Gail Collins and the Adventures of Older Women in American History

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Jane Fonda. Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Nancy Pelosi. Elizabeth Warren. Maxine Waters. Are "older" women taking over? By 2034 there will be more people 65 and older than there are people under 18. And by and large, women are outliving men. So what might all these older women mean in terms of a possible power shift, historically speaking? Listen to my conversation with Gail Collins, New York Times columnist and the author of the new book, “No Stopping Us Now. The Adventures of Older Women in American History” We explore how attitudes toward older women have shifted in America over the centuries – from the Plymouth Colony view that women were marriageable if "civil and under fifty years of age," to quiet dismissal of post-reproductive females, to women’s role as perpetual caretaker (even when she might need caretaking herself), to the first female nominee for president.

Lauren spoke with Gail on stage for the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco in October of 2019.

TRANSCRIPT: We do our best, please let us know any errors!

Gail Collins:                          My first book about women, was about women in American history. And we could not think of a title for it. Finally we called it America's Women, but that was so pathetic. The subtitle was 400 Years of Dolls, Drudges, Helpmates, and Heroines, which is a desperate attempt to make America's Women sound like a better title. And while I was doing that one, when I just came across a bunch of stuff that I wanted to go back and look at again. And one that sometime at some point along the way I came across was this letter from one of the very early colonists when they were first here, they were all guys. And so they're writing back to England saying, please send us some women. Please, please, please. And they wrote down their description of an ideal wife, who was a woman who was civil and under 50 years of age.

Gail Collins:                          So I thought, wow. And then I was wondering through some other point, I guess when I was doing, When Everything Changed and I ran across that famous hair coloring is from the early, the early seventies that said, you're not getting older, you're getting better. And I looked at it and the copy within that said, these days any woman over 25 is old. And I thought, holy moly. Wow. And you look right now and there's Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the gym and then running the Supreme Court, and everybody's applauding. I thought, wow, what makes all this stuff go up and down like this? And it seemed like a fun thing to look into.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller, and that is Gail Collins, New York times columnist and author of a new book called No Stopping Us Now: The Adventures of Older Women in American History. We spoke on stage for the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco, in October of 2019. By 2034 there will be more people 65 and older than there are people under 18, and by and large, women are outliving men. So what might all these older women mean in terms of a possible power shift, historically speaking? Well, look at Jane Fonda. Look at Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Look at Nancy Pelosi. My goodness, these women over 25, they're everywhere. And they're all in the book. This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller with stories of how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  Gail's book covers American women from the 1600s to today, which is a lot of history to cover. So I started our conversation with a challenge. I asked Gail to give us the 60 second recap from the 1600s to today.

Gail Collins:                          May take two minutes, however.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay, you get two minutes.

Gail Collins:                          There were two things. One was scarcity, as we've just seen. If you were the only women coming into some town in the wild west, really you could be 95 and they would be throwing themselves at you, and make no difference whatsoever. But the other thing that seemed to me such a big pattern, once I looked at it, was whether they had an economic role. Women who have an economic role are judged the way men are judged, and women who are seen as only mothers are pretty much out to pasture once their children are grown. And that was the great, great cosmic difference that I saw. And it came and went and came and went. And I won't tell you any more right now, because that's my two minutes, but we'll get back to it.

Lauren Schiller:                  No, you've got more time. Keep going. You talk about that with World War II, how everything really shifted.

Gail Collins:                          It shifted. You start look... Two seconds to the colonies. In the colonies wives were all farm wives, and they're growing vegetables, making candles, making... One woman, I just wove 33,000 balls of yarn this year. Just went on and on, the stuff that they could do, creating wealth. And everybody knew that the housewife was creating all this wealth, and young women wanted to come and hang out with them so they could learn how to do it. So at that period, it was a great period for being an older woman, then when everybody moved to the cities. And middle-class women had a much shrunken role that had nothing to do with economics. That was suddenly when, if your kids are gone, why are you still here? But it was very cruel and mean.

Gail Collins:                          And then as you go back and forth in history, whenever there's an economic call for older women, then they become very popular. And during World War II was the absolute perfect example. You had all the guys are gone and young women with children really resisted the idea of going to work. So there was everybody, a clarion call, and every all eyes turned older women. Here they are, Oh my God. And you suddenly, not just had Rosie the Riveter stories, but you had these stories about Josephine the 80 year old riveter. My God, is she great. And I remember reading one in a magazine at the time that was going around during the war saying, we were so touched today, we went to a restaurant and saw a 65 year old woman carrying a tray of dishes with a gleam of happiness in her blue eyes. I'm not sure about the glass, but that was the moment when women, older women, nobody complained about them at all. They were the heroines because they were doing all the work.

Lauren Schiller:                  This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller, with stories of how women rise up. I'll be right back with Gail Collins, who shares how economy shapes what men look for in a woman.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, you tell a story in the book is about some guys you're interviewing in Connecticut about what they were looking for in a woman.

Gail Collins:                          Yeah. This was the humongous discovery that I made, somewhere along the way. My greatest thought was about the economic participation of women, and during... After World War II, the economy exploded, and everybody thought they could become middle-class. Everybody's going to the suburbs, they're getting their own houses, their kids are going to go to college, we're going to go on vacations. It was a humongous explosion of expectation for family life. And then the '70s came and all that... The oil... You remember a lot of you, I'm sure the oil boycott, the awful, awful economy of the '70s, and suddenly many, many, many families could no longer support the life they thought they needed to live with one income.

Gail Collins:                          And that was really the absolute change, because suddenly all the women who had been consigned to the role of mom and nothing else, were drawn back into the workforce. And younger women started thinking about what their role would be. And my favorite story about that period is it was actually later, in the late seventies or the '80s, but I was at a college in New Britain, Connecticut. And for some reason I'm talking to an entire room full of guys, and I do not know how exactly I got there, I was doing a woman's book tour, but they were lovely guys. And I said to them, what do you look for in a wife? And nobody was going to say to me, a really hot woman who I... So they all said, a really good personality.

Gail Collins:                          And I said, oh, that's nice. And then one kid in the back said, and a good earner. And they all said yes, oh my God, yes, and a good earner. Got to be a good earner. And I thought then, wow, this is a whole new vision. Guys really need their wives to be good earners, and women are being integrated into the economy in the same way. And they're going to get old in a totally different way.

Lauren Schiller:                  What's so interesting to me about that is that, why does the gender wage gap still exist?

Gail Collins:                          Very, very, very good question. It goes on forever too. One of the great things, after the invention of the birth control pill, suddenly the number of women in graduate school, law school, medical school skyrocketed because you could suddenly control and make sure you were not going to be getting pregnant and having a baby while you were doing your preparation for your career. Stupendous numbers. Now there are more women in law school and medical school than there are men. And the income and average of doctors and lawyers has dropped. What does this mean? It's a pattern that goes on and on and on and on and on. I believe we will overcome it at some point.

Gail Collins:                          Another problem is that women often like to go into the helping professions, which instantly, when you hear the word helping, you know they're not going to be making very much money. It's just... And because of that, they want to teach, they want to go and do work. They want to help out in different ways. And those are their income from those professions are not as high, and good for them. So a little bit of booth going on there.

Lauren Schiller:                  And then, right. And then when there is a male profession professionally teaching that women started to take over, it just, it happens over and over again. I just think it's bizarre that they want good earners, but they only want them to make, I don't know, 72 cents for every dollar they make.

Gail Collins:                          Not the husbands. I do not know anybody who believes more in equality of pay opportunity than the husbands of working wives. They are really for it, 100% yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. So, older women do better when they can generate more money. That's one of the things that you told us. And women's power seems to fluctuate depending on what's happening with the economy overall, how much we're needed, but also who's got political power. Are those the two main drivers of where a women do or do not have power, is who's who is in charge politically, and how much are they needed economically?

