Rebecca Hazleden - Dragon-slayers and Jealous Rats: The Gendered Self in Contemporary Self-help Manuals

 
This is an intriguing essay from Rebecca Hazelden that appeared in the March, 2011, issue of the Cultural Studies Review Journal. Hazeldon looks at some of the variations of the gendered self that one finds in self-help books and argues that they are more accurately seen as political variations of the nature of the self than representations of patriarchal vs. feminist gender roles.

I don't agree with some of her assertions, but in general this is a better approach than to see everything as gendered - sometimes gender beliefs reflect more about political agendas than anything else.

Dragon-slayers and Jealous Rats: The Gendered Self in Contemporary Self-help Manuals

Rebecca Hazleden

Abstract

This article traces two broad discourses concerning gender in a selection of relationship manuals from 1974 to 2004. On the one hand are manuals promoting traditional gender roles, and on the other are those that promote financial and emotional independence for women.(1) In contrast to other analyses, I argue that these approaches cannot be categorised into a simplistic dichotomy of ‘feminist’ and ‘patriarchal,’ but that they are better understood as being bound up with conservative and liberal discourses of the self. I further demonstrate that these approaches both assume and require types of self that are somewhat removed from their historical antecedents and should be understood as neo variants. 

Full Citation:

Hazelden, R. (2011, Mar). Dragon-slayers and Jealous Rats: The Gendered Self in Contemporary Self-help Manuals. Cultural Studies Review, Vol 17, No 1; pp. 270–95.

 
The abstract also functions as the first paragraph of the paper, so here are the next two paragraphs, which form a bit of an introduction.

Although
 the 
term 
‘bestseller’ 
is 
hard 
to 
define, 
it 
is 
likely 
that 
each 
book 
in this
 study
 at
 some
 point
 held
 the
 position
 of
 best‐selling
 therapeutic
 relationship
 manual 
in 
the 
United
 States, 
and 
often 
also 
throughout 
the
 world.(2)
 By 
‘therapeutic
 relationship
 manual’,
 I
 mean
 a
 book
 grounded
 in
 popular
 psychology
 that
 has
 the
 putative
 aim 
of 
aiding 
the 
reader 
in
 developing 
and 
managing
 more
 harmonious 
and
 fulfilling 
intimate 
romantic
 relationships.
 This 
is
 a 
popular
 format 
that 
encompasses hundreds of 
new 
titles
 each 
year,
 as
 well
 as
 having
 produced
 some 
of
 the
 enduring
 classics 
of 
self‐help—the
 therapeutic 
relationship
 manuals 
in
 this 
study
 are 
all 
still in
 print, 
with 
the
 exception 
of 
Marabel 
Morgan’s 
The 
Total 
Woman. 
Books 
offering
 advice
 on
 finding
 a
 partner
 were
 excluded,
 as
 were
 dating,
 etiquette,
 household‐management 
and 
sex
 manuals.(3)
 There 
is
 a
 certain
 amount
 of
 diversity 
between
 these
 books
 and
 I
 do
 not
 claim
 that
 all
 relationship
 manuals
 fall
 into
 the
 two
 categories
 used 
here,
 or
 that 
all 
books 
within 
a 
category 
are 
consistent 
with 
each 
other. 
Neither do
 I
 imply
 that
 readers
 simply
 accept
 and
 absorb
 the
 intended
 messages
 within
 these
 texts.
 Numerous
 studies
 have
 been
 made
 demonstrating
 that
 women
 read
 sceptically,
 interpretively
 and
 resistingly.(4)
 Nonetheless,
 the
 unabated
 proliferation
 of
 self‐help 
books 
and 
the
 saturation 
of
 our
 culture 
by 
psy 
truths 
tell 
us 
something important
 about
 our
 values,
 both
 on
 the
 societal
 level
 and,
 as
 self‐help
 books
 are
 increasingly
 translated
 into 
numerous 
languages 
and 
spread
 across
 the 
world,
 at
 a global 
level 
as 
well.(5)
 As
 Elias
 has 
pointed 
out, 
an 
advice 
book
 has 
to 
relay 
a 
message with
 which
 its
 audience
 can
 identify.(6)
 In
 other
 words,
 the
 prescriptions
 and
 proscriptions
 within
 self‐help
 are
 ‘already
 constituted’ 
realities
 for
 the
 readers.(7)


It 
is 
also 
important
 to
 acknowledge 
that
 women
 overwhelmingly 
constitute
 the 
readership. 
Relationship 
manuals
 are 
usually 
aimed
 at 
women
 and 
women 
are more
 likely
 to
 purchase
 and
 read
 them.(8)
 Some
 self‐help
 authors
 even
 assert
 that
 men 
are 
uninterested 
in 
self‐help:
 ‘Men
 don’t 
read
 magazines 
like 
Psychology
 Today,
 Self,
 or
 People’
 because
 ‘they
 are
 more
 concerned
 with
 outdoor
 activities,
 like
 hunting, 
fishing,
 and 
racing 
cars 
…
 and
 couldn’t
 care 
less 
about 
…
 self‐help 
books’.(9)
 One 
author 
includes 
a 
small 
section, 
near
 the 
end 
of 
his 
book, 
which
 he
 encourages
 his 
readers 
to 
show 
to 
their 
partners 
and 
begins 
‘I’m 
assuming
 that
 this 
letter 
is 
the first 
thing
 you’re
 reading 
in 
this 
book 
…
 give 
me 
three
 minutes 
to 
talk 
to 
you
 man 
to man’.(10)
 That
 the
 presumed
 audience
 is
 gendered
 is
 of
 crucial
 importance,
 because
 the
 ‘injunction
 to
 understand 
one’s 
life,’
 or 
one’s
 self,
‘ for
 example
 as
 an 
autonomous
 individual
 …
 can
 come
 to
 mean
 something
 entirely different when we look across the designations of ... gender and sexuality.(11)

Here are a few more paragraphs that get into the role of feminism in self-help - and how this becomes a political issue as much as or more than a psychological self-help issue.

