| Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Next | Part 6 |
| Table of Contents |

Jennifer was about to continue when I interrupted: "Why do you refer to the ego as the false self? Irrespective of its properties or qualities, isn't the ego our primary way of interacting with the world? We may not like some, or even many, of its tendencies, but its presence, activities and effects, problematic though they may be, seem real enough."

Nodding while she listened to me, Jennifer responded with: "What you say, David, is quite true. Yet, from the perspective of spirituality or mysticism, our true self or real identity involves something more essential and fundamental than can be given expression or understood through the inclinations and qualities of the ego.

"The true self is the locus of manifestation for Divinity in human affairs. The ego attempts to obfuscate our awareness concerning the possibilities of the true self that are within us.

"The mystics contend that, among other things, the true self possesses qualities such as patience, humility, compassion, kindness, charitableness, love, integrity, fairness, gratitude, servitude, gentleness, tranquility, selflessness, and generosity. These are qualities which are entirely foreign to the ego.

"To refer to the ego as the false self is to allude to the manner in which the ego is masquerading in a role of authority that is inappropriate to it. The ego is attempting to control how we characterize, interpret, evaluate and act on our experiences, but the ego does so with all the wrong intentions, motivations, attitudes, purposes, goals, values and understandings.

"For example, on the level of the ego's engagement of the world, much of our treatment of other people is permeated with prejudice, suspicion, lying, manipulation, dogma, abuse, bias, exploitation, cheating, fear, thoughtlessness and cruelty. This is as true for women as it is for men.

"Moreover, the properties of the individual ego also are writ large on the level of the collective. In other words, on average, and in general, there is a very strong tendency in virtually every political, national, ethnic, religious, economic, social, cultural, creative and professional group to differentially perceive, and treat, 'insiders' and 'outsiders'.

"In addition, from the perspective of the 'insiders' of these groups, an enemy is defined as anyone who is considered, rightly or wrongly, to constitute a threat to the group's status, prestige, power, vested interests, convenience, pleasure, theoretical world view and/or collective false identity. Therefore, as is true in relation to most individuals, so, too, in the case of collectives, perceived threats are subject to being attacked by the considerable, and quite destructive, allied arsenals of the individual egos making up the collective.

"The activities of the ego can be constrained and curbed, to some degree, by external forces such as socialization, education and various kinds of peer pressure. Nonetheless, as far as the mystics are concerned, the only stable, long-term, viable way of dealing with the ego's tendency to make trouble for oneself and others is to transform the character of the ego's intentions and purposes by bringing it under the influence and guidance of the qualities and properties of the true self.

"Let's try to transfer some of the foregoing principles and points to certain aspects of the feminist discussion. For instance, let us consider the relationship between men and women while keeping in mind the nature and activities of the ego.

"Given an understanding of the properties and characteristics of the ego, one has no problem in accepting at least part of the argument of feminists who claim there is a substantial amount of evidence demonstrating the existence of a systematic attempt on the part of some, perhaps, even many, men to oppress women in a variety of ways.

"After all, inherent in the nature of the ego are tendencies to oppress, exploit, manipulate, abuse and treat others unfairly. Consequently, those men who are oppressed by their own egos will be inclined to allow their egos to oppress others, especially when these men derive benefit from such oppression.

"I also agree, up to a point, with those feminists who are trying to show how the socialization process of gendering often entails an indoctrinatory program that adversely affects both women and men. This program attempts to inculcate in all of us an unquestioning acceptance of the idea that many of the qualities associated with gender are inherent in our natures, when, in reality, quite frequently, such qualities are merely reflections of the way power has become arbitrarily distributed within society and the family.

"Once again, from the perspective of spirituality, one has little difficulty in being receptive to quite a few feminist insights on some of the issues surrounding gender. This is especially true with respect to the manner in which the gendering process helps underwrite, support and maintain a variety of qualities and characteristics that coalesce in the form of a false self.

"Some feminists speak of this false gender identity as the 'other' which women and men are required, if not forced, to internalize. Each of us must assume the identity of the 'other' in a way that is considered 'appropriate' to the roles that we, as women and men, are expected to play in society."

"Sounds," I offered, "as if the gendering process is like a real-life version of one of those nightmarish, science fiction movies in which the heroine and/or hero is threatened by the desire of some alien presence to assume control of human lives."

"That's a stark but rather apt likeness," Jennifer agreed. "The... the gendering script, for want of a better phrase, calls for us to become one with the alien other. As a result, all our thoughts, values, attitudes, feelings, intentions and actions are to be shaped, colored and oriented by the properties of the gendering gizmo into which we are being strapped.

