Alcoholic Self Into The A.A. example essay topic

Abstract: Building on the work of Norman K. Denzin, this paper discusses factors that make the process of self-transformation from the alcoholic self to the A.A. self different for female members of Alcoholics Anonymous. In addition, considering the benefits of social integration and same-sex mentoring / networks, this paper argues that for A.A. women, sustained interaction (i.e. social bonding / social integration) with other A.A. women has a positive impact on the transformation of the alcoholic self to the A.A. self. This impact is significant with respect to life-satisfaction, a factor that certainly effects the desire to remain a sober A.A. member. The program of Alcoholics Anonymous may be utilized by the alcoholic self as a method of interpretation of the disease of alcoholism designed to establish a social pattern of abstinence from alcohol and to transform the alcoholic self into the A.A. self.

Theories of addiction recovery need to be more astute, accounting for the subtle processes by which the self is socialized and the ways that gender and social bonding among women shape the social bonding process. The self has been the object of sociological study for decades and there exists an abundant sociological literature in symbolic interactionism on such study. This literature includes work with respect to the development of the self via primary group socialization (Cooley: 1967 and 1998), the notion of the looking-glass self (Cooley: 1998), the relationship between the self and society (Mead: 1934), self concepts of the "I" and the "Me" (Mead: 1934), and symbolic interactionism's basic tenets (Blumer: 1969) established by Herbert Blumer. Theories in symbolic interactionism established a foundation upon which Norman K. Denzin built to examine how the processes of socialization in Alcoholics Anonymous (A.A.) result in self-tranformations and how both self-constructions and self-transformations occur differently for alcoholics (Denzin: 1997).

While symbolic interaction ists have typically neglected the component of gender in studies of the self, Denzin acknowledges this factor within A.A. However, he fails to follow through sufficiently on the significance of gender with respect to self-tranformations. In order to best understand self-transformations, we have to understand that such processes are not generic, rather they are gendered. Building upon Denzin's work, I will discuss factors that make the process of self-transformation from the alcoholic self to the A.A. self different for female members of A.A. In addition, I will argue that for A.A. women, sustained interaction (i.e. social bonding / social integration) with other A.A. women has a positive impact on the transformation of the alcoholic self to the A.A. self. This impact is significant with respect to life-satisfaction, a factor effecting the desire to remain a sober A.A. member.

I will begin my discussion of self-transformation with a brief overview of each of the following perspectives: (1) sociology and the self as a symbolic system, (2) gender and it's effect on socialization of the self, (3) Alcoholics Anonymous and Denzin's alcoholic self, and (4) the effects of social bonding. Subsequently, I will argue that differences between alcoholic and non-alcoholic perception, as well as those between genders due to socialization, allow the benefits of social bonding to take root in A.A. women more readily upon their bonding within the A.A. women's community. THE SELF AS A SYMBOLIC SYSTEM Sociologists have examined the ways in which identity is negotiated with others for more than one hundred years. Much of Charles Horton Cooley's work examined the dynamics of the development of the self, producing a link between self and society. For Cooley, there can be no "self" apart from society, as it emerges dialectically through communication and interaction. He observed self-feelings as being profoundly shaped by the imagined appraisals of one's self by significant others.

Two of Cooley's major sociological contributions are (1) the notion of primary and secondary groups and their role in socialization and (2) his theory of "the looking-glass self". Cooley espoused to an interactive understanding of the "self", as he postulated a development of that "self" based on our interaction with other people. He also distinguished "other people" with his concept of the "primary group" and he defined such a group in detail. By primary groups I mean those characterized by intimate face-to-face association and cooperation. They are primary in several senses, but chiefly in that they are fundamental in forming the social nature and ideals of the individual. The result of intimate association, psychologically, is a certain fusion of individualities in a common whole, so that one's very self, for many purposes at least, is the common life and purpose of the group.

Perhaps the simplest way of describing this wholeness is by saying that it is a "we"; ... (Cooley, 1998: 179). In our formative years, our most intimate day-to-day associations are generally with our parents, siblings, other family members and close family friends. Our primary group may change and evolve over time, as do we, but the socialization process continues throughout our life. Cooley tells us that, Primary groups are primary in the sense that they give the individual his earliest and most complete experience of social unity, and also in the sense that they do not change in the same degree as more elaborate relations, but form a comparatively permanent source our of which the latter are ever springing (Cooley, 1998: 181). In other words, primary groups play the primary socializing role in our life, even to the extent of influencing other relations with non-primary group people.