Gail Collins:                          And the political part is very interesting, because you can't quite figure out where it goes with women. Women got the vote in 1920, and they had a vision of a new society that would be created with the women's vote, in which there'd be clinics for poor women and their children, there'd be all of these things happening to make society better, kinder, more woman-like in orientation. And none of it happened at all. Women voted like their husbands. Warren Harding was elected president instantly, and we got prohibition. That was about it. And so, voting by itself is not nearly enough to make a difference. You have to be an aggressive voter, which we're seeing more and more among women, that the women are inclined to vote differently from their husbands, their fathers, their brothers, everybody else. Much more than they were, say 10, 20, 30 years ago. And that's a real lever of power, and we'll see where that takes everybody.

Lauren Schiller:                  So can we talk about prohibition, since you brought that up?

Gail Collins:                          Nobody has said, can you talk about prohibition for a long time? I really love this. Thank you.

Lauren Schiller:                  Who here wants to talk about prohibition? Show of hands? Okay, we got one. We got one person who, okay, so we're going to talk about for you. But you talk in the book about how prohibition, while it was pushed by older women, was actually really bad for all the women, because of what it meant is that their husbands were not going to these elicit nightclubs and hanging out with the flappers, who are generally in their 20s. I had a bad backlash.

Gail Collins:                          The whole liquor thing was very weird, because it really did separate men from women. Before prohibition, one of the reasons women were so antagonistic to it, well one was that, truly, important neighborhoods, the saloons desperately tried to drag men in on pay day and take away all their money. So it was a legitimate, legitimate crusade. But beyond that, middle-class women didn't drink. And after dinner, and sometimes on weekends and whatever, their husbands and the men would go away places and drink and leave them behind. And it was a real division between the sexes, and women resented it and thought it was bad. And so, that propelled the way to, right along the way.

Gail Collins:                          And then there we were, and nobody liked it once it came. It really did not work out well at all. And it's true that then men off... Women, middle aged women, housewives, mothers, are not going to be going off to the speakeasy used to be hanging out and drinking. So if the men go, they are going to be meeting a whole new group of young women who are hanging out there. And women got very paranoid, housewives at the time. What the hell is going on? Where are these men going? And even if they weren't going anywhere, they were still looking at their husbands, is this going to happen? What's happening here? So it didn't work out nearly the way people thought it would.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, there were, eventually, some good things that came out of women getting the vote, and women actually getting political power.

Gail Collins:                          I do not want to say this was not a good thing to do, by the way. But yeah, go ahead.

Lauren Schiller:                  That it was not a good thing to do-

Gail Collins:                          To give women the vote. No, it was really, really, really good idea.

Lauren Schiller:                  It was just a slow cook, right?

Gail Collins:                          It wasn't nearly the revolutionary moment that women thought it was going to be.

Lauren Schiller:                  But eventually, out of having women in power, we got social security, we got better labor laws.

Gail Collins:                          The New Deal. Eleanor Roosevelt. Oh my God.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. Let's talk about Eleanor Roosevelt.

Gail Collins:                          Eleanor Roosevelt I think had the greatest middle age of any woman in American history, by far. God help us, she's all over the place. She is visiting places that nobody else at the top of government has ever gone to, ever. To see poor black families, to see Appalachian families. She's going to see the troops overseas. She's driving around by herself. It was driving the Secret Service, so crazy that they taught her how to use a revolver. So there she's in her car with her revolver for going to see people in Appalachian. I just, Oh my God, what a woman. And because of her influence, and because of people who are hanging out with her and because of people who had begun to move into positions of power locally anyway, you got the New Deal women, like Francis Perkins, who was the person you most remember as being responsible for social security. So no badness at all in that development, I would say.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'd love to talk about the parallels in that moment in time, to the moment in time that we're experiencing now.

Gail Collins:                          Wow, okay.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, just in terms of-

Gail Collins:                          There's Franklin Roosevelt.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. Not those guys. The women. We have a historic number of women in Congress now, and they're in positions to make a lot of change. And I think we all tend to get frustrated. Clearly we've got an issue in the White House that is preventing a lot of things from happening, but that we get frustrated with the pace of change. That why does it take so... Now we've got all these women, so how can we see more things happen more quickly, around education and health care and the so called more feminine interests.

Gail Collins:                          You really wonder if we had a different president, what this last election would have brought forward. But things are so crazy now that, just the ability to get up in the morning is about everything they can accomplish. And I find Nancy Pelosi very interesting. People complain constantly. Why isn't she doing more? Why isn't she doing more? But she is handling this thing that's happening now. I can't imagine anybody else doing, any guy up there that I've watched doing it, cannot conceive of them doing it anywhere better. You see the committee chairman, the guys, it's just not, they were not going to do any better than Nancy Pelosi. She's really controlled this thing, handled Donald Trump as well as a human being possibly could. And I like to think that's part of the future.

Gail Collins:                          And once we get past this time, will be very interesting to see what these very large number of women moving into Congress, although still a minority, and hardly any women governors, there's still a long, long way to go. Still, see what happens next. It's going to be great.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, and they are, we were talking about this earlier, they are, the majority of women, are Democrats. There's very few female, Republicans.

Gail Collins:                          Very few. It's amazing how they could even manage to avoid having more women. It's just incredible. Gosh, darn.

Lauren Schiller:                  Imagine what could get done though if there were more women, Republican politicians?

Gail Collins:                          They do work until this recent unpleasantness of the last couple of years, the women in Congress worked together very well. They had their regular things they would do, they would do softball games together. They would go out to dinner together. They had their own special place where they would hang out, and they were capable of behaving in a much more bipartisan manner than the guys were. And if things had, I think the place where they did, I'd probably still, if they still get to do it, the place that they hung out was the Strom Thurmond Room. Which I just find so... The idea that Strom Thurmond gave his name to this, tickles me so. But once this passes, we'll see what happens. It's going to be a whole new thing for sure.

Lauren Schiller:                  I like the affirmative way that you just said, once this passes. All things must pass. Well actually, let's talk about you for a minute. You're a woman with power. You write this... You look at you, you're sitting on this stage in front of all these people.

Gail Collins:                          Thank you.

Lauren Schiller:                  I feel the glow of you right here. And you write your column every week for the New York Times, and you have the opportunity to sway a lot of public opinion. And do you, this is such a weird question to ask, but do you think in those terms, if I write this, and this happens? I have this power and how must I use it?

Gail Collins:                          Not exactly. My thing has been, I've been a columnist for a really long time, before the Times I was at the New York News Day and then the Daily News before that, and somewhere along the line in the Daily News period, I was writing a local column is about local government. And at that point, New York local government was so bad. Oh my God, it was terrible. And I'd write these columns every couple of days saying, oh my God, look what they did now. Oh my Lord, it's getting worse and worse and worse. And I would go on and on like that, trying to rile up indignation and fury.

Gail Collins:                          But after a while, I was thinking, oh my God, basically I'm causing people to get up and want to throw themselves out the window. There's got to be a different way to do this, where I can tell people what's happening, without depressing them mortally. So at that point, I tried to make the columns more fun to read. So that my goal has been, for a long time now, to just get people to know about stuff in a way that doesn't make them suicidal.

Lauren Schiller:                  It seems... So far so good. I chuckle every time I read one of your columns, even though what you're conveying is just so horrible underneath.

Gail Collins:                          We're getting the votes in now, we have a contest now named the worst cabinet member. Many, many votes are coming in, I've got to tell you.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, let's talk about what it means to be old. This is a question that's in question, right? This, a certain age-

Gail Collins:                          And not argue about your age, now. Lie about it, now that we have Wikipedia. You're just stuck. Whatever age you are, you really are for sure.

