, and the world. I believe that
by taking this class, you will learn things that fall outside of your “comfort
zone” and it will teach you not to judge others. I have learned not to automatically label new
things as weird. I now do this because
the term “weird” can carry negative connotations along with it. I do not wish to pre-judge anything, and
through this experience I have learned to keep an open mind as well.
Lesley
Chong from G15 (fall 2001)
This
is what Lesley had to say about the Emotional Spin Cycle.
It (the Emotional Spin Cycle) has provided me with
helpful information that I was able to use to understand and make changes to in
regards to my life socially, academically, and personally. It has given me a
new perspective into my anger and frustrations. I now know that my emotions
should be focused on the positive and not negative aspects of my life.
I am glad that Lesley has
found her way to the positive side of the Spin Cycle, and I hope others do
too. I had the honor of learning about
this topic through Dr. James 409B class in the spring of 2004. I am a G20 student, and I share the same
feelings towards the Emotional Spin Cycle just as Lesley does. I believe that the Emotional Spin Cycle can
help people live their lives better and it can create an environment around
them that is more welcoming and friendly to others.
Audrey
Kawaoka from G08 (spring 1998)
Audrey says that
the best relationships are not always the ones that are face to face. In her report, she says that her friendship
with an old classmate has grown and deepened through online emailing. I am not surprised to here this because, I
believe that relationships can develop without you interacting physically. I believe that there is an inert side to all relationships
that are based on emotions, thoughts, and feelings. This connection is not physical at all, it
does not need to be maintained through close proximity, and it can be enriched
or destroyed through any type of negative interactions.
2.
Introduction
The topic for this course is Unity Through
Differentiation and Reciprocity. Our
required text is “Gender and Discourse” written by, Deborah Tannen. The lectures, class discussions, and papers
are also based on online
articles that can be reached from the reading list link on the lecture
notes webpage.
We are studying the differences in gender behavior in three
sub-components of gender; affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor. These three sub-components are areas of “the
Individual’s Threefold Self.” The
“Threefold Self” model proposed by Dr. Leon James explores the idea that two
people can form an unbreakable romantic partnership if they are united or
conjoined at all three sub-components of unity.
The first and most basic level of the “Threefold Self Model” is the sensorimotor level.
This initial level operates the sensations, perceptions, and motor acts
that we perform in a relationship. For
example the sensorimotor part of a relationship
involve what we like to do together, how we communicate to each other verbally
and nonverbally, and the intimate chemistry that is being shared. This overt external level is the basic and
first level of the relationship.
According to the “Threefold Self Model,” the sensorimotor
is cognitively governed by tradition and affectively controlled by reward and
punishment. Couples who are in this
level of unity are not joined at the “Equity Level” or the “Unity Level”
levels, level two and three; they are only seen to be externally conjoined.
The second level in this model is called the “Equity Level.” The “Equity Level” is the middle level and it
involves what is known as the “cognitive self”.
The “cognitive self” includes how each other thinks, reason, justify things,
what they see as acceptable or not, their thoughts and feelings about
information, knowledge, philosophy, and religion. In the “Equity Level” an equal amount of
power and decision making responsibilities are given to each couple. Negotiations are a big factor in this level
of the “Threefold Self.” Essentially the
“Equity Level” is a type of political power agreement between two
individuals.
Being conjoined at this level enhances and improves the “Sensorimotor Level’s” interactions of the relationship. The couple gets along better, tends to agree
more often, and they are able to talk out and negotiate each other’s needs and
wants. The couples that have reached
this “Equity Level” become more compatible with each other. At this level the
couple has more diversity in their physical activities and derives more
enjoyment from sharing such activities with each other.
The third and
highest level of unity is the “affective self.”
The “affective self” is the inmost level that a couple can reach. Partners who connect with each other on this
level have the desire to protect, support, and promote each other’s feelings,
wishes, and needs. On this level, even
though the two individuals are different, they function together in
harmony. This is what Dr. James calls
“gender unity as one through differentiation and reciprocity.” This level, however, is not possible unless
the couple abandons the two prior levels of the conjoined self.
Chart of the Three Models in Gender Relations
|
Level of Unity |
Name of Model |
Threefold Self Involved in the
Relationship |
|
3 |
Unity |
Affective (inmost) |
|
2 |
Equity |
Cognitive (internal) |
|
1 |
Dominance or Traditional |
Sensorimotor (external) |
3. Annotated
Bibliography in Gender Unity
Article number 1
of 10
Women
in the Priesthood?