In
 the
 1970s,
 a
 new
 feminist
 model
 of
 sexuality
 began
 to
 appear—that
 of
 individualistic
 sexual
 autonomy.
 Sex
 manuals
 began
 to
 focus
 on
 the
 private
 sexual
 experience
 of
 women:
 ‘It
 is
 a
 very
 self‐centred
 experience
 …
 your
 focus
 must
 be
 solely
 on
 your
 sexual
 stimuli
 and
 whatever
 increases
 it’;
 ‘you
 must
 assume
 responsibility
 for
 your
 own
 sexual
 pleasure’.28
 This
 outlook
 saw
 orgasm
 as
 a
 right,
 and
 a
 product
 of
 learning,
 not
 of
 instinct.
 It
 was
 argued
 at
 the
 time
 that
 placing
 a
 strong 
emphasis 
on 
non‐coital 
techniques
 rendered 
the 
man 
dispensable 
to 
female
 pleasure,
 further
 reinforcing
 women’s
 sexual
 independence.29
 This
 latter
 view
 politicises
 female 
sexual 
autonomy,
 on
 a 
model 
of
 sex
 among
 equals.30
 Sex
 began
 to be 
understood 
as 
part 
of
 the
 total
 life 
experience—competence 
and 
independence
 in
 sexuality
 were 
to 
be 
attained
 as 
part 
of 
a 
broader,
 more
 general 
social
 pattern,
 and
 sex 
manuals 
promised 
that
 this 
type 
of 
sexuality 
would
 pay 
off
 in
 other
 areas
 of 
life
 as 
well.31
 These 
sexual
 relations 
both 
reflected 
and
 produced
 more 
general 
cultural
 attitudes
 and
 values,
 stripping
 away
 the
 moral,
 sentimental
 and
 romantic
 notions
 that
 had
 surrounded
 female
 sexuality.
 They
 made
 respectable
 the
 unmarried
 sexually
 active
 woman,
 giving
 women
 more
 freedom
 to
 leave
 unsatisfactory
 partners.32
 At
 the
 same 
time, 
however,
 women 
became
 obliged 
to
 be
 actively 
sexual
 beings 
in
 a 
way 
that
 they 
had 
not 
before.33
 That 
is, 
women
 were
 now
 obliged 
to 
be
 free
 with 
their 
sexuality—competent,
 skilled,
 proficient 
in 
their 
own 
pleasure, 
multi‐orgasmic—and
 open
 to  new
 pathologies
 of
 frigidity,
 emotional
 over‐sensitivity,
 dependence
 and
 sexual
 dysfunction.
 These
 new
 capacities
 required
 new
 interventions: 
self‐interrogation,
 self‐examination
 and
 work
 upon 
the
 self.34 
Indeed,
 the
 obligation
 to
 work
 on
 oneself
 was
 adopted
 by
 many
 feminist
 writers,
 such
 as
 Susie
 Orbach,
 for
 whom
 feminist
 self‐improvement
 and
 self‐liberation
 included
 investigating,
 nurturing
 and
 developing 
the
 inner 
self.35


By 
the 
late
 1980s, 
self‐regard 
and 
self‐liberation 
had
 become 
an 
imperative
 in
 self‐help 
to 
the 
extent
 that 
women
 who 
did
 not
 prioritise 
their 
own
 self‐fulfilment
 were
 characterised
 as
 psychologically
 disordered—’loving
 too
 much’
 or
 co‐dependent.36 
I
 have 
discussed 
this
 phenomenon 
elsewhere, 
but
 will
 mention 
that
 co‐dependence 
can 
be 
characterised 
as 
a
 pathologisation 
of 
femininity, 
or 
as 
a 
reverse
 discourse 
with
 the
 potential 
to 
liberate 
women 
from 
positions
 of 
subordination.37
 In
 this 
latter
 view,
 women 
use 
expertise
 to 
liberate
 themselves
 in 
opposition
 to 
their
 putative 
feminine
 nature—or 
at 
least 
to 
furnish
 themselves
 with 
a 
limited
 space
 in
 which
 they 
can 
refuse 
to 
play 
their 
appropriate
 gendered 
role.38



In
 her
 classic
 study
 of
 relationship
 manuals,
 Hochschild
 bemoans
 the
 tendency
 of
 1980s
 and
 1990s’
 self‐help
 to
 exercise
 a
 general
 ‘paradigm
 of
 [emotional]
 caution’.
 She
 suggests 
that
 feminism 
may be 
‘escaping 
from
 the 
cage’ 
of
 a
 social 
movement,
 to 
endorse
 and
 develop
 a
 capitalist 
ethos 
of
 private 
life
 that
 is
 foreign
 to 
its 
original 
aims 
and 
that 
is 
emotionally
 barren. 
She 
argues
 they 
allow
 ‘the
 worst
 of
 capitalist
 culture
 to
 establish
 the
 cultural
 basis
 of
 the
 struggle
 for
 equality’.39
 While Hochschild 
sees
 a
 paradox 
between 
what
 she 
calls 
the
 emotional
 ‘warmth’
 and
 the
 ‘patriarchy’
 of
 the
 ‘traditional’
 books,
 and
 is
 surprised
 by
 the
 emotional
 ‘coolness’
 of
 the
 approach
 she
 calls
 ‘feminist’,
 these
 are
 part
 of
 a
 long
 tradition
 of
 such
 tensions
 within the debate about the nature and role of women—a point to which I shall return.

Life Transitions - The Death and Rebirth of Self

A little wisdom for a Saturday morning before I head to the gym. This is the Daily Om from last week - the idea that transition involves both dying and birth is part metaphor and part reality. Whenever we give up comfortable and familiar parts of ourselves, even when they no longer serve us well (if they ever did), there is a sense of loss that comes with making space for new parts of ourselves to emerge.

Life Transitions: The Death and Rebirth of Self

by Madisyn Taylor

Sometimes a part of us must die before another part can come to life.
Sometimes a part of us must die before another part can come to life. Even though this is a natural and necessary part of our growth, it is often painful or, if we don’t realize what’s happening, confusing and disorienting. In fact, confusion and disorientation are often the messengers that tell us a shift is taking place within us. These shifts happen throughout the lives of all humans, as we move from infancy to childhood to adolescence and beyond. With each transition from one phase to another, we find ourselves saying good-bye to an old friend, the identity that we formed in order to move through that particular time.

Sometimes we form these identities in relationships or jobs, and when we shift those areas of our life become unsettled. Usually, if we take the time to look into the changing surface of things, we will find that a shift is taking place within us. For example, we may go through one whole chapter of our lives creating a protective shell around ourselves because we need it in order to heal from some early trauma. One day, though, we may find ourselves feeling confined and restless, wanting to move outside the shelter we needed for so long; the new part of ourselves cannot be born within the confines of the shell our old self needed to survive.

We may feel a strange mixture of exhilaration and sadness as we say good-bye to a part of ourselves that is dying and make way for a whole new identity to emerge in its place. We may find inspiration in working with the image of an animal who molts or sheds in order to make way for new skin, fur, or feathers to emerge. For example, keeping a duck feather, or some other symbol of transformation, can remind us that death and rebirth are simply nature’s way of evolving. We can surrender to this process, letting go of our past self with great love and gratitude, and welcoming the new with an open mind and heart, ready for our next phase of life.

Can Integral Theory Account for Transsexual Experience?

In my research on female-to-male transsexuals (FTM, transmen), one of the stories I read over and over again is how these men felt that being born in a female body was some form of mistake or accident.