Lauren Schiller:                  I feel like there's no good answer to the question, how old are you? Or you look younger than I thought you were, or you look older than I thought you were. That used to be a compliment, but now not so much.

Gail Collins:                          No, I'm 73 by the way. The story of it.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, okay, so one of the things that you... That I found in the book is that in the 1950s only about 3% of the population was over 65.

Gail Collins:                          Very tiny bit. And then the amount has just, I trust your numbers because I've completely gone blank on them.

Lauren Schiller:                  I got them from somewhere.

Gail Collins:                          But it was tiny. And it's exploded. And one of the reasons I think it's so important to talk about women maintaining careers, and men too, in their later years, is because there's going to be so many of us very soon. This world is not going to be able to support us, unless we do more earning on the side to try to keep things going a bit because it's just... And the number of people over 90 is skyrocketing. Most of them are women. And it's going to get more and more and more so because thank you, the medical profession.

Gail Collins:                          Which by way, doing history, I have to say, teeth. I think back about history, oh my God, there were no teeth. Nobody had any teeth. They found the body of a woman at Jamestown just a few years ago when they were digging around, and she was about 30 years old, and she had five teeth. That was all. So when I think about history, I do wonder off, and I'm sorry, I just changed the subject completely. Every once in a while I think, my God, teeth. Oh my Lord in heaven. This is so amazing. We've all got our teeth.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well there's been a lot of medical advancements since-

Gail Collins:                          Even more profound than that, but I just-

Lauren Schiller:                  We'll get to plastic surgery, and all the other stuff in a few minutes. Hair dye. I know that's not a medical procedure, but. So is retirement passe now? Is that not a thing anymore? If people... If 65 was the retirement age-

Gail Collins:                          Well many people do retire at 65. And to be fair, many, many people look forward to retiring at 65. It's not like the entire world is out there saying, let me stay in this job for another 10 years, this is what I really want to do. But the vision that when you stop doing, if you stop doing what you were doing when you turn 65 or whenever, that you're then going to go home and sit around is, I think, really passe. There were just so many things people are doing now. There's so many people who are working as volunteers. There's so many people doing community service. There's so many people who are just going out and doing things they always wanted to do, take a boat around the world or whatever, that they couldn't do otherwise. But that's the vision. The thing is that you don't have that sense of, okay, we're done now, we're going to go home and it's all over.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, because you get to be sticking around for another 30, 40 years.

Gail Collins:                          Damn straight.

Lauren Schiller:                  We've got to come up with a good routine. It's also in this time, it seems like a great opportunity to get involved in, say, some activism. Right? And thinking about women throughout history who have been involved in activism, and bridging that gap between the younger activists and the older activists, how those two worldviews might come together or push apart. And that's something that you talk about.

Gail Collins:                          Can I tell my Elizabeth Cady Stanton story?

Lauren Schiller:                  Yes.

Gail Collins:                          This is one of my favorite stories. This is before the civil war, and women in the North were the ones who were very, very conscious of the evils of slavery, I think, more than the men were there. They were very into the idea that it was a woman's issue, because you're talking about families being broken up, and young girls being at the mercy of slave owners, and became a very passionate issue. But you couldn't go out and talk about it in public, because the idea of women speaking out in public was just not accepted. They would throw stones at you, they would burn down your auditorium, they would call... They thought that you were all promiscuous if you were to speak out in public, you were a harlot. That was the thought that was going around, and so nobody did it. You really did not have any women getting out. Even African American women who wanted to speak out against slavery were really discouraged by their communities in many parts of the North.

Gail Collins:                          So Elizabeth Cady Stanton is right there in this point and she's dying to go out and talk about this stuff. So she suddenly announces, well, I'm going to come out, because I am a grandmother, gray hair, looking dumpy, wearing frumpy clothes here. I am a grandmother. I'm going to come and talk to you about grandmother things, our boys and our home. And I'll throw in a little bit about slavery, maybe, and a little bit about women's rights. And I've got ideas about divorce for forum that I made. And she got away with it. And she went around the country giving speeches all the time, sleeping over night in railroad stations when she couldn't get a train. Playing cards with soldiers on her way from one town to the other. She got away with it all because she presented herself as a grandmother, and her friends saw this going on and suddenly they started writing odes to menopause. Oh happy day we get to go out. This is all great. And it was a great liberation, and it was liberation through gray hair, basically.

Lauren Schiller:                  So the menopause thing comes up a lot, for obvious reasons, but that it either is going to make you sex crazy, or sex neutral or completely be the beginning of the end. Can you talk about some of the things that you learned about the change?

Gail Collins:                          Doctors didn't discover a menopause until the 1800s. Did not occur, and they didn't care. When they did discover it, they instantly decided that it was terrible and it led to your death, or insanity or something. It was just, it was never a popular. And when doctors did start to think about it, they started to think about ways to avoid it. They started with chimpanzee glands, allegedly at least, injecting women with a chimpanzee glands to save them from menopause and keep going. And of course that didn't work, but you did, as time went on, get to what led to a hormone replacement therapy, which for 20 years, it was the absolute thing that was going on in this country. Tons and tons and tons of women were doing it. And that was all about eliminating the evils of menopause.

Gail Collins:                          And it took all that time, really until they realized that hormone replacement therapy was bad for you, and you can't do it anymore for a long periods of time, before people were really willing to sit down and talk about, well, hey, this is a normal part of life. You can just do that and move on, and everything is fine. It was a bad moment for the medical profession that went on for a long period of time. But I think it's pretty well over now. It's been a long time since I've heard anybody say, oh my God, I'm going through menopause, my life is over. It's been forever.

Lauren Schiller:                  I just hear, oh my God, I'm going through menopause, I'm sweating all the time.

Gail Collins:                          That one does still come up, I've got to say. That's true.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, okay, so on that topic, the amount of work,

Gail Collins:                          I'm sorry, guys, whoever's out here, it's just-

Lauren Schiller:                  Hey, you know what? It's just, it's part of the package. There's also, I love all the stories about hair dye, and the reactions to women who dyed their hair, that the horrible dye that was actually available when it first came out. And even today, women of a certain age, or women who are going gray. Have to make this vital decision. It's a life, it's really a life altering decision. Am I going to dye my hair?

Gail Collins:                          Well my friend, Nora Ephron said, that the history of women superseding the limitations of age was not about feminism or about better life through exercise. It was all about hair dye. I was just totally into that idea, and I grabbed it. Because it really is in many ways true, that if you have the choice of deciding whether or not you're going to go gray, and either one is a perfectly logical choice. It does create an end to that whole idea that there's a particular point in life when all women go gray, and that's a marker, because clearly, two thirds of the women are not having that marker anymore.

Gail Collins:                          It was a 10 year period, I think it was from the beginning to the end of the '60s, but maybe the '70s, when the first time that women could, that was really easy to do hair coloring. You could do it at home. It was easy to go to a hair shop and get it done. 7% of women used hair coloring at the beginning of that decade, and by the end, they had to take hair color off American passports because you couldn't tell anymore. You had no idea what color people's hair really was. So it's just eliminated. It's a big thing.

Gail Collins:                          And in the early days, women, first of all was against the law in many States, allegedly, to dye your hair. Or at least they tried to pass a law. State legislatures will do anything, basically. And there was a long period of state legislatures talking about banning, or making it illegal to dye your hair, because the theory was, you could trick people into marrying you, trick men into marrying you by looking younger than you really were. A, the dyes were so terrible then that nobody would have been fooled anyway. And if you use them, your hair would fall out, or you get mercury poisoning. It just was not a reliable thing to do for anybody. But there was this paranoia on the part of state legislatures and people, guys in general, that somehow women would be able to trick you into thinking that they were much younger than they really were.