"According to some feminists, internalization of the alien other prevents us from seeking out, and trying to realize, our true identities and callings. Feminists disagree, however, about what the precise character of these true identities and callings are, or should be.

"In any event, when, for whatever reason, the internalization process is short-circuited, either at its inception or after-the-fact, then external pressures are brought to bear in order to ensure, at least, outward compliance with the directives of the alien other. Sometimes these externally applied pressures are subtle and indirect, and sometimes such pressures are blatant and direct.

"Naturally, if the oppressive qualities of patriarchy or the formation of identity by gendering were completely successful, no woman would ever have been able to break free of the orbit to which mission control had tried to assign her. However, as a result of personal qualities and life circumstances, there have been some women who were able to gain certain insights into some of what is false about the nature of patriarchy and gendering.

"Therefore, these women have been opened up to, and they have tried to apprise others of, the possibility of transcending the alien other that walks amongst us amidst the internal and external shadows of our lives. Yet, although an increasing number of women are seeing the possibility of an 'I' which is independent of the gendering process, a major challenge stands before feminist theorists.

"More specifically, establishing the possibility of an identity beyond gender does not specify what the character of the identity is that lies beyond the gender horizon. One is still faced with the question: what kind of non-gendered 'I' should one seek?

"I disagree both with those women who are preoccupied with patriarchy, as well as with those who are preoccupied with gender, when they attempt to claim that most of the problems of women and society can be laid at the feet of either patriarchy or gender. In point of fact, both patriarchy and gender are but symptomatic expressions of an underlying disease: the ego or false self.

"Whatever pathologies various men may suffer from, one cannot automatically assume that the problems of women are only derivative from the condition of, say, patriarchy or gendering. Women, as do men, have their own indigenous demons of hatred, anger, pride, envy, jealousy, manipulativeness, dishonesty, cowardice, ambition, pettiness, oppression, prejudice, biases, worldly desires, exploitiveness, preoccupations with power, and so on. These demons are fully capable of generating problems for women, quite independently of the kinds of difficulty which men, due to the activities of their own demons, impose on women.

"These demons are not the product of patriarchy or gendering, although these processes may color, modulate and orient such internal demons in certain ways. These demons are inherent in the human condition, for both men and women.

"Furthermore, aside from our demons, and aside from the different kinds of hardship that some men inflict on some women, women, like men, are faced with the problems which arise in conjunction with the search for essential purposes, meanings, directions, values and understandings in our lives. Between these sorts of problem and our own personal demons, women still would be in a world of difficulty even if men did not exist and had never existed.

"As such, contrary to what some feminists have argued, women were not the first group to be oppressed, nor can the oppression of women be taken as the prototype for all other forms of oppression. From the perspective of mystics, one cannot oppress others until one, first, has oppressed oneself through permitting one's false self or ego to gain ascendency in the control of one's thoughts, values, attitudes, emotions, intentions and actions.

"The first group to be oppressed were those, whether men or women, who became inclined to oppress others. Consequently, the activities of the ego or false self constitute the prototype for understanding all other forms of oppression.

"In any event, many women still find themselves in a position of having to try to break free of the gravitational pull of what has been referred to as the ideology of confinement and separate spheres. Many feminists believe that patriarchy and gendering both give expression to this ideology as a means of isolating, containing, denigrating, excluding and subjugating women.

"Such feminists have argued that men marginalize women by means of the ideology of confinement and separate spheres in order to establish and preserve the kind of domestic and political/social stability that men believe to be necessary to the 'well-being' of their own egos or false selves. In point of fact, however, every form of oppression uses the same tactical ideology of confinement and separate spheres.

"This is so because such an ideology reflects the strategy which the ego originally used to confine the oppressor's own awareness, thereby relegating understanding to a separate sphere devoid of any meaning except what the ego permits that sphere to have. The oppression of others, whether in relation to sexual identity, class, religion, race or whatever, is but another manifestation of the activities of the ego or false self written on a larger scale.

"The ego oppressed the individual's own being in order to establish a stable space within which to pursue its intentions and purposes free from interference. This program of pacification occurs in every oppressor and oppressed relationship.

"When the process takes place between men and women, this is but a particularized example of a generalized ideology of confinement and separate spheres in action. The use of this ideology, in whatever circumstances, whether in relationship to oneself or others, is the telltale signature of the presence of the imperialistic ego or false self."

| Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Next | Part 6 |
| Table of Contents |