These "other relations" or "secondary group" associates come to us by way of relationships with a specific purpose and socialize us is specific ways. Secondary group members may become primary group members due to associations formed through school, college, occupational or other settings where there exist common interests and common activities. Per Cooley, our basic nature, which some refer to as "human nature" is not individualistic, rather it is a product of our societal interaction... human nature is not something existing separately in the individual, but a group-nature or primary phase of society, a relatively simple and general condition of the social mind (Cooley, 1998: 183). Thus, both primary and secondary groups play important roles in the interactive development of "self". For Cooley, it was simple common sense knowledge that "the social self is simply any idea, or system of ideas, drawn from the communicative life, that the mind cherishes as its own".

(Cooley, 1967: 179) For recovering alcoholics, A.A.'s system of ideas is the kind of common sense knowledge alcoholics must cherish (as Cooley would say) in order to become a member of A.A., thereby becoming a recovering alcoholic self. Other recovering A.A. members must become the primary socialization group in the newcomer's sober life in order to affect the transition from the alcoholic self to a recovering A.A. self. If the newcomer does not share the beliefs of A.A., they cannot learn the how and the why and the what of A.A. sobriety and A.A. won't work for them. They might not even want sobriety unless they understand what it is by the A.A. definition, because they understand it to mean "you don't drink" and nothing more. This definition is far short of A.A. reality. Building upon the work of William James, Cooley opposed the traditional distinction between the individual and the external realm of society.

Interactive understanding A separate individual is an abstraction unknown to experience, and so likewise is society when regarded as something apart from individuals... ". Society: and "individuals" do not denote separable phenomena, but are simply collective and distributive aspects of the same thing... When we speak of society, or use any other collective term, we fix our minds upon some general view of the people concerned, while when we speak of individuals we disregard the general aspect and think of them as if they were separate (Cooley, 1964: 36-37). Cooley asserted that an individual's self develops through interaction with others. Thus, there is no separation between the individual and society, where, perhaps, the self originates first individualistically and then socially.

Rather, this process is dialectical and communicative. In a very large and interesting class of cases the social reference takes the form of a somewhat definite imagination of how one's self-that is any idea he appropriates-appears in a particular mind, and the kind of self-feeling one has is determined by the attitude toward this attributed to that other mind. A social self of this sort might be called the reflected or looking-glass self: Each to each a looking-glass Reflects the other that doth pass (Cooley, 1998: 164). The primary ingredient of this communication is the individual's perception of the other's judgment or understanding of such individual. Thus, consciousness of myself is a reflection of what I think others think of me. The theory's three principal elements are: (1) We think about how we appear to another person, (2) we decide the other person's discernment of our appearance, and (3) we experience some sort of resulting feeling (i.e. self-satisfaction or embarrassment).

What moves us into the resulting feeling is the determination, or verdict if you will, that is ascribed to us by the "other". This is evident from the fact that the character and weight of that other, in whose mind we see ourselves, makes all the difference with our feeling. We are ashamed to seem evasive in the presence of a straightforward man, cowardly in the presence of a brave one, gross in the eyes of a refined one, and so on... A man will boast to one person of an action-say some sharp transaction in trade-which he would be ashamed to own to another (Cooley, 1998: 164-65). The essence of the theory is an interactive understanding of the self, an understanding based on our interaction with other people. In the introduction of Human Nature and the Social Order, Philip Rieff discusses the social communication process as the maker of the self.

He writes of contributions to social science made by Charles Horton Cooley and George Herbert Mead, To the study of this process both Cooley and Mead contributed insights that have become the trustworthy basis of contempo-ray social psychology... ". Taking the attitude of the other" toward one's own conduct is, for Mead and Cooley, the essential characteristic of social conduct. Even the body is not a self, as such; it becomes a self only when it imagines itself in relation to others; without social experience, therefore, the self cannot develop. Social communication is thus fundamental to selfhood (Cooley, 1967: xv -xix). The self we perceive is partially the result of interaction with primary and secondary groups (or significant others).

This self is also the result of interactions with people outside of those groups. George Herbert Mead argued that society (e. g., culture, institutions, role systems, language, and acts) precedes symbolic thought that, in turn, precedes the development of selves. Mead observed that by studying role-taking, one can see how the rise of self is dependent upon the ability of an individual to become an object to himself or herself. In other words, one comes to act towards one's self as one acts towards others. Thus, the self is a dynamic process within an individual. Mead stressed that participants in social interactions attempt to take the role of the other in order to see themselves as others see them.