Henry Rubin's Self-Made Men (2003) offers a great look at the issue of embodiment in FTM men - most of the men in his study offered different understandings of why they were born into the wrong bodies - some are creative, some are biological:

Whereas most individuals feel that they have bodies that adequately express their true selves, these FTMs all feel as if their bodies are erroneous expressions of their core selves. Their bodies fail to express their internal male identities. An expressive error occurred, severing the link between their body and their identity. The men in this study describe a variety of possible errors, ranging from the belief that God had made a mistake, to genetic mutations, to chemical imbalances, to underdeveloped or hidden male anatomy. One man believes he was reincarnated in a female body so that he could avoid the draft during the Vietnam War. This occurrence would be fortuitous, but most of the other men are less than thrilled with the mistakes of God or nature. They have always been men, albeit men whose bodies fail to express this to the world. (p. 150-151)

And it must be stated up front that I trust their experience - I do not believe trans people are mentally ill or suffering from gender identity disorder (GID), which I am not convinced is an actual valid diagnosis for anyone. Here is how the DSM-IV-TR defines GID:

DSM-IV-TR Diagnostic Criteria For Gender Identity Disorder

A. A strong and persistent cross-gender identification (not merely a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex). In children, the disturbance is manifested by four (or more) of the following:

1. repeatedly stated desire to be, or insistence that he or she is, the other sex

2. in boys, preference for cross-dressing or simulating female attire; in girls, insistence on wearing only stereotypical masculine clothing

3. strong and persistent preferences for cross-sex roles in make-believe play or persistent fantasies of being the other sex

4. intense desire to participate in the stereotypical games and pastimes of the other sex

5. strong preference for playmates of the other sex

B. Persistent discomfort with his or her sex or sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex.

C. The disturbance is not concurrent with a physical intersex condition.

D. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

When the APA membership discussed the continued relevance and use of this diagnosis, members were split - but some would definitely like to see it revised or eliminated.

Katherine Wilson, Ph.D. said that DSM fails to acknowledge that “many healthy, well-adjusted transsexual people exist” or to distinguish between such individuals and those who would benefit from a medical treatment.

She would like to see GID replaced with a term such as gender dysphoria, which would describe someone who is persistently distressed with his or her physical sex characteristics or with the limiting gender-based roles that society often imposes on men and women. (Hausman, 2003)

More importantly, trans people suffer depression, anxiety, and addictions at about the same rate as the general population (an increased prevalence likely arises as a result of the social ostracism and discrimination they experience). When they come to see a therapist, they often are not coming for counseling around gender issues - it is often for all the same reasons other people go to therapy: family, relationships, work, depression, anxiety, substance use, and so on.

So if their experience is not pathological in the usual sense, how do we account for the discrepancy between gender identity and natal physiology? The term gender dysphoria is useful, I suppose, but in the absence of pronounced brain differences between trans and non-trans people (most likely based in genetics or epigenetics), we lack a solid understanding.

The deeper one gets into these men's lives, the more one learns that it really is not even about the penis for many transmen - their breasts are often a source or torment and their experience of menstruation, especially the first time, was traumatic.

Kristen Schilt and Elroi Waszkiewicz (2006) looked at the role of surgeries in transmen in their presentation to the American Sociological Association:

For most of our interviewees, hormone therapy, which gives transmen male secondary sex characteristics like thicker facial and chest hair, and chest reconstruction take priority over phalloplasty. Chest reconstruction involves a double mastectomy to remove the breasts, signifiers of womanhood,(7) and allows for the surgical construction of a male chest. The effects of testosterone, such as beard growth, create a male appearance. Having facial hair, no visible breasts, a low voice, and “men’s clothes” function as “cultural genitalia” for transmen, as they are assumed to have a penis based on their appearance.(8) Thus, even without a “real” penis, transmen can gain a male social identity that lines up with their personal gender identity.

For transwomen, the situation is a bit different - these women report that living with a penis, although they can pass as women in society, prevents them from fully adopting their internal gender identity - for them, the surgery is important.

Setting an Integral Foundation

In the integral psychology model developed by Ken Wilber, the human being grows and develops as a body, as a psyche, as an interpersonal being, and as a member of society. Each of those domains (the It, the I, the We, and the Its) shape the individual and determine her/his identity - and all of this occurs in an interrelated and interconnected manner.

Ken Wilber (Integral Psychology, 2000), explains the interaction of the quadrants with the now familiar phrase (at least it's familiar in integral circles) "tetra-evolve" (also: tetra-arising, tetra-interact, and so on) - the idea is that all quadrants interact in the creation of a holon:

It is not enough to say that organism and environment coevolve; it is not enough to say that culture and consciousness coevolve. All four of those "tetra-evolve" together. That is, the objective organism (the Upper-Right quadrant), with its DNA, its neuronal pathways, its brain systems, and its behavioral paterns, mutually interacts with the objective environment, ecosystems, and social realities (the Lower Right), and all of those do indeed co-evolve. Likewise, individual consciousness (Upper Left), with its intentionality, structures, and states, arises within, and mutually interacts with, the intersubjective culture (Lower Left) in which it finds itself, and which it in turn helps to create, so that these, too, coevolve. But just as important, subjective intentionality and objective behavior mutually interact (e.g., through will and response), and cultural worldviews mutually interact with social structures, as does individual consciousness and behavior. In other words, all four quadrants-organism, environment, consciousness, and culture--cause and are caused by the others: they "tetra-evolve."

(It does not matter "how" this happens; that "how," I am suggesting, is more fully disclosed at the postrational, nondual waves; at this point, it is only necessary to acknowledge that this interaction seems phenomenologically undeniable. Whether you think it is theoretically possible or not, your mind does interact with your body, your mind interacts with its culture, your mind interacts with the physical organism, and your organism interacts with your environment: they all "tetra-interact.") (p. 183-184)

Among those who accept the AQAL model (pronounced "aw kwal" - all quadrants, all levels, all lines, all states, and all types), this notion of tetra-evolving is taken as foundational. It is one of the primary assumptions upon which the whole model is built - to call it into question brings whole elements of the model into question.

Wilber goes as far as to say this tetra-evolution of the quadrants is essentially obvious: "this interaction seems phenomenologically undeniable." But is it undeniable? If we can't find an explanation that allows for the transsexuality in a non-pathologized manner, then we must question the extent to which body and psyche are inextricably linked.

So then how do we fit trans people into the model?

Trans men and women grow up with the awareness that they were born in the wrong body. In fact, trans people do not feel that they are transforming, for them its a transition:

Their goal is simply to become recognizable. Who they are at heart does not change during transition. Notice that they use the term "transition" rather than "transformation." Although they do have to make a social and physical changeover from one sex to another, they are not transforming, like caterpillars becoming butterflies. They are not changing their personality, only the physical package that houses the person inside the flesh. They are not transforming themselves from women into men. They are repairing the link between their bodies and their gender identity. (Rubin, 2003, p. 143-144)

From their experience and perspective, their body is all wrong for who they are as a gendered person. They would seriously question this assumed linkage that Wilber feels is unquestioned in its obviousness. I would suspect that intersex and other transgender people might also offer resistance to the idea that the body inherently shapes identity, especially gender identity.

