It is time for psychoanalytic discourse to retire the term “object.” The term has become ambiguous, has become anachronistic, and has misleading and even deleterious connotations. It misconstrues the process of internalization as interpreted by contemporary theories and approaches. It also contributes to the impression that psychoanalysis is unconcerned with the kinds of relational and interpersonal factors that have assumed center stage in much analytic thinking. This article addresses different ways that internalizations have been construed and described, and modern concepts of drives that do not require this syntax in order to describe processes of mental representation.