Lauren Schiller:                  There's got to be a politician who just had a terrible experience, and he was like, I am not letting this happen to any of my other male friends.

Gail Collins:                          State Senator, Fred. And he told everybody about it, it was horrible.

Lauren Schiller:                  I was also thinking about, I can't remember if this is in your book or not, but the quality of mirrors used to be not that good.

Gail Collins:                          Right.

Lauren Schiller:                  And if you've ever stayed in an old house or whatever, and you try and do your makeup, pluck your eyebrows, forget about it. So, but as the quality of mirrors got better, I'm guessing, that also intersected with the proliferation of magazines, and all of these different ways that you could beautify yourself, and all the makeup that was available to do it with.

Gail Collins:                          It's absolutely true and it was very fast, that suddenly this all turned over, and women went, hey, this could happen, that could happen. And then once it became possible, every magazine in the entire universe was warning you, if you don't use that, or that or blah, you are going to look like such a hag. You will never be able to go outside again. There was one ad I really loved. It was from I think the '40s maybe the '50s, in which a young girl is saying to her mother, mom, you're looking so young these days, because of blah, blah. And mom looked really young because she had exactly the same face as her daughter in the ad.

Lauren Schiller:                  In addition to the epiphany around the mirror. I was also just thinking about how much, these magazines, many of them, especially as the years went on, were run by women, and women perpetuating these beauty standards, which were, are, impossible for most real people who don't have Photoshop or a stylist and to make a person and a fitness trainer and yada, yada, yada to actually live up to. And that it has caused... And you can see I'm wearing lipstick, I get my hair cut just the other day, but that it has caused us women to spend so much time and money worrying about these things, and also being judged by them, and that it has been perpetuated, in a sense, by other women, women who had the possibility to change the way we think about ourselves.

Gail Collins:                          It's a great business. And I worry about cosmetic surgery, that the places at which it goes to. Crazy lengths, and you just see poor women cutting themselves up every year to try to look more and more young, and I find that very disturbing. But I have to say I've gotten used to the cosmetic thing. And I see a lot of guys who I just think, well, if you had the opportunity [crosstalk 00:32:21]. It's not my biggest worry, anyway, in the cosmic scheme of things.

Lauren Schiller:                  Coming up, Gail Collins tells us her adventure to becoming the first woman editor of the editorial page of the New York Times.

Lauren Schiller:                  Join our supporters by making a tax deductible donation at inflectionpoint.org, and clicking the support button.

Lauren Schiller:                  We're moving away from hair dye and makeup, and all of that, into the civil rights movement.

Gail Collins:                          Fantastic.

Lauren Schiller:                  Where women did, when they went to march, dress quite beautifully, and wear their hat and their lipstick and you even have a story about lipstick and suits.

Gail Collins:                          The Women's March for Peace, in particular. That was the first really anti war anti nuclear proliferation movement, that was created by middle-class housewives. And their idea was, that if you marched around wearing a shirtwaist dress, and maybe even a mink coat and high heels picketing the White House, that you would confuse people, and then they cause them to think, maybe mothers really do care about these issues, and it's not really the three crazy people down the street. And it worked, to some extent. And for a long time, younger women in the movement, were always being yelled at for not coming in with the right clothes on and stuff like that, because they thought that was a really important part of the story.

Gail Collins:                          Can I just tell one civil rights thing that-

Lauren Schiller:                  That proceeded, that was leading up to the civil rights... Yes, go.

Gail Collins:                          The thing about the civil rights movement that... I thought so much about the trajectory of African American women, which was different because they were working all the time, mostly as domestics. But when you got to the civil rights movement, when we think about the civil rights movement, we think about young people getting killed or risking their lives down South. And then we think about Martin Luther King, and all the other men who were leaders. But if you look at, say the beginning of the movement, the first person that most Americans heard about was Rosa Parks, who was a middle aged woman. And then that gave birth to, when she refused to go to the back of the bus, that gave birth to the Montgomery bus boycott, which was really the thing that caused America for the first time to think, what's going on? For the first time, really focus in on this.

Gail Collins:                          And the Montgomery bus boycott was organized by middle aged black women. They were the ones who had been out in the community forever doing social work, helping people, taking care of stuff that was going on, working on the schools, registering people to vote. And they were the ones that had those kinds of connections, who could go right in there and organize people very quickly. And nobody gave them any credit. And Andrew Young said that it was because it was, they were too much like their mothers, so they therefore it didn't want to do it. But nobody has celebrated the work of older black women in the civil rights movement nearly, nearly enough.

Lauren Schiller:                  And he specifically said that about Ella Baker.

Gail Collins:                          Yes. Ella Baker was my hero. Oh my God.

Lauren Schiller:                  Tell her story.

Gail Collins:                          Ella Baker was a great organizer in the civil rights movement, and she started out, and she spent her most heroic years working with young people, black and white in the South, trying to give them a vision of community organizing that didn't involve just having a big strike and that everybody goes away. But organizing the whole community so that people are able to take up the cause themselves, and set their own goals. And it was hard to do, because of course the kids wanted to come in and...

Gail Collins:                          But she spent her great years working on that kind of organization, and she would spend all of her nights on trains going from town to town, sitting, listening all night long to young people talking, trying to help them by listening to them think about ways to move forward. They called her their Gandhi. She did this when she had terrible asthma, and all these kids smoked the whole night long. She would sit there with respirators, listening to them with an oxygen mask on, listening for hours and hours and hours and hours, patiently, to these kids talking in order to help them to move forward. I think she's the great unsung heroine, hero, of the civil rights movement forever.

Lauren Schiller:                  Ella Baker was a middle aged woman who went and hung out with young people, and helped them rise up. But sometimes, the young people don't necessarily want the old people around.

Gail Collins:                          Don't trust anyone over 30.

Lauren Schiller:                  Exactly.

Gail Collins:                          I must admit, I was in college for that. We actually did trust many people over 30, people who are professors, men and women, and our lawyers. But it was just so cool to say that, that you just did for a while there.

Lauren Schiller:                  We would say in high school all the time to our parents. You wrote in your book, it was about the 1950s. In the 1950s, the Population Reference Bureau was a research book that warned that the country could be taken over by elderly women, since their numbers were increasing so much faster than that of the men in terms of voting power, ownership of land and corporate equities. The US could be seen on the road toward a geronto-matriarchy, control by aging females.

Gail Collins:                          Ready to go. Okay.

Lauren Schiller:                  What happened?

Gail Collins:                          Worse things could happen in the world. I can name one right now really fast. And part of it is, went with women's suffrage, and why it didn't work out the way you expected, is that women's interests are so intermingled with their husbands, their sons, their brothers, that it's very seldom that you see for any prolonged period of time women separating themselves from men and saying, we're just going to do this on our own. It's just not going to ever happen. And that was part of it. And the whole women, older women, taking over the world thing, which I'm looking forward to, has clearly been a lot slower than some people might've expected. But I think that's just paranoia. There's just a ton of that out there. People being, statisticians and poll takers, becoming paranoid about stuff that they didn't need to become paranoid about.

Lauren Schiller:                  Remember the statistic about people over 65 being such a small percentage of the population. So apparently, by 2034, there will be more people 65 and older than there are people under 18.

Gail Collins:                          The population is just exploding all the way up. And as, I think I said before, the answer to that, one of the answers is that older people are not going to be able to drop out anyway, even if they want to. They're going to have to chip in there, do stuff to help keep the rest of the country going. It's our responsibility, for heaven's sake. You just can't let these things slide and say, I've done mine. I'm gone. This is all you. That's one of the reasons I just see this incredible change, and what's going to be happening.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. You'll probably tell me that it's always been this way, but there is a movement around activism for mothers, and often, mothers in their forties whose kids are old enough, they're at school and they have time available to push forward things around ending gun violence. Mothers Against Drunk Driving is the first one that... Okay, ending gun violence. Yes, thank you. I'm thinking specifically of Shannon Watts for Moms Demand Action, and then Moms Clean Air Force is a great environmental group, but Mothers Against Drunk Driving is the first one that I have a memory of. And just thinking about these women who are old enough to have a skillset, and a focus and something that they want to see change, and not just go along with the status quo. That is such a huge asset to our country.