The great gift of postmodern and poststructural views of gender identity is that these models break the 1:1 link between genitals and gender identity. The social construction model argues that (1) gender is constructed by each individual, (2) that it is based on conscious or unconscious acceptance or rejection of cultural norms (hegemonic masculinity, for example), and (3) that gender identity is not always equivalent to biological sex identity.

The flaw, for me, is that there is considerable evidence of the ways in which biology and brain structure impact our notions of male or female. The social construction approach tends to minimize or reject this research - but an integral approach cannot make that exception. We must find a way to account for the body in trans identity development.

I am going to propose a rather radical solution to this problem - but I am at a loss as to how to describe this phenomenon without pathologizing it - I can't offer the how or the why, only an attempt at explaining the what.

Subtle Bodies and Gross bodies

In 2003, Wilber posted a series of excerpts from what was to be (before his illness) part of the Kosmos Trilogy begun with Sex, Ecology, Spirituality - one of those postings was Excerpt G: Toward A Comprehensive Theory of Subtle Energies (Shambhala Publications website).

If you choose to read that article/excerpt, please keep in mind that Wilber comes from a Buddhist background, as well as transpersonal psychology, and association with various "nondual" gurus (some toxic, some not). Because of his own contemplative experience and due to the teachings he has received, Wilber accepts ideas about subtle and causal bodies with (it seems to me) little intellectual questioning.

He has talked frequently over the years about the three bodies - gross body (physical matter, the "outside" body), subtle body (contains - or can contain - the 3 levels of emotional, mental, and higher mental), and causal body (contains an overmental consciousness [Aurobindo's overmind], and is also the source for involution of archetypes - see Plotinus).

I've never entirely bought into this notion (it always felt metaphorical to me, even though I feel I can sometimes "read" bodies, which is probably picking up on the subtle body) - while there is considerable overlap on these ideas in the writings of various mystics coming from all of the major wisdom traditions, there has not been anything empirical for me to wrap my brain around.

Until now.

As I was thinking about the topic of trans identity and the lack of "fit" in their birth bodies, I decided to look back at Thomas Metzinger's The Ego Tunnel (2009). He had written extensively on out-of-body-experiences (OBEs) in that book, which he uses as a foundation for his self-model theory of subjectivity.

He lists ownership, agency, and location at three of the defining elements of "me-ness" in most people. While these and other qualities are important, he feels it has become increasingly obvious that . . .

ownership is closest to the core of our target property of self hood. Nevertheless, the experience of being an embodied self is a holistic construct, characterized by part-whole relationships and stemming from many different sources.[5] Phenomenal ownership is not only at the heart of conscious self experience; it also has unconscious precursors. Classical neurology hypothesized about a body schema, an unconscious but constantly updated brain map of limb positions, body shape, and posture.[6] (p. 78)

Ownership would seem to be a hard word for those who feel almost betrayed by their birth bodies. Interestingly, however, in finding a way out of the "location" issue so as to explain OBEs, he may have also given us a solution to the embodiment problem in integral self theory.

Metzinger offers a brief history subtle body thinking to create an intellectual, philosophical, and theoretical foundation for his idea OBEs - here is his list:

Examples are the Hebrew ruach, the Arabic ruh, the Latin spiritus, the Greek pneuma, and the Indian prana. The subtle body is a spatially extended entity that was said to keep the physical body alive and leave it after death.[14] It is also known in theosophy and in other spiritual traditions; for instance, as "the resurrection body" and "the glorified body" in Christianity, "the most sacred body" and "supracelestial body" in Sufism, "the diamond body" in Taoism and Vajrayana, "the light body" or "rainbow body" in Tibetan Buddhism. (p. 86)

He suggests that the idea of the subtle body may be the origin of our modern conception of the soul. More importantly to our work here, however, he tries to ground the idea of the subtle body in contemporary neurobiology (specifically body schemas).

My theory—the self-model theory of subjectivity—says that this subtle body does indeed exist, but it is not made of "angel stuff" or "astral matter:' It is made of pure information, flowing in the brain.[15] Of course, the "flow of information" is just another metaphor, but the information processing level of description is the best we have at this stage of research. It creates empirically testable hypotheses, and it allows us to see things we could not see before. The subtle body is the brain's self-model, and scientific research on the OBE shows this in a particularly striking way. (p. 86)

It's not too challenging to see Metzinger's model and Wilber's model as highly similar, at least as far as a general view is concerned.

For Metzinger, the subtle body is information, the brain's self-model; this is not all that different from Wilber's subtle body containing emotional, mental, and higher mental aspects of self.

Antonio Damasio offers a neurobiological model that can possibly account for this subtle body - and we leave the causal body to Wilber and the esoteric traditions.

In each of his last several books, Damasio has been refining his brain-based model of the self, most recently in Self Comes to Mind (2010). Arguing that the origin of the self and self-consciousness is in the upper brain stem and surrounding region, he posits a proto self, an organized and coherent, though temporary neural mapping of sensation and "primordial" feeling; a core self, a kind of stream of conscious that is modified whenever an object or experience "modifies" the proto self; and an autobiographical self that possesses knowledge of past (memory) and future planning. This third stage is social and spiritual in its construction and not directly connected to brain circuitry in the same way as the earlier stages.

Again, this autobiographical self is similar to Metzinger's and Wilber's versions of the subtle body - and he does a better job of explaining its origins than either Metzinger or Wilber.

So we have the gross physical body - the sexed body - and the subtle body that contains or holds our sense of self.

So is it possible that when these two do not match in terms of sex identity (female body, male self identity, or some other incongruous combination) that we have a transgendered person? Is this the child who grows up to be transsexual?

I think this may be an integrally-oriented explanation. And of course, how this dissonance is lived out will depend wholly on the developmental stage of the individual in question.

• A mythic-authoritarian stage person, one who is religious, would likely not be able to face or "embody" the lived conflict between body and self.
• A rational, self-expressive person might simply see gender reassignment surgery as the only obvious option.
• A relativistic, communally oriented person might see variety of options from (assuming he has a female body) living as a butch female, living as a male with no surgeries, take testosterone, taking T and having chest reconstruction, all the way up to phalloplasty.

There is still much to think about around this topic - but I want to think out loud and maybe get thoughts from people who think I am off the deep end or on the right track or somewhere in between.

Stay tuned.