This process allows individuals to know how they are coming across to others and allows them to guide their social behavior so that it has desired effect. Mead contended that there can be no self apart from society with respect to both individual consciousness and communica-tion. Therefore, society emerges through an ongoing process of communicative social interactions between persons who are in alignment with each other. Mead's theory of socialization describes the gradual developing ability of children to take the role of the other and to see him or herself from the point of view of others. The theory has three stages: (1) the self-conscious stage, (2) the play stage and (3) the game stage. In stage one, the child becomes aware of him or herself as an individual at a very primitive level.

Stage two finds the child learning imperfect role-taking through interaction with others, primarily significant others, or, as Cooley termed it, those in the child's primary socialization group. The third stage involves becoming a fully mature socialized individual through structured play, or "playing by the rules", learned through interaction with others not necessarily known to the child. According to Mead, it is not enough for a fully mature individual to consider the attitudes of significant others... he must also take their attitudes toward the various phases or aspects of the common social activity or set of social undertakings in which, as members of an organized society or social group, they are all engaged (Mead, 1934: 154-155). Members of an organized society or social group are what Mead terms the generalized other.

Taking the attitude of the generalized other allows the self to better fit into society through shared beliefs and values. While individuals have agency, the attitude of the generalized other is reflected in the "me", and the agency is reflected in the "I". Mead's distinction between the 'I' and the 'me' explicates the internal conversation between two phases of the self. The 'me' weighs the social context of a situation against the individual context of the situation, the 'I'.

This process finds the self looking for the appropriate 'me' to explain the situation in order to respond with an appropriate 'I'. The self is the outcome of this process, occurring over and over again, hence, the self is always developing. Mead also theorized about the unified self and how differing "I"s and "me"s can hinder a unified self. Normally, within the sort of community as a whole to which we belong, there is a unified self, but that may be broken up. To a person who is somewhat unstable nervously and in whom there is a line of cleavage, certain activities become impossible, and that set of activities may separate and evolve another self. Two separate "me's" and "I's", two different selves, result, and that is the condition under which there is a tendency to break up the personality... the various elementary selves which constitute, or are organized into, a complete self are the various aspects of the structure of that complete self answering to the various aspects of the structure of the social process as a whole; the structure of the complete self is thus a reflection of the complete social process (Mead, 1934: 143-144).

Mead's social psychology declares that people are different from animals and their behavior cannot be predicted or explained simply by stimulus-response mechanisms. Humans have the ability to reason and this qualification reveals itself through ongoing internal negotiations. Alcoholics Anonymous is a process of a transformation of self that occurs only if and when the alcoholic adopts certain attitudes and actions. By taking the attitude of the A.A. generalized other, many alcoholics have found sobriety and a more complete and unified self. The A.A. other must guide one's presentation of a sober self, and each A.A. member must come to know the self to be a reflection of others recovering in A.A. through stages of socialization. The self-conscious stage of A.A. recovery may be described as the newcomer stage, where the individual is likely to become aware of him or herself as an alcoholic within a new subculture; the play stage may be described as socialization into the A.A. way of life through interaction with other members, primarily a sponsor who acts as a program mentor; the game stage may be described as adopting A.A. principles and concepts as a way of life, learned through activities in the fellowship.

Just as members of some general community do not always "play by the rules" of society, so do self-proclaimed A.A. members stray from abiding by A.A. principles to affect a sober way of life. Some of the alcoholic's problems may be found in his or her dialogue between the "I" and the "me". Still, many years of observation at A.A. meetings has revealed a belief among recovering alcoholics that alcoholism is a disease of perception. Thus, even the recovering alcoholic's perception of the other's discernment of his or her appearance is often distorted.

Symbolic Interactionism, based largely upon the theoretical contributions to sociology by Mead and further developed by Herbert Blumer, focuses on subjective perceptions or other symbolic processes of communication. There are three basic assumptions of Symbolic Interactionism, as conceived by Herbert Blumer. The first premise is that human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that the things have for them. Such things include everything that the human being may note in his world... The second premise is that the meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that one has with one's fellows. The third premise is that these meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretive process used by the person in dealing with the things he encounters (Blumer, 1969: 2).

Consequently, Blumer shared Mead's view of individuals, selves and capacity for interaction, yet he deviated from Mead's social behaviorism when he added an explicitly sociological dimension. For Blumer, the repeated use of identical forms of interpretation is a condition of the continuance of established social patterns. A.A. is dependent on members' recurrent use of identical forms of interpretation of alcoholism and the solution offered. Each member must adopt A.A. principles, beliefs and practices in order for the program to work in arresting his or her alcoholic condition. Likewise, A.A. as a whole must do the same in order for the fellowship to persevere. Such principles, beliefs and practices are constructed and reconstructed through interaction, much of which occurs at A.A. meetings.