Masculine and
Feminine Uses
The Difference between
the Sexes from Divine Revelation and From Experience
1. Headsten states that being masculine is different from
being feminine and that the two are so different that one cannot transform into
the other. Headsten
believes that in order for two people to become a whole, the two individuals
must become united. Headsten
believes that the conjoining of two people will bring upon a true
marriage. This true marriage is the
unification and agreement of a man and a woman in all aspects of each other’s
mind, body, and soul.
I believe that
this statement is gender stereotypical and that it follows a highly religious,
idealistic view of marriage. It is my
belief that men and women can have either masculine, feminine, or androgynous characteristics
if they choose to do so. And those
characteristics can be used to conjoin with someone who possesses similar
and/or overlapping characteristics. I
believe that a good marriage is between two people who share common interests
on the sensorimotor level and can communicate
effectively on the cognitive level. I
also believe that the unification of two people in the affective level three
relationship needs to be supported by the previous two levels in order to
function properly. I also believe that in a true marriage you are two
completely detached individuals who function well together. I consider the idea of becoming conjoined
into a whole individual with someone else as inaccurate because it leaves you
dependent on someone else for fulfillment.
I believe that you should be able to function as a whole individual, and
the responsibility to do so should not be dependent on another individual. It is also my belief that two whole people
together in one relationship will function better than two people conjoined to
form one whole in one relationship.
2. Headsten also states in her article that men and women
communicate, feel, perceive, react, respond, love, need, and appreciate
differently from each other.
This idea follows
a gender-relative perspective, and I feel that this statement should be changed
to one that is based on an individual’s personality not gender. Two individuals will always have differences
in any type of relationship, and they must negotiate and resolve those differences
in order to continue to function together. I believe that part of this
statement is true but is restricted to heterosexual romantic couples. I believe that it should be changed from a
gender-relative statement to a personality-relative one so that all types of
romantic relationships can be included.
3. This article
also concludes that because men and women come from different upbringings, men
and women communicate differently with each other. Headsten goes on to
say that messages being said between a man and a woman are gender encoded and
possess underlying messages, which the other cannot understand.
I believe that
the communication between two people does not have any gender barriers. I believe that the only barrier that stands
in the way of effective communications is self made. I feel that if someone needs to get a point
across to another person, they will do so in a way that is clear,
understandable, and to the point. The
only time when a communication boundary will be erected is when there is a
deliberate omission of information from the speaker’s side. All other communication should be transferred
and received in its correct and accurate entirety from speaker to listener.
Article 2 of 10
Women
in the Priesthood?
Masculine and
Feminine Uses
4. Reverend Gladish
says in his article that if a man and a woman are to become united in conjugial love, then neither of them must exercise power
over the other.
I believe that
when two people are united in conjugial love, no one
can dominate over the other. Power
should always remain equal, even during disagreements. Without this equality in negotiations, the
power would belong to one side---making the argument unfair and giving one
person the authority over the other. By
having an equally powered relationship, two people can function better together
and live harmoniously in conjunction.
5. Gladish goes on to say that a marriage in heaven has no
predominance because the will of the husband is the will of his wife, and he
also states that the husband’s understanding is the
wife’s understanding as well.
This statement is
saying that in a level three unity of a man and a
woman, the man and woman’s focus becomes one single focus, and all aspects of
the relationship become conjoined. I
think that this is an ideal relationship construct that may never be achieved. This perfect conjunction between two
individuals will have to be between two identical people, and this is not
possible. Everyone will disagree about
something at sometime.
6. The Reverend Gladish also says that conjugial
love is dependent on each person having a strength in
one area, and the one person must be led by the stronger one and vice versa.
This, I believe,
is a trust issue. If you trust your
partner enough for him or her to make a decision that you are not qualified to
make yourself, then that constitutes a trusting bond between two people. This willingness to forfeit power to someone
to make a decision in your best interest is representational of a strong bond
between two people.
Article 3 of 10
Women
in the Priesthood?
Masculine and
Feminine Uses
7. Woodard states
that a true marriage is unique because its depth in intimacy of communication
cannot be found anywhere else in society.
This statement is
saying that only in marriage can you have a deep intimate conversation with
someone else. On the other hand, I
believe that before you join in matrimony, you should already possess the
ability to have deep intimate conversations.
The joy of communication on such a level should be formed before
marriage, not after or during. I feel that
this type of communication is one of the essential foundations to beginning a
life with someone and that it forms the basis for a good, sturdy relationship.
8. Woodard again reiterates what Rev. Gladish spoke about: how the will and understandings of a
man and a woman in a Heavenly Marriage becomes each other’s will and understandings.