Gail Collins:                          It's always been this way No really. But there've been so many people like that who have talked about that throughout our history. Jane Adams was the famous leader of the first social work movement, really, among women in this country. And she worked until she really was almost ready to die, and wrote many articles as she got older about how older women were getting back in there and they were doing... It was all volunteer work, but it was very serious volunteer work in their communities. They were starting women's clubs that everybody thought were, oh my God, they're going to be writing papers about Julius Caesar and his wife's dresses or whatever, it's going to be really silly. And very fast, they went from, we're going to do study groups to, we are going to do prison reform. We're going to go and help working women in working class, working women. We're going to do stuff to pasteurized milk, for God's sake.

Gail Collins:                          So this, this has been a movement that comes and goes and comes and goes, but I think it's coming again now you. Do really see, although I talked to Anna Quinlan about that, who's been working for Planned Parenthood for a thousand years, just the rock of Planned Parenthood, and she said that she finds now that's so many older women are still working, that they're volunteers, more and more, tend to be younger women who are trying to get college credit for it or something like that. Which is a very weird and strange thought that never occurred to me before, but I'm just putting it out there. Because if Anna Quinlan says it, it's probably true.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. And those interns should get paid. Well one of the things that I, the main thing that I explore on my show, is how women rise up. So since you've studied 400 years of women rising up, is there an answer out there? Could we just put a nail in it?

Gail Collins:                          There are many, but I can tell you one from your very own life. When people ask me a lot, how did you get to be the editorial page editor at the Times or whatever. And the answer is basically-

Lauren Schiller:                  First woman.

Gail Collins:                          First women, there were some before me, but they were all guys. There were many before me, but they were all guys. And I have to tell you this, as totally in passing, and I'm sorry I'm getting off the subject, but at the Times, there is a room where the editorial board meets and they do all their deliberations and discussions. And when I was around, there were pictures on the wall, it was in the old building, of Henry Raymond, who was the first editor and editorial page editor and a few of the other really famous editorial page editors. And of course they're all guys, and I used to, once in a while, if I was feeling really sassy, I just go in the middle of the day and I'd say, guys, I've got your job. It just knocked me out. I really just always enjoyed it, always enjoyed that.

Gail Collins:                          I wanted to tell a story that has, I was talking so much about how the economy changed what happened with women and everything else, but it was also the women who changed what happened with women. Women who filed lawsuits, and who went on strike for equal opportunity, and they were almost never the people who got the rewards. At the times, the women who, was before I got there, but the day that I think the publisher or the editor, it was while back, posted a thing saying we have three new openings for editors. Any guy that's interested should just come over here and apply or something like that. But whatever it was, it just drove the women crazy because they had all had desires. They had hopes and dreams of becoming, say foreign editor, or national editor or whatever. And they were all getting shunted away to assistant travel page editor or whatever.

Gail Collins:                          And they were so angry, and they fought, they started fighting and protesting and threatening lawsuits and terrifying the management, until all these changes were made. And I guarantee you right now, the New York times is the most diversity conscious place I have certainly ever worked. They're very, very conscious of that. But this change, when it happened, didn't help those women, because they had been spending so much of their lives fighting for this stuff that they were like... They'd been... She was the travel editor, or travel deputy for 15 years. What the hell? We're not. And they were older, and they'd gotten in everybody's face. So they were thought of as a pain. The people who got all the rewards for people like me, who walked in right after that. And we were the ones who got all of the opportunities.

Gail Collins:                          And I know so many of these women. And the thing about them that just knocks me out is that they weren't bitter about it. They were so happy that they had done something that had opened up these opportunities. When I got to be editorial page editor, they were thrilled. None of them ran around saying, I could have done that, for God's sake. I didn't have the chance. It's not fair. And that to me is the definition of a great heart. Somebody who takes joy in somebody else getting the thing they fought for that they didn't get. And that's what these women were like. And I never pass up a chance to talk them.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's it. That's the answer, right? We help each other step up.

Gail Collins:                          You help each other.

Lauren Schiller:                  So when I first got the book, I thought to myself, No Stopping Us Now, is that ironic or sincere? But I feel like by the end of reading the book and this conversation, I think it's our rallying cry.

Gail Collins:                          It is totally sincere. I just look at the history, and when I think that I got to live through the point in history that changed the entire way women survive in western civilization. That changed the role of women, the role of men relating to women that had gone on forever. It changed in my lifetime and I got to see it happen. How can you not be optimistic when you think about something like that?

Lauren Schiller:                  Could you feel it? Could you feel it as each change happened? Obviously as a little baby, you're maybe not feeling things, but as you as a tween, and then in your twenties thirties and so on?

Gail Collins:                          I was really completely out to lunch about it. I had gone mostly to all girls schools and so, and they were Catholic schools, so really the male thing did not enter the equation a whole lot at all as you were coming along. And then when I was in college, we were having the free speech movement, and it was a very open movement and I felt fine about that. So it really wasn't until I got to graduate school, and there were a lot of other women organizing around women's issues. And I had no idea, and there were, there were no women faculty members in the graduate school where I was at UMass at that time, but it had never occurred to me. I was so stupid, and so dumb and I'm just every day thankful that when I was there, I ran into all of these amazing women and on and on throughout my life. They were all always way ahead of me, and it was just a privilege to come up behind them and learn stuff from them.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Gail Collins, New York Times columnist and author of No Stopping Us Now, speaking with me live on stage at the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco. I'll put a link to Gail's book on my website, inflectionpointradio.org, where you can also find future events by clicking on the events tab. I'm Lauren Schiller, this is Inflection Point, and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  Today's program was produced, in part, by the generous donation of Ellen Olsen in honor of her late mother-in-law, Margaret Nicholson, a woman Ellen says, was way ahead of her time.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's our Inflection Point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple Podcasts, Radio Public, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review, and subscribe to the podcast.

Lauren Schiller:                  Know a woman leading change we should talk to? Let us know at inflectionpointradio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible, monthly, or one-time contribution, when women rise up, we all rise up, just go to inflectionpointradio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  We're on Facebook and Instagram @inflectionpointradio. Follow us, and join the Inflection Point Society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. And follow me on Twitter @LASchiller.

Lauren Schiller:                  To find out more about today's guest, and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go, inflectionpointradio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  Inflection point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco, and PRX. Our community manager is Laura Weaver. Our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host, Lauren Schiller.

Speaker 3:                              Support for this podcast comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

 

RzDGJ3ag.jpg

How To Make America a Democracy Again - Dan Pfeiffer

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

You may know Dan Pfeiffer as a host of Pod Save America. You may know him as Senior Advisor to President Barack Obama. Or you may know him for his book, "Yes We (Still) Can: Politics in the Age of Obama, Twitter and Trump". His new book, coming in February is called "Un-Trumping America: A Plan to Make America a Democracy Again". In this episode he shares how he got into politics and what it's going to take to get America out of the political plight we find ourselves in today. This conversation was recorded on stage, presented by Cal Performances at UC Berkeley.