SOCIALIZATION AND GENDER-ROLE DEVELOPMENT Gender and socialization play a significant part in the construction and reconstruction of meanings in every area of life and A.A. is no exception. "The study of gender roles has emerged as one of the most important trends in the discipline of sociology in the last half century" (Lindsey, 1997: 1). The socialization process of gender-role development effects language, marriage, family relations and social institutions. Gender is a social construction.

While sex refers to the biological aspects of a person, gender refers to one's social aspects. Sociologist Linda Lindsey defines gender as "those social, cultural and psychological aspects linked to males and females through particular social contexts" (Lindsey, 1997: 3). Gender is achieved by adhering to a set of norms, laws and mores that govern social expectations with regard to behavior, interaction, life opportunities and life outcomes. From the time we are born, we are taught to be the gender that matches our sex by adopting a certain gender role. "Gender roles are defined as those expected attitudes and behaviors which a society associates with each sex" (Lindsey, 1997: 3). Such roles are achieved through the socialization process, a lifelong course of learning one's cultural expectations with respect to sex and gender.

Basic differences exist between traditional male and female gender roles. The male gender is seen as appropriate when instrumental, goal and task oriented, aggressive, stoic, powerful and dominant. The female gender is seen as appropriate when expressive, sensitive and supportive, passive, emotional, nurturing, and subordinate. Gender roles are reinforced by the family, sexism, patriarchy, the double standard and other social institutions via social sanctions.

Because socialization is an ongoing process throughout our lives, gender roles change with modifications in culture. As psychoanalyst Karen Horney sees it, ... the difference in male and female development as the difference between "being" and "doing.".. the female identity is "ascribed" while the male identity has to be "achieved.".. Women are women because of what they are, men are men because of what they do. (Mendell, 1996: 19) Gender differences find disparity in most any human experience due to socialization and sexuality and have impeded the communication and understanding between the sexes for centuries. Men and women communicate differently. A.A. AND THE ALCOHOLIC SELF I turn now to a brief discussion of Alcoholics Anonymous, the philosophy upon which it is based, the principles under which it operates and the ways in which that is likely to shape or socialize the alcoholic self into the A.A. self (Denzin, 1997). A.A. is a fellowship of two million or more men and women in over 100,000 groups in 150 countries around the world (A.A., 2001: xx ).

There is a large sociological literature on the study of A.A. from many different standpoints. Such literature includes studies exploring A.A.'s history, models and theories regarding its principles, the relationship between A.A. and religion or spirituality, social aspects of the A.A. society, diversity of membership and its effect on sobriety, success / failure and deviance within the fellowship, conversation analysis of the A.A. narrative, disease vs. flawed character debates, alternative solutions to alcoholism, and aspects of self-identity, bonding / fellowship, and the well-being / life -satisfaction of its members. Abundant literature approved by A.A. exists, as well, influencing tremendous growth of the fellowship (A.A., 2001). Its preamble is a basic summary of what the program is and is not.

Alcoholics Anonymous is a fellowship of men and women who share their experience, strength and hope with each other that they may solve their common problem and help others to recover from alcoholism. The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking. There are no dues or fees for A.A. membership; we are self-supporting through our own contributions. A.A. is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization or institution; does not wish to engage in any controversy, neither endorses nor opposes any causes. Our primary purpose is to stay sober and help other alcoholics to achieve sobriety (Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., 2003). The A.A. program is based on 12 steps of recovery (see Appendix A) outlined in its basic text, Alcoholics Anonymous, more commonly referred to as the Big Book. The 12 steps are designed to effect a spiritual answer to the alcoholic problem.

The program is structured to be all-inclusive, non-hierarchical and void of gender-specific roles within the organization. Three basic tenets of A.A. are unity, service and recovery. The concept of unity in A.A. encourages interaction with other recovering alcoholics in order to effect a sober self. Interaction generally occurs at A.A. meetings, however interaction outside of meetings is encouraged within the fellowship. Spirituality is the solution offered by A.A.'s 12 steps and interaction with other recovering alcoholics is part of A.A. spirituality.