Again, I think
this is unreachable and idealistic. I
also believe that if this could be achieved, the relationship would lose
spontaneity, creativity, and excitement because it lacks differences within the
relationship.
9. Woodard
finally states that it is the essential concern of the church to bring two
people into effective harmony.
I believe that
the responsibility for the conjunction of two people in harmony is solely
dependent on the individuals in that union.
I think that the church’s concern should be limited to the ceremonial
aspect of the relationship, and the church should not intervene in the
homeostatic functionality between two people.
I think that should be worked out between those involved in the
relationship itself.
Article 4 of 10
Teacher’s
Classroom Strategies Should Recognize that Men and Women Use Language
Differently
10. Tannen states that women who attend single-sexed schools do
better later in life because in a coeducational setting, men take up a greater
percentage of the talk time.
Tannen bases this statement on the fact that
women are less intimidated by members of their own sex; therefore, they are
more likely to voice their opinions. I
agree with Tannen because in a coeducational setting,
I feel that men are more assertive and tend to overpower women’s voices,
opinions, and inputs. In a single sex
environment, women have the chance to be assertive, and this will help them
make their needs, wants, and feelings known.
This absence of intimidation will hopefully lead to more women voicing
their concerns.
11. Tannen also writes that girls and boys learn to use
language differently in sex-separate peer groups.
I find this to be
true because males’ activities tend to be activity-oriented and lead to a
hierarchical system, which later affects how boys assert themselves in
speaking. Girls, however, are more
likely to establish a best friend whom they share things with, which later
leads them into a pattern of not being assertive to establish a rank.
12. Tannen ends her essay by saying that she is convinced that
students need to become observers of their own talking strategies, and they
need to be aware that their way of talking affects others around them.
This statement by
Tannen gives excellent support for the need to have
self-witnessing skills. I feel that we
need to have the ability to critique ourselves in a non-biased way. If we can acquire this skill, I believe that
we will become more sensitive to those around us. This may lead to equal talk time between
genders, which would mean that the power struggle for voicing concerns will no
longer exist.
Article 5 of 10
Paradigm Shift and the Issue of Women
in the Clergy
13. Dyck tells her readers in this article that men need to
become conjoined with a woman because the man by himself is a self-intelligent,
self-indulging, egocentric person. He
needs a woman to steer him away from these natural male tendencies.
I feel that this
claim, which Dyck makes, is very extreme. It tells its readers that men do not possess
the innate ability to be a well-rounded person.
It also goes on to say that the only way a man would be able to be this
well-rounded person is if he has the guidance of a woman. I think that this is totally untrue, biased,
and was probably written after she met a totally egotistical male jerk. Men can
possess the qualities that she refers to, but they are not predetermined to be
“all bad.” And if they were to become a
well-rounded individual, they could do it without the help of a woman.
14. Dyck goes on to say that women tend to have some influence
over men. They bring in a new feminist
perspective into the eyes of a man.
Woman may be the
ones to teach a man about feminism, but the man is the one who decides to be a
feminist. You can take all the feminist
teachings and try to change a man, but the only time when he will change is
when he chooses to. It should not be the
female’s responsibility to change a man; it should be his. And being with a woman is not the only way to
become enlightened with the concepts of feminism. He could learn it in a classroom, out of a
book, or even from a pro-feminist man.
15. The gift of conjunction can only come from the
unity between a man and a woman. They
are both in need for each other and cannot benefit from the joys of being
conjoined if they are not married.
I once gave a
friend some relationship advice that was contradictory to this statement. He was feeling inadequate and could never get
a girlfriend. I told him that he needs
to find himself first, and then he would be in a better position to find
someone to be in a relationship with. I
had told him this because I feel that self-identity is important in finding a
partner. When you are aware of your
self-identity, you know who you are and you know what you want. Now all you have to do is find someone with
the same or similar characteristics as yourself, and then go from there.
I believe that
before you ever enter into a relationship, you should be independent and a
whole person. You should not be with
someone because he or she completes you.
There should be two whole people in a relationship. This is what I believe makes unions
great.
The next two articles
that are being reviewed are from the previous generations and are based on
gender differences in driving norms. I
have chosen to detour into another realm of “The Threefold Self” to give you a
more rounded perspective on how this model is applied under different
conditions.
Article 6 of 10
16. Wilfred Lee
writes that we cannot attach norms to driving behavior since driving behavior
is an individual activity that is based on personality and the environment that
you are in.