References:

• Damasio, A. (2010). Self comes to mind: Constructing the conscious brain. NY: Pantheon Books.
• Hausman, K. (2003, July 17). Controversy continues to grow over DSM’s GID diagnosis. Psychiatric News, vol. 38, no. 14: 25-32.
• Metzinger, T. (2009). The ego tunnel: The science of the mind and the myth of the self. NY: Basic Books.
• Rubin, H. (2003). Self-made men: Identity, embodiment, and recognition. Nashville, TN Vanderbilt University Press.
• Schilt, K. R. & Waszkiewicz, E. (2006, Aug. 10). I feel so much more in my body: Challenging the significance of the penis in transsexual men’s bodies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal Convention Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Accessed online: 2011-03-13 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p104747_index.html.
• Wilber, K. (2000). Integral psychology: Consciousness, spirit, psychology, therapy. Boston: Shambhala Publications, Inc.
• Wilber, K. (2003). Excerpt G: Toward a comprehensive theory of subtle energies. (Shambhala Publications website).

Tags: masculinity, integral theory, transsexual, transmen, philosophy, Ken Wilber, integral psychology, AQAL, Henry Rubin, Slef-made Men, Thomas Metzinger, The ego tunnel, Antonio Damasio, Self Comes to Mind, subtle bodies, gender identity disorder, gender dysphoria, self, self concept, embodiment, body, gender identity, sex identity, social construction, quadrants, gross, subtle, causal

David Wexler, Ph.D. - Men in Therapy in the 21st Century

For any therapists out there - or maybe even life coaches - who work with men, this telecourse, from Psychotherapy Networker, with David Wexler seems essential. Dr. Wexler is the author of Men in Therapy: New Approaches for Effective Treatment and When Good Men Behave Badly: Change Your Behavior, Change Your Relationship.

In his writings, Wexler offers some crucial insights into the ways in which men manifest emotional issues differently than women do, and why female therapists need to understand how and why this is true, as well as how to talk to men in a way that will allow them to feel safe expressing themselves.

His discussion of the "Broken Mirror" (from the article Shame-O-Phobia: Why men fear therapy, see below) using a construct from Self Psychology, is immensely useful in understanding men - it definitely helped me understand why my inner critic gets triggered by my relationship partner while perceived criticism from others barely even registers much of the time.

A metaphor from self-psychology, the broken mirror, is particularly helpful in understanding the dynamics of male shame. This sensitivity to shame—to feeling incompetent, not valuable, unloved, unneeded, unimportant—is often governed by the psychological relationships with mirroring-self objects in our lives. It works like this: the response from others serves as a mirror, reflecting an image that governs our sense of well-being. Sensitivity to mirroring-self objects and broken mirrors isn't gender-specific, but men are more vulnerable to experiencing these mirrors as referenda on their performance and personal value. When the mirror image is negative (or is perceived as negative), the reflection can reactivate a man's narcissistic injury and deliver a blow to his feeling of competence. There's no more potent a mirror for a man than the one reflected by his intimate partner. If she (or he, in a gay relationship) is unhappy, he's failed. If she offers even a normal, nonabusive criticism, it's as if she's yelling at him: "You've failed at making me happy." And the shame-o-phobic man, vulnerable to broken mirrors and narcissistic injuries, will hear that message whether it's unintended or not.

I think a lot men can see themselves in this brief passage. Sometimes Jami can say something that is as free from judgment or shaming as humanly possible (and being a therapist, she knows how to do this), and I hear it as though I am the worst partner in the world. This doesn't happen all the time, of course - some days my critic is more reactive than other days - but when it does, I withdraw and she wonders what the hell just happened.

For an extended sample of his writing (and an explanation of the "narcissistic wound," see the article excerpt below.

Anyway, here is the info for the telecourse.

T915 Men in Therapy in the 21st Century

Learn about contemporary models of male psychology and how to engage men in therapy to bring out the best qualities even in “difficult” or “defensive” men.

David Wexler, Ph.D.

Dates: Tuesdays, June 8, 15, 29; July 6
Time: 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM EST
CE Credits: 4 hours
Fee: $85; Online Member Discount: $75

Course Description

Traditional models of psychotherapy and couples therapy have often fallen short in trying to reach and engage men because they don’t recognize the defenses and strengths that men typically bring with them into relationships. In this course, you’ll learn about creative 21st-century perspectives on male psychology, particularly how to reach men and bring out their best qualities. We’ll discuss the “broken mirror” phenomenon, ways in which men rely on women excessively for validation of the self, and the challenging and rich issues that emerge when women therapists treat men. We’ll explore how to creatively incorporate language and imagery that make sense to men and how to help them achieve authenticity and intimacy in their relationships.

Meet the Instructor

David Wexler, Ph.D, is the executive director of the Relationship Training Institute in San Diego. He's the author of "Men in Therapy: New Approaches for Effective Treatment," "When Good Men Behave Badly: Change Your Behavior, Change Your Relationship," "Is He Depressed or What?" and "STOP Domestic Violence."

Learning Objectives

1. Describe four contemporary insights about male psychology and how to integrate them into your couples work.

2. List three examples of “guy talk” that engages men and helps bring out their best qualities.

3. Explain the concept of the “broken mirror” and how it can be used to reach men more effectively.

Course Contents

Session 1: Understanding “Good Men Behaving Badly” * The shame of masculinity * Masculine gender role stress * The “broken mirror” sequence * The power of women.

Session 2: Rules of Engagement * Typical male counseling-o-phobia * Respecting “relational dread” * Guy talk for engaging men in treatment * Respecting resistance.

Session 3: When women treat men/diversity issues and treating men * Countertransference and challenges * When men “come on” to female therapists * Cultural sensitivity and cultural competence * Therapist/client matching issues * Alpha errors and beta errors.

Session 4: Relationship authenticity and relationship intimacy * The authentic self and the authentic other * The four pillars of intimacy * Intimacy: action steps * Emotional honesty and behavioral honesty * True love.

The current issue of Psychotherapy Networker has a special section on men (The Secret World of Men: What therapists need to know). One of the articles - and a very good one in my opinion - is Shame-O-Phobia by David Wexler (I think it is free to read online even for non-subscribers).

Here is a bit of the article:

Men who've experienced toxic doses of shame early in life will do anything to avoid reexperiencing it as they grow older. It can originate from family experiences, from peer experiences, or just from the culture at large. A shamed boy becomes a hypersensitive man, his radar always finely tuned to the possibility of humiliation. His reaction to slights—perceived or real—and his ever-vigilant attempts to ward them off can become a kind of phobia. Tragically, the very men who are most desperate for affection and approval are the ones who usually can't ask for it: instead, they project blame and rejection and perceive the worst in others. Sometimes the smallest signs of withdrawal of affection will trigger old wounds, and they'll suddenly lash out at those they see as slighting them, even as they're unaware of the dark feelings stirring inside them. This is a state of mind that many of us in the field call shame-o-phobia, an endemic condition throughout Guy World.

