14 ICSA TODAY
network. At the same time, ICSA has welcomed increased
numbers of family members from inside and outside of cults,
mental health professionals, researchers, clergy, journalists,
and attorneys. Each of these groups has emerged to
articulate its own particular perspectives, beliefs, and goals.
How do we deal with this new reality? In today’s
presentation, I will consider some factors that undermine
dialogue, and I will suggest some ideas that might help us
connect.
Our Black-and-White World
As a psychoanalyst, my perspective is that unconscious
as well as conscious factors always are at play in our
interactions with others, and that some of these factors
can undermine dialogue. For example, when I was asked
to give this plenary address, I became aware of a certain
degree of anxiety about your reaction to my presentation.
I allowed myself to consider what might be underlying my
anxiety. I began to understand that I imagined you would
have a critical reaction. To comfort myself, I challenged my
black-and-white emotional thinking with self-reflection
gained from years of my own therapy, and from the use of
self-analysis, which has been a central tool in my work as a
therapist. Moving from an emotional to a self-reflective state
allowed me to calm down as I had the following thoughts:
First, even if many of you respond critically, I am pretty good
about accepting criticism today, in contrast to situations in
my early life so it was unlikely that I would be crushed by
your reaction. Second, although some of you might take
issue with some of my ideas, others might have a positive
reaction to some of what I say. Third, my self-esteem would
increase if I took the uncomfortable action of presenting
rather than declining to speak. These thoughts moved me
from emotion to self-reflection and helped me shift from
viewing myself as the potential victim of your crushing
reaction to a more balanced and, hopefully, realistic view.
In light of this, I began to consider Jessica Benjamin’s concept
of “the third.”1 Benjamin suggested that too often we divide
our emotional world between feeling like the victim who
is done to or the victimizer who is the doer we are stuck in
right/wrong, dominant/submissive, binary thinking. We see
this kind of thinking today in world leaders who negotiate
as if everything is a zero-sum game. Their attitude is “If
you win, I lose” “the only way I go up is if others go down.”
Benjamin believes that instead, by using self-reflection and
“uncertainty, humility, and compassion that form the basis of
a democratic or egalitarian view of psychoanalytic process”
(Benjamin, p. 34), we can move toward empathy for other
and the possibility for mutual understanding. This allows
us to claim an equal place within our relationships with
others. Instead of a divided way of viewing the world, we
can approach situations in such a way that everyone has the
possibility of gaining something from the experience.
I just talked about my anxiety when I first considered
giving this plenary address. In psychoanalytic terms, I
was experiencing a transference expectation in making an
assumption about the audience’s reaction. That is, instead of
looking at all possible outcomes, my sense of reality became
limited by my expectation that you would react in a manner
similar to reactions I had experienced in my early life.
Transference is a core concept of psychoanalysis (Freud, S.,
1940). It means that, unconsciously, we transfer attitudes
and expectations developed in the past into our present
life and relationships. A psychoanalytic approach focuses
on transference and how we might distort our present
relationships based upon how we viewed relationships in the
past. Often, these expectations are developed in childhood
when our thinking tends to be black and white, lacking the
nuance and subtlety we gain as we mature. But transference
expectations can also form as a result of important
relationships made later in life, particularly in traumatic
relationships. Transference also can lead us to the possibility
of mishearing and misunderstanding each other, and this
misperception can undermine successful communication.
This happens because our past constantly reshapes how we
view our present.
Many former cult members may have an expectation, both
conscious and unconscious, that new relationships will
repeat the victim/victimizer dynamics that occurred in the
cult. However, as you can see by my example, you don’t
have to be a former cult member to have these particular
expectations. Although some individuals here, including
myself, never were in a cult, we are all are vulnerable,
as anxious humans, to regress into the black-and-white
thinking of childhood that cults intensify.
With transference expectations, we can make assumptions
and fill in the gaps in what we know about who people are
and what they are thinking. Doing this limits our ability to
see others in a more complex, human, and realistic way.
When we idealize or de-idealize others, we are not seeing the
real person before us, an individual with strengths and flaws.
Likewise, with transference expectations, we limit our ability
to see ourselves in a more complex and realistic way. When
we contrast ourselves to an idealized cult leader, therapist,
or others, we tend to magnify our own shortcomings.