TRANSCRIPT. Please note, we do our best on these, please forgive or let us know about errors.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Well, I grew up in a household where politics was talked about all the time. My parents had gone to college during the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement. They had protested themselves. Even though they didn't work in politics, or go to fundraisers, or do anything like that, we talked about it all the time. It was a constant topic of discussion. So, it was always in the background in my life. I went to college in Washington DC. I got a little involved in politics with some local politics involving a dispute about parking, which meant a lot, because we needed a car to get to the grocery store outside of my college house. And did a little volunteering in presidential election. I really viewed politics originally as this very exciting opportunity to do something that I thought would be helpful and delay going to law school for a couple of years. I am 43 years old, and I have not been to law school yet.

Lauren Schiller:                  But you still have that application sitting on your desk somewhere.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I've got several LSAT books. They keep moving from house to house with me.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, you have a lot more life experience now. They'll probably let you in. That's Dan Pfeiffer. He may not have gone on to be a lawyer, but you may know him as a host on the wildly popular podcast about politics, Pod Save America, or you may know him as the senior advisor to President Barack Obama. So, do you remember anything in particular from those days growing up that was the most memorable thing your parents took you to, a meeting, or a march, or anything like that?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Well, my parents always took us voting. My mom always brought us and would bring some of my friends as well into the voting booth with her. We would get to get off school, which was very notable, because we live in a weird country where election day is not a holiday. I distinctly remember when Ronald Reagan was reelected, because my mom was incredibly upset about it. When I asked her why, it seemed very apocalyptic, and I was very nervous for a long time.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller, and this is Inflection Point. Dan Pfeiffer is also the author of Yes, We Still Can and the upcoming book, Un-Trumping America. He and I had a chance to speak on stage December 5, 2019 for an evening presented by Cal Performances at UC Berkeley. We'll be right back.

Lauren Schiller:                  Lauren Schiller:                  And we're back with Dan Pfeiffer. The first question that I had when I first learned that I would be joining you here tonight is how do you get to go work for Obama? How did you get involved in politics? You were at Georgetown. How'd you get from there to a very long stint in the White House?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         So, at Georgetown I moved off campus my junior year, and we had an extra room and a need for someone to pay more of the rent. One of my buddies brought his German partner to live in that room. His German partner was a guy named Chad Griffin, who was from Arkansas. He had gone to a small, Baptist college in Arkansas and had been an intern on the Clinton campaign, Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign. He then got a job in the White House when Bill Clinton won, worked for the White House Press Secretary at the time for 18 months, and then went to Georgetown to finish his career.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         He was the first person I had ever met who had actually had a job in politics. He had worked in the White House. He had traveled the world with Bill Clinton. He had this very cool perspective. He sort of taught me that this was a path you could take. I viewed it as a path that I could take for two years. My vision was I would graduate from college. I would go work on Al Gore's election, which was a year after I graduated. Al Gore would obviously win. If I was lucky, I'd get to work in the White House, like Chad, for a year, and then I would-

Lauren Schiller:                  Do you find any irony in the fact that this guy's name is Chad? I mean, I just had to ask you.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. We called him Hanging.

Lauren Schiller:                  You were hanging with Chad. Okay.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Chad is someone some of you may know who he is. He went on to become the president of the Human Rights Campaign and led the fight for marriage equality in this country. He remained very, very successful in politics. And I went to work for Al Gore. He lost. I said, well, I do one more presidential election. Then I'll go to law school, because the Gore election was quite dramatic, considering Al Gore got more votes and did not get to be president. It turns out that that would be a trend in American politics. In 2004, I thought I would work on a presidential campaign. I ended up, for a whole host of reasons, working for Tom Daschle, who was the Senate democratic minority leader, who was running for re-election. We lost that race. I was like, I'm not ready to quit yet. I want to do one more race.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Eventually, I went to work for a guy named Evan Bayh. He was a senator from Indiana. He had called me and asked me if I would come work for him, because he was planning on running for president in 2008. He was a very nice guy. He was sort of a rising star in democratic politics. He also was calling me, which was unusual, because I had just helped preside over Tom Daschle becoming the first Senate leader in a half century to lose his race. So, I was appreciative of the interest. I spent two years working for Evan Bayh. We were traveling to Iowa, going to New Hampshire, getting ready to run for president. We were planning it.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         In the fall of 2006, a guy named Barack Obama teases, as his book is coming out, that he is reconsidering his decision not to run for president, which caused a huge flood of interest. But on the Bayh campaign we were not going to let this get in our way. So, we decided we were going to announce. He was forming an exploratory committee. This was in December of '07, sorry, December of '06. He announces his exploratory committee. We go to Iowa. We have this great visit. We meet all these people. People are interested in him. Then our next stop is to go to New Hampshire.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         While we're in Iowa, it is announced that Barack Obama is going to deliver the keynote speech at the New Hampshire Democratic Party fundraiser in the middle of our trip. That doesn't seem good for Evan Bayh. We go to New Hampshire. I get to the airport to get on the one flight from the DC area to New Hampshire. There are 700 reporters. One of them comes up to me and says, "Dan, what are you doing here?" I said, "Well, I'm meeting my boss in New Hampshire." They said, "I didn't know you worked for Obama." We get there. Evan Bayh gets very small crowds, but it's still [inaudible 00:08:24] a good event, but there was Obama hysteria happening.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         On our last event, we're getting ready to go to the airport, and our driver, the staffer who was driving the van that Senator Bayh was in, asked the host, "What's the best way to get to the airport from here?" He's like, "Go out, get on the highway." He's like, "You know what? I would go back roads, because of the traffic from the Obama event." Evan Bayh dropped out of the presidential race three days later, which was very fortuitous for me, because Barack Obama was now planing to run for president and hiring staff. His senate chief of staff had been Tom Daschle's chief of staff, this guy named Pete Rouse. He called me and said, "Come meet with Obama. He's going to run."

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I had never met him. I had not actually even watched the 2004 convention speech. I didn't watch it in real time. So, in preparation for this meeting I watched the speech and I read his books and was pretty interested in the guy. I walked in there and within an hour I walked out having accepted a job to work on a campaign that did not yet exist. I didn't know how much money I was going to make, and I didn't know when he was going to force me to move to Chicago. It was a very impactful meeting apparently.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. So, you stayed for seven years, which is like ... Do you count working in the White House like people count dog years? You were there for seven years, so how many lives is that?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It was a long time. When I left the White House, and that was in March of 2015, when I went to tell President Obama that I had left, at that point I was the last person who had started on the first day of the campaign and worked in the White House the whole time, except one. That person was Barack Obama.

Lauren Schiller:                  Wow.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Which is a fact he pointed out to me when I told him that I was getting tired and it was time to leave. He said he was also tired. I said, "You work above the office, and you have a bed on your plane. I don't."

Lauren Schiller:                  Right. I believe you compared your hair.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. Not long before I left we had been in a meeting in the Situation Room. It was not a well attended meeting, which made me the highest ranking White House staffer in the room, which meant that I sat to the president's immediate right at the big table in the Situation Room. This was obviously not a very important meeting. I saw the president looking at me a couple times. I couldn't tell if he was trying to get my attention or something. I didn't really know. Then the next day we were flying somewhere, and so we would get ... I would meet him in the morning, and we would get on Marine One, the presidential helicopter, to fly to get on the plane.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         The president looks up from his Blackberry, looks at me again, and goes, "Hey, Pfeiffer. I noticed, when we were it the Sit Room the other day, that your hair's getting pretty gray," and I thought to myself, "Really?" I almost responded to point out that my hair was less gray than his, but then I remembered he was the president, and I bit my tongue. But revenge is a dish best served cold, because I put it in my book a few years later.