I totally agree
with Lee. Individual personalities are self-relative
and will never fall perfectly under any particular norm. I believe that this statement can be applied
to this semester’s topic of “Unity through Differentiation and Reciprocity”. Personalities should be individually
relative, and gender norms are to be used for prediction only.
17. Christine Tomooka says that the best thing about driving behavior is
that it can always be changed.
I believe that
all social behaviors have the ability to change. One of the great things about being a human is
the ability to contribute more and new knowledge to your existing crystallized
intelligence. I feel that all behaviors
are always changing, updating, or adjusting to the knowledge that we are taking
in every day.
18. Dr. Driving’s site
gives its readers an overview of the masculine and feminine ways of
driving. One of the points that Dr.
Driving makes is aggressive driving attracts aggressive behavior, emotions, and
reactions.
I also believe
that this statement can be applied to behavior in general. I believe that aggressiveness is situational,
and any individual possesses the ability to be aggressive or refrain from
aggression. A person’s behavior is
environmentally relative, and you cannot predict what any individual will do in
a specific situation.
Article 7 of 10
Gender
Differences in Driving: Is There a Difference?
By: Jayson Nakasone (generation 10)
19. Lucy’s report
from the G6 class wrote “men act upon their anger more than women because of
their dominant and controlling nature.”
Although this may be true, Lucy said that her findings from a distributed
class survey carry no reliability or validity.
I
believe that it is wrong to assume that men are the more dominant and
controlling of the two sexes. I feel
that this statement carries no validity, and dominance and controlling
characteristics can be attached to either sex.
Women do have the ability to possess such characteristics.
20.
Shintani of G7 wrote, “I do not think that gender is
the key factor in aggressive driving. I
think aggressive driving is influenced more by factors other than gender.”
I
agree with Shintani, because I feel that gender is
only one factor out of the many which determine behavior. To base a particular behavior on only one
factor is wrong. You must take
everything into consideration in order to make a prediction on what someone
will do. The other considerations that
you may want to account for are things such as past history, environment,
amount of experience in a given situation, etc.
21.
Tomooka had stated in her report that the negative
stereotypes of women drivers were invented to maintain their low social status
in society.
This
theory is nothing more than a theory. I
believe that social status in society is self-determined rather then gender
specific. Anyone can enter a particular
social class if they choose to do so.
Status, in this sense, is not gender-limited but individually open to
anyone.
Article
8 of 10
22.
“The Threefold Self” is not a concept that you are born with; it is something
that you must learn to develop.
Part
of “The Threefold Self” model requires you to develop what is known as a
non-biased, self-witnessing skill. This
skill, when acquired, will allow you to evaluate your self, and it will help
you to achieve conjunction with someone in the highest level of unity in the
model. This can be a difficult skill to
master, but it is useful in many ways.
By having the ability to critique yourself, you can learn to better
yourself for the sake of yourself and others.
I think that everyone should attempt to gain this skill.
23.
Nakashima points out that the self-witnessing method is a process whereby you
disconnect your body and its activities and log down your feelings, thoughts,
and conversations and its relevance to your surroundings at that time.
I
believe that the self-witnessing method is a good way to correct any mistakes
that you may have made in order to avoid that behavior in the future. This method is a good way to learn from
yourself, and it can be beneficial to you if you learn from your previous mistakes.
24.
Nakashima concludes that through self-witnessing, we are able to connect with
what had been disconnected.
I
assume that Nakashima is trying to say that by having a self-witnessing skill,
we are able to look back on what we have done and analyze it. I am guessing that what he meant by
“disconnected” was a previous event that you cannot change. If that is what he is trying to say, then I
think his statement is true. You can
never take back an action that has already been done, even if that action was
bad and you wanted to take it back. This
is why it is best to reconnect yourself with what has happened in the past and
learn from it so that you do not repeat undesired behaviors.
Article
9 of 10
25.
Sunada writes in her report that it is important to
know why we do the things we do because it is helpful to those who are trying
to increase their own self-awareness.
I
believe anyone who is aware of the things that they do and its relativity to
others are in a good position to better their actions later in life. By doing this, a person is able to evaluate
his or her actions and improve them in case the situation presents itself
again. I believe that sometimes the best
way to learn is from your own mistakes.
26.
Sunada says that the self-witnessing method is a good
way to find out more about yourself because it digs
below the surface and analyzes the internal self.
Being
able to know what internally causes you to act out externally is the best way
to correct, change, or repeat what you have already done. This is great because you now know the source
of your actions, and it is up to you to change them or continue to act out in
the same way.
27.
Sunada also points out that it is good to have an
ongoing dialogue with yourself to keep yourself aware of what and why you do
the things you do.