With their profound fear of appearing weak or—god forbid!—feminine, most men will do whatever it takes to prove their manhood. In one recent study, men were assigned to three different groups and given the task of keeping their hand in painfully icy water for as long as they could. Those who were told that the ability to withstand the discomfort was a measure of male sex hormones and an index of physical fitness showed greater cardiovascular reactivity, reported feeling more performance expectations, and kept their hand in the water the longest. This was in contrast to the group who were told the test was a measure of high levels of female sex hormones and the ability to bond with children, and with the third group, who received no explanation at all.

What does this tell us? The length of time a guy will tough it out with his hand submerged in freezing water depends on whether he thinks his masculinity is in question. For some men, their hand could fall off before they'd risk the shame of not seeming "man enough" to take it.

Women feel shame, too, of course, and much of the emotional experiences for men and women are more similar than not. But there are still some fundamental differences in how men are both hardwired and acculturated that can't be ignored in the therapist's office. Even as infants, boys are more overstimulated by direct eye contact and show less ability to regulate arousal through intimate connection. These infant boys then grow up in a Guy World culture that emphasizes successful performance and deemphasizes reliance on others as a way to self-realize. Furthermore, evolutionary psychology teaches us that men are wired for procuring and performing (while females are wired for tending and befriending)—a trait that may provide a biological backdrop to the modern male focus on success. Without that, he ain't much—or so he feels.

To ignore the powerful effect of shame-o-phobia is to risk not really "getting" men, even if you happen to be a man yourself. An otherwise benign or mildly embarrassing event—like carrying the purse across the plaza, or a daughter who isn't having a good time at a Halloween party—can overactivate a man's fear that he's failing at some central task of being a real man.

The Broken Mirror

A metaphor from self-psychology, the broken mirror, is particularly helpful in understanding the dynamics of male shame. This sensitivity to shame—to feeling incompetent, not valuable, unloved, unneeded, unimportant—is often governed by the psychological relationships with mirroring-self objects in our lives. It works like this: the response from others serves as a mirror, reflecting an image that governs our sense of well-being. Sensitivity to mirroring-self objects and broken mirrors isn't gender-specific, but men are more vulnerable to experiencing these mirrors as referenda on their performance and personal value. When the mirror image is negative (or is perceived as negative), the reflection can reactivate a man's narcissistic injury and deliver a blow to his feeling of competence. There's no more potent a mirror for a man than the one reflected by his intimate partner. If she (or he, in a gay relationship) is unhappy, he's failed. If she offers even a normal, nonabusive criticism, it's as if she's yelling at him: "You've failed at making me happy." And the shame-o-phobic man, vulnerable to broken mirrors and narcissistic injuries, will hear that message whether it's unintended or not.

A few years ago, I was interviewed on a radio show about the psychological concept of the broken mirror. Afterward, the (male) interviewer said to me off-air: "Damn! Now I get what happened to me yesterday! I came out of the bathroom after shaving and I'd nicked myself a little on the cheek. My girlfriend looked up at me and said ÔWhat happened to you? That's the second time you've done that this week?' And I just went off. I started yelling at her, and then I stormed off, and our plans for the day were ruined. And it was all because I had a manhood attack. I know she didn't mean anything like that, but that's what I heard. What the hell's wrong with me?"

This man experienced his girlfriend's comments as a stab at his masculinity. It was as if she'd said, "What kind of loser are you that you can't even shave properly? Any man should be able to pull that off!" To a guy whose self-esteem—particularly his masculine self-image—feels vulnerable (this includes most men), this simple interchange, silly as it sounds, can feel like as an unbearable assault. My radio interviewer, as best as I could tell, didn't suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder, nor was he particularly outside the norm. He experienced the broken mirror and reacted in ways that are typical, in one form or another, for many of us men.

Men and Therapy

The field of counseling and psychotherapy hasn't done a particularly good job of creating a user-friendly environment for male clients. The problem begins with a lack of awareness about the profound impact of shame-o-phobia and the vulnerability to broken mirrors. Furthermore, there's a mismatch between the relational style of many men and the touchy-feely atmosphere of most counseling and psychotherapy.

Think of what we typically ask a man to do in therapy settings: recognize that something is wrong with him, admit that he needs help, openly discuss and express his emotions, get vulnerable, and depend on someone else for guidance and support—all extremely challenging tasks in Guy World.

Too often therapists—both male and female—try to massage men into being more like women in the ways they express themselves and experience their emotions. So it isn't surprising that only one-third of psychotherapy clients are men. Either men have fewer psychological problems (not likely!), or else many are too turned off by the whole therapy enterprise to seek the help they need. In fact, men usually get therapy only because someone else has insisted on it. When I ask men in an initial therapy session, "What are you doing here?" the answer I hear is "My wife told me I needed to be here." Other times, it may be their boss or their grandmother or their doctor, or even a probation officer. They perceive the decision to use the therapeutic services and the process of using them to be not particularly helpful and not particularly masculine—often even downright threatening. It's our job, as counselors and therapists, to adapt our approach to these realities.

Part of what makes treating men challenging is that they generally don't signal their psychic pain as clearly and straightforwardly as women. In the postfeminist turmoil of shifting relationship dynamics, men have been struggling to find a way to relate intelligently, parent sensitively, and manage their emotional needs with more consciousness and depth. Many of us haven't figured out a way to do all these things and still really feel like men. Author William Pollack describes men's anger as their "way of weeping"—an expression of underlying pain that women would more likely display with tears or more direct expressions of sadness and loss. Men also "weep" by drinking, withdrawing, acting defensive, blaming others, getting irritable, being possessive, working excessively, becoming overly competitive, suffering somatic complaints and insomnia, and philandering.

As therapists, we have two choices: shoehorn men into a process that's traditionally been more user-friendly for females, or reshape what we do and how we present it to better reach male clients.

Read the whole article.

One of the concepts he mentions in this brief section of the much longer article is the narcissistic wound. The following is a good explanation of the narcissistic wound, from Linda Marks, which is a very central concept in Psychosynthesis (primal wounding), Self Psychology (see Philip Cushman's Why the self is empty: Toward a historically situated psychology), and many other therapeutic models.

The wound to heart and psyche that gets called narcissism occurs when a child's vulnerable and developing core sense of self is not seen and reflected back by the adults around him/her. Each child is born a unique individual with special gifts and personal challenges, multi-layered and both simple and complex. For any one layer to develop, that part of the child needs to be seen, heard, understood and valued. Parents have to be present to be mirrors—to bear witness and reflect back. Healthy parents help young people build a frame of reference for living.

A child needs a safe context in which to explore and express his/her core sense of self. A child needs adults who are themselves grounded in who they are so they have emotional and psychic space to be receptive to the individual child at any moment, rather than relating to the child from their own unmet needs. Any one adult may be capable of seeing and developing certain aspects of a child, and less equipped to see and develop other ones. In this sense, it does take a village to raise a child, and with the loss of this village and the committed long-term adult relationships the village offers to a child, many levels of the child's developing self will be missed entirely.