Lauren Schiller:                  Which is how I found out. We all have probably seen the West Wing and read the paper and so on, but I'm really curious. I mean, you went through a number of different jobs at the White House. You ultimately were promoted to the role of senior advisor. Can you just explain what that means? What is that job?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It's different often based on who the person is, like the person who has that job right now is Jared Kushner. It's so funny that everyone laughed at that. I didn't even make the joke yet. Jared Kushner had that job. David Axelrod had that job. Karl Rove had that job. What it really meant, when I had it, was I technically oversaw communications, politics, and digital strategy and was sort of the liaison to the president's larger political universe, his former campaign staff, the political organizations around him, but what it really was was two things.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         One was I was sort of a political communications consultant on all projects in the White House. That was my job was to go to the policy meetings, to go to the decision meetings and help people understand the political and communications ramifications of a decision, not to decide what it would be necessarily, but to say, "If you do X, here is what is likely to happen. Republicans in the Congress will freak out. That could mean this thing we're trying to do will not get passed. This will upset the Democrats that we need to vote to preserve the Obamacare or whatever else."

Dan Pfeiffer:                         But the other thing that I think was the more consequential and important thing was I was one of the few people at that point who had been with the president the longest, and it was sort of my job to help interpret his wishes and desires for others on the staff, to help be able to make decisions based on my experience about what ... take the decisions off his plate. Right? I mean, not on big things, like policy decisions or anything like that, but on ... The question would be like do we have to ask him before we agree to do this? I would know he will be annoyed if we ask, and I would know if he would be annoyed if we don't ask. That was a big part of it.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I was sort of an interpreter of presidential moods and someone that he could sort of speak directly to and trust and sort of be someone he could bounce ideas off of, outside of the context of larger meetings. I guess, therefore, I spent a lot of time traveling with, him in and out of his office, receiving late night emails and phone calls. I mean, it was an amazing experience, to be able to sort of see a person like that up close for that period of time.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. So, the time you were in the White House, how old were you?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I was ... Let's see. 2008.

Lauren Schiller:                  11 years ago.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I turned 32 right after Obama was elected. 33. I turned 33 right after Obama was elected.

Lauren Schiller:                  I can say, because I'm older than that now, and so are you, that that's pretty young. I mean, you were a young guy doing a really, really important job. So, were you in situations where you had to take an opposing view to somebody who had much more experience than you? Okay. You're looking at me like the answer is yes. So, how did you approach that?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It was really hard in the beginning. I think I probably overcompensated by being a little more aggressive or louder than, in hindsight, was probably appropriate. It was challenging. There were a lot of really big personalities. You would have to have sometimes vigorous discussions with cabinet secretaries who wanted to do things that the president does not want them to do, and it would be your job to tell them that. There was a moment, and I write about this in my first book, Yes, We Still Can, where I had sort of been the point person on helping figure out the politics around this budget deal.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         The vice president, who is ... I am from Delaware, so my entire life, until three years ago, Joe Biden was either my vice president or my senator. He's a legendary figure in my state. He would speak at my high school, a very big deal. There was a situation where the president ... We were in the vice president's office. Large portions of the cabinet were there. The vice president had struck a deal with Senator McConnell about resolving this tax dispute. We were talking to the president of the United States on the speaker phone.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I believed that the deal was not favorable enough to the president to protect his politics. I had this moment to decide, am I going to say that now, because I know how the vice president feels about it. I know how the treasury secretary feels about it. I know how the commerce secretary feels about it, and they're all in the room. I made the decision in the moment, which, in hindsight, was insane, but to tell the vice president that I disagreed. He was not mean about it, but he was displeased with me. No one came to my defense, except Barack Obama.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, that is ... I mean, I can imagine that was a both very exciting time and a very stressful time.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. It was quite stressful. I look younger now than I did then.

Lauren Schiller:                  You do. We'll go back and look at pictures. One of the things that I've been thinking about is we're on the cusp of this new election coming up. It seems like a ripe opportunity for some more hope and change. I'm wondering what you've been thinking about in terms of the similarities between this upcoming 2020 election and 2008.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I've been trying to find similarities, but there's been so much change in that brief period of time in American life, in politics, what issues are popular, what aren't, and how people get their information. You just think about it this way. When Barack Obama started running for president, the smartphone had not been invented. You did not watch videos on your phone. You got your news on the television or in a newspaper most likely. Facebook was something used by college students. Twitter was something used by people in Silicon Valley. Instagram didn't exist. Snapchat didn't exist. It was a very different world. But I was thinking about the difference between the Democratic primary electorate then and now.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think the biggest thing now, and this is because this is a reelection to choose our candidate running against Trump, that people are afraid in ways they were not afraid in 2008. Hope wasn't just Obama's message. It was that people were hopeful for a better future. We had had eight years of Bush, Iraq, Katrina, and all of the tax cuts for the rich, all of that. [inaudible 00:19:17] it was pre-financial crisis and was this hope for a better future. Now, the primary driving emotion is fear, because we've had three years now of this, and it is almost impossible to fathom what another five would look like. That is really I think changing how the candidates are acting, and it's really changing how the voters are acting.

Lauren Schiller:                  What do you think the winning slogan is going to be then? I was really banking on hope, but now I just feel depressed.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I have been thinking a lot about this question, because I still believe the American people would like to find a leader who will unite them, not divide them. Right? That we as a country can be better than our politics is right now and that someone who can speak to those aspirations can be the most powerful candidate we have against Trump, but it has to be tempered by everything we've learned since the day Barack Obama was elected. Right? That the Republicans in Congress are not going to have an epiphany and come around, that our country is ... which has always had an imperfect democracy, but in terms of our democracy, it's been heading in the wrong direction for the last decade, that the rich and powerful have more power and the people have less.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         So, I think it has to be an aspiration of a realistic message. The way I have come to describe that is sort of the domestic, political version of how John F. Kennedy thought about foreign policy, which is we have to be idealists without illusions. We can speak to people's better angels, but we have to do it with full understanding of what we're up against, both Trump and everything that created an opportunity for Trump to be president of the United States.

Lauren Schiller:                  In terms of how that message gets out there ... By the way, we are going to get to the impeachment thing. I just want to say that out loud, because this has been a crazy week on that. But I feel like it's important just to think about how these mindsets have been solidified over time to put us in such polarized camps. It feels to me like social media has played a huge part in that and its ability to create camps and tribes and incite outrage, and the things that create the most outrage are the things that get the most shared. Therefore, you end up, even if you completely disagree with the message, you end up sharing it anyway, and so you continue to amplify it, but yet when you first started out in this business we'll call it, Twitter was this thing, this weird thing, where you would tell people what you were doing. Who cares?