Recovery from alcoholism in Alcoholics Anonymous is a set of processes. These processes include adopting a system of beliefs and practices, mentoring and a transformation from the alcoholic self to the A. A Self (Denzin, 1997). The Alcoholic Society: Addiction & Recovery of the Self (1997) is Denzin's analysis of the experiences of alcoholic men and women. Chapter three studies theory and solution offered by Alcoholics Anonymous in regard to the problem of alcoholism. The A.A. solution is spiritual in nature and involves finding a higher power via twelve steps and ideals contained in the A.A. text, known as the Big Book, in order for the alcoholic to achieve a transition from a sick alcoholic self to a recovering A.A. self. Denzin explains, The alcoholic self who comes to A.A. finds an existing society of recovering alcoholic selves.

In G.H. Mead's (1934) terms, Alcoholics Anonymous is an emergent society of preexisting alcoholic selves organized around the principles of recovery contained in the texts of A.A. Recovery involves learning how to take the attitude of the selves in this preexisting structure so that their attitudes can be applied to the individuals own experiences with alcoholism (Denzin, 1997: 49). Denzin further asserts six theses, or interpretive positions, that shape his understanding of alcoholism. He asserts that one basic premise constitutes the six theses and goes on to describe the underlying premise. Every alcoholic I observed drank to escape an inner emptiness of self. This emptiness, often traced to early family experiences of death, parental loss, sexual abuse, drug abuse, or alcoholism, was manifested in terms of a fundamental inability of self... The self-other experiences, the self ideals and the ideal selves that the alcoholic pursues are largely imaginary and out of touch with the world of the real...

As a result of living in the realm of the imaginary, the alcoholic is unable to take the attitude of the other... He or she is unable to enter into and find a place in a society of preexisting selves. His or her imaginary life will not permit this. Intense pre occupa-tions with self shut the alcoholic off from others (Denzin, 1997: 7). A.A. and Denzin seem to agree that one aspect of alcoholism is a distorted perception of life and reality. Therefore, processes of resocialization and self-transformation occur differently for recovering alcoholics in A.A. than for non-alcoholics, in part, because people with a routinely distorted perception of reality have difficulty taking the attitude of those with a routinely undistorted perception of reality. Consequently, for practicing alcoholics, interactions between persons who are in alignment with each other may best occur with other practicing alcoholics.

The same is true for recovering alcoholics. The bottom line is alcoholics have difficulty negotiating identity with non-alcoholics. As a result of what Denzin terms "living in the realm of the imaginary" (Denzin, 1997: 7), the alcoholic is unable to experience a clear perception of the situation at hand. Consequently, a response with an appropriate "I" for the alcoholic self is more elusive than for the non-alcoholic self.

The language of A.A. includes phraseology, signs and symbols within the dominant language of mainstream culture. Examples include "hitting bottom", the end of an alcoholic spree that can manifest internally and / or externally, "the committee", referring to the internal voices in conflict or debate, and the triangle within a circle, signifying A.A., unity, service and recovery. Many A.A. members speak about "the committee", referring to the many aspects of self in their alcoholic mind and the dialogue & conflict that occurs between these differing aspects. Early sobriety in A.A. finds some members thinking that others are speaking in some kind of code language, as they have not yet assimilated to the "sub-language" of A.A. Denzin also opened up the world of interactional interpretation to life-changing moments in people's lives called epiphanies (Denzin: 1989). Such an epiphanic process may be what A.A. calls a "spiritual experience" that may manifest as "sudden revolutionary changes" or "develop slowly over a period of time" (A.A., 2001: 567).

The spriitual experience, or epiphany, may be the catalyst in transforming an individual from the alcoholic self into the A.A. self. Denzin describes the epiphany as, Those interactional moments that leave marks on people's lives... have the potential for creating transformational experiences for the person. They are "epiphanies". In them, personal character is manifested and made apparent...

They are often interpreted, both by the person and by others, as turning point experiences (Strauss, 1959). Having had this experience, the person is never again quite the same (Denzin, 1989: 15). In meetings, A.A. members commonly refer to moments that left a mark on their life as turning points, moments of clarity, spiritual experiences, or spiritual awakenings. Many members report that such moments occur over and over again throughout their sobriety. Denzin recognizes that "gender, sexuality and personal biography structure the transitions in self that occur within the A.A. social group" (Denzin, 1997: 315).