This
may sound strange to some, but Sunada brings up a
good point. Although this is a
characteristic of an ADHD person, being able to talk to yourself about issues
concerning yourself and others who you interact with is a good way to keep a
mental log of what you have done. In
this sense, I think that having an internal dialogue is a good thing. It will help you record what you do and why
you have done them. This archival data
can be referenced later when one needs to improve one’s self.
Article
10 of 10
A
Dinner Conversation in Manoa
28.
Morifuji analyzes a dinner conversation that lasted
for about an hour among five people. Her
analysis of the conversation found that food was usually eaten between topics
and arguments and after pauses because food was used as a
filler, both physically and conversationally. Food became the means of
providing continuity into the different topics of discussion.
I
think that it was interesting that Morifuji was able
to point out two common things that happened between pauses in the
conversation. The first: using the topic
of food to fill emptiness in speaking. I
find this interesting because food is something that everyone can talk about,
and you can never run out of things to say about it. The topic of food also served another
function because it also gave the speakers time to develop a new topic. Morifuji’s examples
of why her conversation continued to flow smoothly are excellent examples of
what we all can do to promote a conversation without unusual silences.
29.
Morifuji also says at the end of her report that talk
is also affected by the physical context of the setting in the way the speakers
are assembled. For example, if everyone
were sitting at a rectangular table, the conversation would be different than
if everyone were sitting on a round table.
I
believe that Morifuji’s observations on settings and
how they affect speech are accurate because I feel that under some
circumstances, conversations are environmentally relative. For instance, you would speak in a formal
tone in a courtroom in front of a judge, but you would speak informally to a
friend in a hallway.
30. Morifuji also finds
that past history also affects the way we speak to each other. She gives an example of two people riding on
a bus: “historical context may be shown by two strangers sitting together in a
crowded bus -- they may talk, but most likely wouldn't bare their souls to each
other, not having any previous history of relationship, and standardized
imaginings to draw from.” This can
determine what one would say to the other.
I also see truth in this
statement made by Morifuji because through my own
experience, I too choose not to disclose certain bits of information to people
I do not know well.
4. Conclusion
This assignment has helped me to
better understand “The Threefold Self “model and the importance of the
“self-witnessing” method. I believe the
approach to examining gender, however, will not have a significant impact on
society because I feel that there are too many people who feel that the
conjoining of two people on the highest level will not lead to one whole
individual. It is my belief that two
people exist before, during, and after a relationship and that those two people
must continue to negotiate around the differences that they have. I also believe that you should not look for
fulfillment in someone else; I think that the search for self-fulfillment
should be done on an individual basis.
However, this model does have relevance
to the emotional bases of relationships that people should have. Although it is an ideal, it does give couples
something to strive for. The inner connections
that is formed when you do conjoin is the same type of connection that you
share with a best friend or when in a good relationship/marriage. This type of relationship sets the foundation
for everything that the relationship is about.
It becomes the precursor to the love, helping, sharing, etc. that we experience
while in a “perfect union” with another person.
With that said, I would like to
share with you something that I have written after having an inspirational talk
with a close friend of mine.
Building
Foundations
Every corner
stone in someone’s life contributes to a person’s character. Each experience is
of valid importance, regret nothing. If a good thing occurs remember why it was
good. If a bad one happens reflect on why it was bad.
Whether it is out of a book or just a lesson in
life, the mind learns something every day. Often times it takes a collection of
extensive experiences to draw one conclusion.
Through many experiences, good or bad, I have come to the conclusion
that all great relationships begin from within.
A proper foundation needs to be set before you can build a healthy
relationship. This foundation must be sturdy enough to withstand anything. The goal is to achieve unconditional love,
and that can only be nurtured through an unconditional emotional friendship. This type of friendship is the bases of any
true relationship.
I am looking for someone to like me for my good
qualities and more importantly, love me for my bad ones. My flaws are something that I don’t want but they
are a part of me indefinitely. I need someone to accept me for me.
To: my best friend, can you love the true me?
This passage explains that there are so much
more to a relationship then what you see.
A personal connection with another individual can be achieved and
maintained by keeping a strong emotional tie with another person. I believe that this I what unity really
is. I also feel that this is an important
piece of the “Unity Model” described in this paper.
5. Note to Future Generations
To generation 21+: when taking
Dr. James’ course, it is important to keep in mind that you are studying a model, and what you make of it is
solely up to you. Also there is a good
amount of reading to be done in this class; so keep up to date or ahead of the
proposed reading schedule.