When a parent's own woundedness and unmet needs override their ability to be present to a child or a parent's undeveloped parts of self render them unable to respond to a child's vulnerable and authentic needs, the child's core sense of self can be lost, fragmented or undeveloped. The loss, fragmentation and lack of development of the core sense of self is the root of the narcissistic wound. Raw, broken, undeveloped and lost, we enter a cold cruel world ill-equipped to relate, define fulfillment from the inside out and connect with the spirit of life.

A significant part of this process, the "fragmentation and lack of development of the core sense of self," which stems from the narcissistic wound, is the source of our subpersonalities, especially the manager parts - for me it is the inner critic (and the perfectionist), while for others it might be the pleaser (seeking to please everyone to avoid shame or abandonment), or the pusher (seeking recognition to avoid shame or abandonment).

Anyway, I highly recommend this article, and Wexler's books.

Tags: psychology, men, therapy, masculinity, self, narcissism, narcissistic wound, broken mirror, David Wexler Ph.D., Men in Therapy in the 21st Century, Psychotherapy Networker, Self Psychology, Shame-O-Phobia, Why men fear therapy, telecourse, Men in Therapy, New Approaches for Effective Treatment, When Good Men Behave Badly, Change Your Behavior, Change Your Relationship, Is He Depressed or What?

Christina Feldman - Overcoming the Last Great Obstacle to Awakening: The Conceit of Self

This is a great older article from Tricycle Magazine. Every one of us feels better than, less than, or equal to another person - but this tendency to define ourselves in relation to others is what Feldman is getting at in this article.

She sees this self/other split as the source of all our suffering. When we feel better than, we become self-righteous, arrogant, or condescending. When we feel less than, we become jealous, resentful, or fearful.

Even we feel equal to, we are trapped within the limitations of appearance, body, mind, intelligence, attainments, stature, and achievements. There is no freedom, no awakening in these traps.

This is a very important article for those of us who seek greater compassion, greater empathy, and greater awakening.

Long Journey to a Bow

Overcoming the last great obstacle to awakening: the conceit of self

By Christina Feldman

WHEN news of the impending death of a beloved and esteemed teacher swept through the village, well-wishers gathered to pay their last respects and honor him. Standing around the master’s bedside, one by one they sang his praises and extolled his virtues as he listened and smiled weakly. “Such kindness you have shown us,” said one devotee. Another extolled his depth of knowledge, another lamented that never again would they find a teacher with such eloquence. The tributes to his wisdom, compassion, and nobility continued until the master’s wife noticed signs of restlessness and kindly asked his devotees to leave. Turning to her husband, she asked why he was disturbed, remarking upon all the wonderful tributes that had showered him. “Yes, it was all wonderful,” he whispered. “But did you notice that no one mentioned my humility?”

The conceit of self (mana in Pali) is said to be the last of the great obstacles to full awakening. Conceit is an ingenious creature, at times masquerading as humility, empathy, or virtue. Conceit manifests in the feelings of being better than, worse than, and equal to another. Within these three dimensions of conceit are held the whole tormented world of comparing, evaluating, and judging that afflicts our hearts. Jealousy, resentment, fear, and low self-esteem spring from this deeply embedded pattern. Conceit perpetuates the dualities of “self” and “other”—the schisms that are the root of the enormous alienation and suffering in our world. Our commitment to awakening asks us to honestly explore the ways in which conceit manifests in our lives and to find the way to its end. The cessation of conceit allows the fruition of empathy, kindness, compassion, and awakening. The Buddha taught that “one who has truly penetrated this threefold conceit of superiority, inferiority, and equality is said to have put an end to suffering.”

Although I didn’t recognize it at the time, my first significant encounter with conceit happened in the very beginning of my practice in the Tibetan tradition, a serious bowing culture. I’m not talking about a tradition that just inclines the head slightly, but a culture in which Tibetans undertake pilgrimages of hundreds of miles doing full prostrations the entire way. In Tibetan communities the serious bowers can be spotted by the callous in the center of their forehead. Walking into my teacher’s room in the Himalayan foothills for the first time, I found myself shocked to see people prostrating themselves at his feet. My reaction was visceral; I saw their bowing as an act of self-abasement, and I determined never to do the same. My conceit appeared in the thoughts that questioned what this plump, unsmiling man swaddled in robes had done to merit this attention. The recurrent words “I,” “me,” “better,” “worse,” “higher,” “lower,” “worthy,” and “unworthy” provided fuel for plenty of storytelling and resistance.

Over the years, as my respect and appreciation for this teacher’s generosity, kindness, and wisdom grew, I found myself inching toward a bow, often a token bow with just a slight bob of my head. Occasionally I would engage in a more heartfelt bow born of deeper gratitude, but still an element of tension and withholding remained. I continued to practice in other bowing cultures. In Asia, I witnessed the tradition of elderly nuns with many years of practice and wisdom kneeling before teenage monks who had yet to find the way to sit still for five minutes. In Korea, I saw a practice environment where everyone bowed to everyone and everything with respect and a smile. It dawned on me that bowing was not, for me, just a physical gesture, but rather an object for investigation and a pathway to understanding conceit. The bow, I came to understand, was a metaphor for understanding many aspects of the teaching—pride, conceit, discriminating wisdom, and self-image.

My first challenge on this journey was to distinguish the difference between a bow as an act of letting go of conceit and a bow that reflected belief in unworthiness. As Kate Wheeler once wrote in this magazine, “A true bow is not a scrape.” Many on this path—both men and women—carry a legacy of too many years of scraping, cowering, and self-belittlement, rooted in belief in their own unworthiness. The path to renouncing scraping can be long and liberating, a reclaiming of dignity, and a letting go of patterns of fear. Discriminating wisdom, which we are never encouraged to renounce, clearly understands the difference between a bow and a scrape. A true bow can be a radical act of love and freedom. As Suzuki Roshi put it, “When you bow there is no Buddha and there is no you. One complete bow takes place. That is all. This is nirvana.”

CONCEIT manifests in the ways we contract around a sense of “self” and “other”; it lies at the core of the identities and beliefs we construct, and it enables those beliefs to be the source of our acts, words, thoughts, and relationships. Superiority conceit is the belief in being better or worthier than another. It is a kind of conceit that builds itself upon our appearance, body, mind, intelligence, attainments, stature, and achievements. It can even gather around our meditative superiority. We see someone shuffling and restless on their meditation cushion and then congratulate ourselves for sitting so solidly. We might go through life hypercritical, quick to spot the flaws and imperfections in others, sure we would never behave in such unacceptable ways.