He asserts that A.A. has both a male (or instrumental) moral code that represses emotionality and a female (or emotional) moral code that releases emotionality and that this is what "aligns males to males and females to females" within the fellowship (Denzin, 1997: 315). Moreover, he reports that women seem to acquire the attitude of A.A.'s generalized other more rapidly than men because their "empathetic abilities and previous socialization experiences allow them to more quickly to enter the emotional space that exists within any A.A. meeting" (Denzin, 1997: 315). He goes on to discuss the double standard that stigmatizes female alcoholics to a greater degree than their male counterparts, how it often produces a suppression of emotionality within alcoholic women who enter A.A., and that such suppression transcends to a participatory stage in their recovery. Yet he seems a bit idealistic when discussing a "merger of gender-specific attitudes on emotionality" to the extent that "a neutral emotional zone of self-disclosure appears" such that either sex may "discuss self-degrading or emotionally disruptive experiences and not be evaluated negatively by members of the opposite sex" (Denzin, 1997: 315-316).

During the data collection process of my master's thesis, I witnessed discussions in A.A. women's stag meetings that indicate the double standard exists within A.A., just as it does outside of A.A., and that meetings without men allow more safety for women to discuss experiences specific to the female gender. Thus, what "aligns males to males and females to females" (Denzin, 1997: 315) in A.A. may be a process involving much more than morality and emotionality. It may involve hitting a sexual bottom for women to favor seeking the help of other A.A. women, as opposed to A.A. men. Such a bottom may be what some common phrases in A.A. grew out of (i.e. "Men stick with the men and women stick with the women" and "The men will pat your ass, the women will save your ass"). These phrases may be an attempt at protecting A.A. women, particularly newcomers, from sexual vulnerability and bottoming out in that manner by encouraging social bonding with fellow A.A. women. However, such phrases may fail to elicit social attraction among women in order to effect social integration within the A.A. women's community.

SOCIAL BONDING Social integration or social bonding, referred to by 12-step programs as unity or fellowship, is one of the three basic tenets of such programs and key to successful recovery for A.A. members. In his classic study of suicide, Emile Durkheim determined that suicide and social integration have an inverse relationship. Thus, "people who are well integrated into a group are... less likely to resort to extreme behavior such as suicide", delinquency or alcohol abuse (Coser, 1977). Application of Durkheim's theory to A.A. finds that the stronger the degree of integration of a member the less likely they are to act in ways destructive to themselves and to others and this is certainly true for A.A. members.

In order to further expand upon the advantages of social bonding, I will discuss a few of the research settings in which same-sex bonding has benefited women. Benefits are evident with respect to intrinsic and extrinsic assets. Findings of survey research have found mentoring beneficial with respect to both career (earnings, promotional opportunities, procedural justice and social integration) and emotional (career satisfaction and degree of fulfillment of expectations) outcomes. This effect was found to be different on female lawyers who were mentored by another female lawyer than for those mentored by a male lawyer (Wallace, 2001). More specifically, the group mentored by males earned significantly more than the group mentored by females, however, the latter reported more career satisfaction, more intent to continue practicing law, more satisfaction with respect to career expectations and less work-family conflict.

It was noted that future research should examine specific ways in which female mentors prepare and socialize their prot " eg'es and how that may differ from male mentors. A case study of a national historically white sorority (Handler, 1995) was conducted at an eastern U.S. university. Interviews covering a variety of issues, including relationships between sorority sisters and benefits of joining, were analyzed. It was determined that sororities are a strategy for cultivating friendships among women and for navigating a male-dominated culture of heterosexual romance. Handler describes sororities as "a celebration of women's friendships" and "the embodiment of the relational model of women's nature" and further contends that women need each other for both intrinsic and extrinsic resources that may be best drawn upon in a collectivity. Authors Ellen Goodman and Patricia O'Brien interviewed a distinguished group of women in the United States from all walks of life to collect data for a book about the power of close, personal friendships between women (Goodman & O'Brien, 2000).

In it are a collection of stories that describe emotional strength such friendships provide, as well as the level of understanding that occurs between women when their comparable ways of being bond into a relationship of trust. Goodman and O'Brien report that talk is at the very heart of women's friendship, the core of womens' connection and at the heart of such connections is one sentence that women repeat over and over: "I know just what you mean". Such a phrase may be at the heart of pop culture books that explore the differences in mens' and womens' ways of being (for example, Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus). Goodman and O'Brien further claim that, Friendship matters to women; it matters a lot; women today-with lives often in transition -- -depend on friends more than ever. Many who once believed that family was the center of life, with every myth and movie and fairy tale having the same married-happily-ever-after ending, now know that friends may be the difference between a lonely life and a lively one.