Conversely, when we need to protect ourselves, we can
become suspicious and expect nothing but bad from
too often we divide our
emotional world between
feeling like the victim who
is done to or the victimizer
who is the doer
network. At the same time, ICSA has welcomed increased
numbers of family members from inside and outside of cults,
mental health professionals, researchers, clergy, journalists,
and attorneys. Each of these groups has emerged to
articulate its own particular perspectives, beliefs, and goals.
How do we deal with this new reality? In today’s
presentation, I will consider some factors that undermine
dialogue, and I will suggest some ideas that might help us
connect.
Our Black-and-White World
As a psychoanalyst, my perspective is that unconscious
as well as conscious factors always are at play in our
interactions with others, and that some of these factors
can undermine dialogue. For example, when I was asked
to give this plenary address, I became aware of a certain
degree of anxiety about your reaction to my presentation.
I allowed myself to consider what might be underlying my
anxiety. I began to understand that I imagined you would
have a critical reaction. To comfort myself, I challenged my
black-and-white emotional thinking with self-reflection
gained from years of my own therapy, and from the use of
self-analysis, which has been a central tool in my work as a
therapist. Moving from an emotional to a self-reflective state
allowed me to calm down as I had the following thoughts:
First, even if many of you respond critically, I am pretty good
about accepting criticism today, in contrast to situations in
my early life so it was unlikely that I would be crushed by
your reaction. Second, although some of you might take
issue with some of my ideas, others might have a positive
reaction to some of what I say. Third, my self-esteem would
increase if I took the uncomfortable action of presenting
rather than declining to speak. These thoughts moved me
from emotion to self-reflection and helped me shift from
viewing myself as the potential victim of your crushing
reaction to a more balanced and, hopefully, realistic view.
In light of this, I began to consider Jessica Benjamin’s concept
of “the third.”1 Benjamin suggested that too often we divide
our emotional world between feeling like the victim who
is done to or the victimizer who is the doer we are stuck in
right/wrong, dominant/submissive, binary thinking. We see
this kind of thinking today in world leaders who negotiate
as if everything is a zero-sum game. Their attitude is “If
you win, I lose” “the only way I go up is if others go down.”
Benjamin believes that instead, by using self-reflection and
“uncertainty, humility, and compassion that form the basis of
a democratic or egalitarian view of psychoanalytic process”
(Benjamin, p. 34), we can move toward empathy for other
and the possibility for mutual understanding. This allows
us to claim an equal place within our relationships with
others. Instead of a divided way of viewing the world, we
can approach situations in such a way that everyone has the
possibility of gaining something from the experience.
I just talked about my anxiety when I first considered
giving this plenary address. In psychoanalytic terms, I
was experiencing a transference expectation in making an
assumption about the audience’s reaction. That is, instead of
looking at all possible outcomes, my sense of reality became
limited by my expectation that you would react in a manner
similar to reactions I had experienced in my early life.
Transference is a core concept of psychoanalysis (Freud, S.,
1940). It means that, unconsciously, we transfer attitudes
and expectations developed in the past into our present
life and relationships. A psychoanalytic approach focuses
on transference and how we might distort our present
relationships based upon how we viewed relationships in the
past. Often, these expectations are developed in childhood
when our thinking tends to be black and white, lacking the
nuance and subtlety we gain as we mature. But transference
expectations can also form as a result of important
relationships made later in life, particularly in traumatic
relationships. Transference also can lead us to the possibility
of mishearing and misunderstanding each other, and this
misperception can undermine successful communication.
This happens because our past constantly reshapes how we
view our present.
Many former cult members may have an expectation, both
conscious and unconscious, that new relationships will
repeat the victim/victimizer dynamics that occurred in the
cult. However, as you can see by my example, you don’t
have to be a former cult member to have these particular
expectations. Although some individuals here, including
myself, never were in a cult, we are all are vulnerable,
as anxious humans, to regress into the black-and-white
thinking of childhood that cults intensify.
With transference expectations, we can make assumptions
and fill in the gaps in what we know about who people are
and what they are thinking. Doing this limits our ability to
see others in a more complex, human, and realistic way.
When we idealize or de-idealize others, we are not seeing the
real person before us, an individual with strengths and flaws.
Likewise, with transference expectations, we limit our ability
to see ourselves in a more complex and realistic way. When
we contrast ourselves to an idealized cult leader, therapist,
or others, we tend to magnify our own shortcomings.
Conversely, when we need to protect ourselves, we can
become suspicious and expect nothing but bad from
too often we divide our
emotional world between
feeling like the victim who
is done to or the victimizer
who is the doer