Superiority conceit is easily spotted when it manifests in arrogance, bragging, or proclaiming our excellence to the world. On retreat we may find ourselves rehearsing the conversations we will have with our partner, recounting our trials and triumphs, but especially our heroism in completing the retreat where others failed. We can feel remarkably deflated when his only interest is when we’re going to take out the garbage. It can be subtle in our inner beliefs in our specialness, rightness, or invulnerability. Superiority conceit looks like a safer refuge than inferiority conceit (thoughts of being worse than another), but in truth both cause the same suffering. Feelings of superiority have the power to distort compassion into its near enemy, pity, and to stifle the capacity to listen deeply. Superiority conceit disables our receptivity to criticism because we become so convinced in the truth of our views and opinions.

A traditional Buddhist story tells of the time after the Buddha’s death when he descended into the hell realms to liberate all the tormented beings imprisoned there. Mara (the personification of delusion) wept and mourned, for he thought he would get no more sinners for hell. The Buddha said to him, “Do not weep, for I shall send you all those who are self-righteous in their condemnation of sinners, and hell shall fill up again quickly.”

Inferiority conceit is more familiar territory for many of us, probably because a chronic sense of unworthiness is so endemic in our culture. The torment of feeling worse than others and not good enough is the daily diet of inferiority conceit. A student on retreat came in distress to report that none of her more familiar dramas and agitation were appearing, and she was convinced she was doing something wrong. The teacher suggested that this odd experience could actually be one of calmness and was surprised when the suggestion was met with even more distress and denial, with the student exclaiming, “Calm is not something I can do.” Another student experiencing rapture in her practice continued to assert that it was menopausal flashes, unable to accept that she could experience deep meditative states. Inferiority conceit gathers in the same places as superiority conceit—the body, mind, and appearance, as well as in the long list of mistakes we have made throughout our lives.

Inferiority conceit is fertile in its production of envy, resentment, judgment, and blame, which go round and round in a vicious circle of storytelling, serving only to solidify our belief in an imperfect self. This belief is often the forerunner of scraping as we create heroes and heroines occupying a landscape of success and perfection we believe to be impossible for us.

Governed by inferiority conceit, we may be adept at bowing to others, yet find it impossible to bow to ourselves, to acknowledge the wholesomeness and sincerity that keep us persevering on this path. Learning to make that first bow to ourselves is perhaps a step to realizing that a bow is just a bow, a simple gesture where all ideas of “self” and “other,” “worthy” and “unworthy,” fall away. It is a step of confidently committing ourselves to realizing the same freedom and compassion that all buddhas throughout time have discovered; it is acknowledging that we practice to be liberated. We practice because it seems impossible; we practice to reclaim that sense of possibility. We learn to bow to each moment knowing it is an invitation to understand what it means to liberate just one moment from the burden of self-judgment, blame, envy, and fear. Letting go of inferiority conceit awakens our capacity for appreciative joy and reclaims the confidence so necessary to travel this path of awakening.

Seeing the suffering of superiority and inferiority conceit, we might be tempted to think that equality conceit is the middle path; however, a closer look shows us that it is more a conceit of mediocrity and minimal expectations. Equality conceit is when we tell ourselves that we all share in the same delusion, self-centeredness, and greed, that we all swim in the same cesspool of suffering. We see someone falling asleep on their cushion and feel reassured. We observe a teacher dropping their salad in the lunch line, and it confirms our view that people are essentially and hopelessly mindless. Sameness can seem both comforting and reassuring. Thinking that others are also struggling on the path can make us feel relieved of the responsibility to hold aspirations that ask for effort and commitment.

Equality conceit can express disillusionment with human possibility. When we look at those who appear happier or more enlightened than ourselves and primarily see their flaws, we are caught in equality conceit. We see those who seem more confused or deluded than ourselves, and we know we have been there. We see our own delusions and struggles reflected in the lives of others and think that we are relieved of the task of bowing. The offspring of equality conceit can be a terminal sense of disappointment, resignation, and cynicism. After Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, was released, several newspapers responded by publishing the electric bill of his home. What wasn’t mentioned was how the home’s electricity was generated by solar power. It seemed there was a driving need to reduce his message and show that we’re all hopeless carbon emitters.

All forms of conceit give rise to the endless thoughts and storytelling that solidify the beliefs we hold about ourselves and others. Liberating ourselves from conceit and the agitation it brings begins with our willingness to sensitize ourselves to the subtle and obvious manifestations of conceit as they appear. The clues lie in our judgments and comparisons, the views we construct about ourselves and others. Suffering, evaluating, envy, and fear are all signals asking us to pause and listen more deeply. We learn to bow to those moments, knowing they are moments when we can either solidify conceit or liberate it. Instead of feeding the story, we can nurture our capacities for mindfulness, restraint, and letting go. Instead of volunteering for suffering, we may be able to volunteer for freedom. It is not an easy undertaking, yet each moment that we are present and compassionate in the process of conceit building is a moment of learning to bow and take a step on the path of freedom.

Life is a powerful ally because it offers us the opportunities to let go of the conceit of self. There are times when our world crumbles. Unpredictable illness and other hardships come into our lives, and we face the reality once more that we are not in control. Sometimes there is simply no more that “I” can do. In those moments, we can become agitated or we can acknowledge that we are meeting the First Noble Truth: at times there is unsatisfactoriness and suffering in life. When we face the limitations of our power and control, all we can skillfully do is bow to that moment. The conceit of self is challenged and eroded not only by the circumstances of our lives but also by our willingness to meet those circumstances with grace rather than with fear.

A teacher was asked, “What is the secret to your happiness and equanimity?” She answered, “A whole-hearted, unrestricted cooperation with the unavoidable.” This is the secret and the essence of a bow. It is the heart of mindfulness and compassion. To bow is to no longer hold ourselves apart from the unpredictable nature of all of our lives; it is to cultivate a heart that can unconditionally welcome all things. We bow to what is, to all of life. By liberating our minds from ideas of “better than,” “worse than,” or “the same as,” we liberate ourselves from all views of “self”and “other.” The bow is a way to the end of suffering, to an awakened heart.

~ Christina Feldman is the author of a number of books, including Compassion: Listening to the Cries of the World and The Buddhist Path to Simplicity: Spiritual Practice in Everyday Life. She is a co-founder of Gaia House and a senior teacher in the Insight Meditation community. She lives in Devon, England.

Image 1: © Hans Georg Berger, Kneeling, Archive No. 3773,13, hansgeorgberger.d
Image 2: © Hans Georg Berger, A Monk Dressing; Feet, Archive No. 608-08

Tags: Christina Feldman, Overcoming the last great obstacle to awakening, the conceit of self, Long Journey to a Bow, Tricycle, Buddhism, awakening, empathy, self, obstacles, feeling better than, feeling less than, feeling equal to, comparing, self and other, duality