As they turn over Big Birthdays, women are taking deep breaths and looking around at the other women who are their fellow travelers and saying-sometimes for the first time-this person is important to my life; indeed this may be my most sustaining relationship of all (Goodman & O'Brien, 2000: 12). This passage reflects the deterioration of the nuclear family in U.S. society, a return to valuing extended families, the dissatisfaction women find when not working outside of the home and the essentiality of the support of friendships with other women. Collectively women can empower each other in every area of life. More recent studies show a positive relationship between social integration and successful arrest of alcoholism via the A.A. program. I will now discuss a few of the research settings in which bonding within A.A. has benefited recovering alcoholics.

Nealon-Woods, et al. interviewed residents of a male recovery home for alcohol and substance abusers to investigate whether and why they continue as A.A. members. Results suggested that residents make a shift from substance dependency to pro dependency on their peers. "The individual's process of change toward sobriety may be maintained by a reciprocal sense of fellowship, belonging ness, and support" (Nealon-Woods, et al., 1995). A sense of fellowship, one of A.A.'s basic tenets, with others in addiction recovery is an attraction for new members to continue in the program. Another study "approached A.A. as a social world in which social integration is a key to individual success" (Smith, 1993). Participant observation and in-depth interviews found that a process of the newcomer forming a one-on-one relationship with another A.A. member leads to increased involvement in the program and to subsequent significant other relationships within the A.A. social world.

In addition, taking a chance on significant dyadic relationships seems to enhance the newcomer's self-esteem. A study of A.A. utilization (Thomassen, 2002) found three main areas of usage: (1) involvement in the fellowship, (2) attendance and participation at meetings, and (3) involvement in the bureaucratic functions A.A. and production of its meetings. Fellowship or social involvement was found to be the primary usage type. While fellowship takes place at meetings, it was found that fellowship outside of meetings, in social, recreational and friendship activity, is a more effective use of the A.A. program. The author notes that benefits and support provided by fellowship outside of meetings has been only generally explored in psychological distress literature and that this area is ready for future research. While A.A. women can best identify with other A.A. women in order to successfully transform the self, they may resist same-sex bonding and surrender to social attraction to men.

Studies of differences in male-female development and socialization have revealed conflict resolution differences between the sexes (Mendell, 1996). Boys tend to learn conflict resolution skills via team sports, finding a way to resolve conflict in order to continue the game according to the rules. Girls are willing to sacrifice rules for relation-ships they value more, however girls' games often end due to quarrels. While the female tendency to care about and nurture relationships is one of women's strengths, it can also be a potential weakness.

Because the tendency toward emotional involvement in relationships may put females at odds with one another, A.A. women may need encouragement toward the strength of bonding with other A.A. women. CONCLUSION Cooley teaches us that shared perceptions of the world are fundamental to self-constructions because the self arises dialectically. The perception of reality shared by alcoholics would more likely result in a shared communication through interaction than would discernment between one alcoholic and one non-alcoholic self. A.A.'s system of ideas is the kind of common sense knowledge an alcoholic self must cherish in order to become a successful A.A. self. Other recovering A.A. members must become the primary socialization group in the newcomer's sober life, through interactions occurring primarily during A.A. meetings, in order to affect the transition from practicing to recovering alcoholic in order for the program to work for them as it has for others. A.A. novices might not ever want sobriety unless they understand what it is by the A.A. definition, meaning far more than just not drinking. The concept of unity within A.A. encourages interaction with other recovering alcoholics in order to effect a sober self. You could say that the A.A. other guides the presentation of a sober self, and the alcoholic adjusts to elicit a desirable self-feeling within his or herself.

Each A.A. member must come to know the self to be a reflection of others recovering in A.A. Correspondingly, Mead teaches us that the fully developed recovering Alcoholics Anonymous member must take the attitude of the "A.A. generalized other" via stages of socialization. Alcoholics Anonymous is not a stimulus designed to affect an automatic response of abstinence from alcohol. It is a process of self-transformation that occurs only if and when the alcoholic adopts certain beliefs, attitudes, actions, signs and symbols. A "committee" of internal voices in conflict or debate is a hindrance to the alcoholic taking the attitude of the generalized other outside of the A.A. community.

With a greater capacity for taking the attitude of the A.A. other, the alcoholic's presentation of a sober individual is guided toward a more complete and socially connected self, a reflection of others recovering in A.A. From Blumer we discover that the A.A. program is one method of interpreting alcoholism aimed at initiating a social pattern of abstinence from alcohol and a manner of successfully living life without the drink. The A.A. self is reinforced through identifying communications and interactions with other A.A. members, as is the A.A. group. The construction and reconstruction of A.A.'s principles, beliefs and practices occur primarily at A.A. meetings, however, the program encourages fellowship among its membership outside of meetings and on a more personal level of interaction. Denzin recognizes the alcoholic's distorted perception of life and describes it as an inability to experience a clear perception of the situation at hand. He also recognizes gender's imprint within the A.A. program, but fails to follow through sufficiently on its significance. Further, he seems to diminish the significance of the double standard within A.A., yet the standard continues to permeate society and the A.A. society is no different. A.A. women have confirmed this in many discussions at A.A. meetings closed to men.

Meetings without men allow women to feel safe when discussing experiences specific and perhaps exclusive to their gender. The process of bonding among women in A.A. may involve hitting a sexual bottom for women to favor seeking the help of other A.A. women, as opposed to A.A. men. Yet these phrases also demonstrate the benefits of friendships between women. Considering both the benefits of relationships among women and the benefits of fellowship within A.A., sociability among A.A. women should enhance sober life two-fold and research exploring this prospect ought to be conducted. The process of negotiating the self is different for alcoholics than for non-alcoholics due to the alcoholic's impairment with perception of reality.

Likewise, this process is gendered and different for men and women. The program of Alcoholics Anonymous may be utilized by the alcoholic self as a method of interpretation of the disease of alcoholism designed to establish a social pattern of abstinence from alcohol. A.A. may also be utilized to transform the alcoholic self into the A.A. self. For female A.A. members, negotiating an identity of a recovering alcoholic self will be enhanced by mentoring (or sponsorship) and social bonding with other A.A. women, rather than with other A.A. men. Considering the benefits of social integration and same-sex mentoring / networks, theories of addiction recovery need to be more astute, accounting for the subtle processes by which the self is socialized and the ways that gender and social bonding among women shape the social bonding process. We can take Denzin's work on the alcoholic self and expand upon it with respect to gender by discovering how the process that aligns males to males and females to females in A.A. occurs.

In so doing, sociologists can open the door further to potential life-changing moments in women's lives. APPENDIX A THE 12 STEPS OF ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS 1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol, that our lives had become unmanageable. 2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity. 3.

Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him. 4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves. 5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs. 6.

Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character. 7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings. 8.

Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all. 9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others. 10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out. 12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

Bibliography

A.A. 2001.
Alcoholics Anonymous Fourth Edition, New York: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. 2003.
A.A. Preamble: Service Material from the General Service Office". New York, NY: A.A. General Service Office. Retrieved April 28, 2003 (web).
Blumer, Herbert 1969.
Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc. Clemmons, Penny 1991, "Feminists, Spirituality, and the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous" Women & Therapy 11 (2): 97-109 Cooley, Charles H.
1967.
Human Nature & the Social Order. Edited and with an introduction by Philip Rieff. New York: Schock en Books, Inc. Cooley, Charles H. 1998.
On Self and Social Organization. Edited and with an introduction by Hans-Joachim Schubert. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Coser, Lewis A. 1977.
Masters of Sociological Thought. New York: South Harcourt Brace Jovanovic h College Publishers Denzin, Norman K. 1989.
Interpretive Interactionism, Newbury Park: Sage Publications, Inc. Denzin, Norman K. 1997.
The Alcoholic Society: Addiction & Recovery of the Self, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers Goodman, Ellen and Patricia O'Brien 2000.
I Know Just What You Mean: The Power of Friendship in Women's Lives. New York: Simon & Schuster. Handler, Lisa 1995, "In the Fraternal Sisterhood: Sororities as Gender Strategy" Gender & Society 9 (2): 236-255 Lindsey, Linda L.
1997.
Gender Roles: A Sociological Perspective, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc. Mead, George H. 1934.
Mind, Self & Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Mendell, Adrienne 1996.
How Mend Think: The Seven Essential Rules for Making it in a Man's World, New York: Fawcett Columbine. Nealon-Woods, Michele A., Joseph R. Ferran and Leonard A. Jason 1995, "Twelve-Step Program Use among Oxford House Residents: Spirituality or Social Support in Sobriety?" Journal of Substance Abuse 7 (3): 311-318 Smith, Annette R.
1993, "The Social Construction of Group Dependency in Alcoholics Anonymous" Journal of Drug Issues 23 (4): 689-704 Thomassen, Lisa 2002.
AA Utilization After Introduction in Outpatient Treatment". Substance Use & Misuse 37 (2): 239-253 Wallace, Jean E. 2001.