Lauren Schiller:                  Now, of course, it's completely blown up and has become the new bully pulpit. We're now at this point where there's a lot of talk around, well, should the technology platforms be banning advertising, and how bad are they making it for us in a multitude of ways beyond that? What are your thoughts on how we can use social media for good I guess really is the point of this question.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think a couple points. I mean, long before Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook or the folks who created Twitter created Twitter, America had been on an inexorable path of polarization. Every president has been more polarizing than the previous one, dating back to the 60s. That has to do with a whole variety of sociological things, how people are moving, homogenous viewpoints among people of similar generations, or races, education, a whole host of things. What I think Facebook in particular and social media in general has done is catalyzed this process to the point that it has made it easy to eliminate the idea of an objective set of facts.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         We used to be polarized around two different responses to the same set of facts. There is acid rain hitting the earth. What are we going to do about that? Republicans would have one view. Democrats would have another view. Sometimes there would be some consensus in the middle around it. Or the economy is doing poorly. Democrats would say invest in the economy. Republicans would say cut taxes. But it was the same set of facts. Now, we are operating on completely different universes, which makes consensus nearly impossible. By creating filter bubbles to allow people to avoid learning things and by destroying the economic model of objective journalism, social media has taken out sort of the equilibrium that was holding us together.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Now, on the question of advertising, so there's been this debate about should Twitter ban political advertising? Google limited it. There's been this pressure on Facebook to eliminate political advertising. Instead, their current plan is that politicians can lie and not be fact checked, which seems suboptimal to me and possibly advantageous to one side that may be less factual than the other. So, there's been this pressure on the left to say let's get Facebook to agree to also ban political advertising. I am deeply concerned about that, as someone who's been involved in campaigns, because Trump has a three year headstart on using Facebook to get data on his voters and potential voters. Our Democrats have not done any of that. They have spent all their time focusing on raising money among guaranteed Democratic voters.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         If Facebook were to make the decision to ban political advertising, which a lot of progressives want them to do, it would give Trump a mass advantage in 2020, but even more importantly, it would really hurt progressive challengers. Right? When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was running against Joe Crowely, she didn't have money to spend on TV. TV is quite expensive. You can run small, cheap, digital advertising campaigns on platforms like Facebook. So, ultimately I think it would be a mistake for Democrats to push Facebook in that direction, because it seems on the surface like it would hurt Trump. It would actually hurt us more, which is probably why we're pushing for it, because that's a very on brand thing to do.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. What about truth in advertising? I feel like I should know the answer to this question, but in the advertising world, when you're advertising a product, let's say pancakes, you pretty much have to say the truth about the pancakes, but when you're advertising a candidate on TV, does the same standard apply? Then is it an even lower standard when it comes to social media, because no one's actually checking?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It does apply on TV. It is a quite high bar, and it's left in the hands of the TV stations. I think that they have some concerns about in the end FEC accountability. On social media there are no rules, because we stopped legislating before Facebook was inventing, so we have no ... There are lots of bills that would apply these similar standards. None of them have passed, because it's not in the interest of one party to pass such laws. Yeah. It's not great.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. What about the mainstream media? I mean, a lot of your job was spent trying to figure out how to get the best press in the mainstream media, before social media became as big as it was. Clearly, perceptions of that have been changing, well, on both sides.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         This past couple years is the first time in my 20 years in politics where attacking the media was good politics for Democrats, probably because they've been doing this for years, liberal bias, et cetera. That's why Fox News exists. It has been their strategy for a long time. There's a lot of anger among progressives for how the media, and the New York Times in particular, covered Hillary Clinton in 2016. There was a lot of frustration among democratic voters that we have someone that they view as a racist liar in the White House and most mainstream media are unwilling to call him either a racist or a liar. But I think the fundamental frustration among Democrats with the media is that we misunderstand it.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         We live in this world where we think that well coiffed investigative reporters who look like Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman are going to take down presidents, that that is their job to do that. That is not their job. They don't view it as their job. It's sort of this all the presidents men view of politics. In Democrats, we love the media. We describe to newspapers, listen to NPR. I think generally we like to believe in a world where facts matter and referees can blow the whistle on lies, but the problem we have is the media does not view that as their job. The media is ultimately a business. I think most reporters do a very good job at what they do, but ultimately their job is not to help defeat Trump. Their job is to tell people things.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         As Democrats, we have not adjusted our campaign strategies to reflect the way that media works now. So, I think most campaigns, and this was particularly true in 2016, were very focused on what ... The way you get your message out in a campaign would be I'm going to run a television ad, or I'm going to tell the media things, and then the media will tell voters, but now we live in this super hyperactive media environment where people have a million choices. They can watch Netflix. They can watch things on their own time. They don't have to watch the news and read newspapers. So, it's much harder to get information from the candidate's mouth into the mind of voters.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         So, Democrats need to think not about what we tell the media, but how we get the information from the media into the minds of voters we care about. That is a very different communication strategy we've ever had before, and it really requires us almost disabusing ourselves of these romantic notions about the role of the media as the fourth estate, as these guardians of democracy, because despite the slogans in the TV ads they run to get us to subscribe to the media, that's not what they do. That's not a critique of them. It is just the fact of it's understanding who they are, the role they play, and how the media environment has changed.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, I think part of the frustration, if that's the right word, is that there's no equivalent to Fox News on the other side.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Are you familiar with Pod Save America? I'm kidding. We are not like that.

Lauren Schiller:                  Except for this podcast, Pod Save America. Has anyone listened to it? Well, in a way that is true, because you guys, you speak your mind. You have an opinion. Well, I mean, I guess the right would consider you a propaganda machine, but when I listen to it, that's not how I think about it, but maybe a viewer of Fox News doesn't think of them as a propaganda machine. Do you think they do?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I don't know. No. Probably not. I think they have been convinced that all other media is biased and this is the one true source of information. In my 20 years in politics, I have been to at least one million meetings where someone said, "How do we get the democratic Fox News. It's incredibly challenging, because Pew, the research foundation, does these studies I think it's every year or two years about the media habits of the American people. Republics list ... They ask them like, "Where do you get your news?" It is overwhelmingly Fox News, the Drudge Report, and then Breitbart, these other things, but they live on a conservative media diet. Democrats are like CNN, NBC, the New York Times. They have a wide media diet that includes some progressive outlets who are ... I don't know. Progressive's not even the right word. They have some outlets, like NPR, that I think cover ... They're objective, but they often cover issues of interest to more liberal voters.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think this is a huge failing on the democratic part, because when Donald Trump says something, he has Fox News, he has Rush Limbaugh, he has Breitbart, he has the Daily Caller all pushing his message into the social media conversation in America. When Democrats do say something, we have no one doing that. I think a world in which the majority of media is, quote unquote, traditional, objective media is long gone. We really live in a world of information warfare right now, and we have no soldiers on the field. So, we need a gazillion more Crooked Medias, the company that created Pod Save America. We need lots of progressive voices helping shape the conversation in this country. Propaganda would not work as a democratic strategy because of the media diets of our voters. You would know we're telling you lies.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         So, it should be factual. It should be based in reality, but it should be progressive. It should draw attention to our issues, because there is this financial incentive for the traditional media, which depends on Facebook for a lot of their advertising revenue, to write things that are about what Trump is talking about, because that's what gets clicks, which is what gets advertising dollars. What Democrats have to do is create this alternative media ecosystem that is not dependent on the Trump media economics, but that relentlessly pushes out democratic media. This is a place where I hope our cadre of billionaires, and entrepreneurs, and business types will invest in progressive media outlets who will help carry the message out.

Lauren Schiller:                  Have you laid that challenge down?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         So many times, and no one responds.

Lauren Schiller:                  Come on, people. Is anyone out there that might be able to take that on?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         If you're a billionaire, we'll talk.

Lauren Schiller:                  All right. Meet us in the hallway.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Even a millionaire.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, one of the other things I've been thinking about is just how the messages get distilled on the right, simplified to such, I don't know, simplified to such simplistic terms. I'm trying to think of more adjectives here. I'm preparing for a conversation about the Green New Deal. I'm reading about what the opposition is to it. What I'm hearing is that these people who want to put forward the Green New Deal want to take away your ice cream and hamburgers. That's because they want to limit the number of cows that get slaughtered basically and how agriculture is done. But there's a much more complicated story behind it, but yet they've got this total knack for just simplifying it. They want to take away this or that from you.

Lauren Schiller:                  I ran across this piece of research that talked about if progressives could figure out how to talk about their ideas in the terms that might be used for more conservative values, that they might get more done or they might get more people on-board with that idea. Can we do that? I mean, can we talk in shorter sentences? I obviously can't right now, but ...

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think there's two different issues here. One is can we communicate complicated ideas in easily understood fashion? Democrats must be better at that for sure. Most politicians are very bad at it, which makes you wonder how they won, but it is true. It is not a natural skillset. The Republicans can get away with some of this, because they're communicating through friendly media outlets to a friendly audience. Right? The hamburger and airplane thing, the ice cream thing, whatever [inaudible 00:35:47], particularly the Green New Deal, is complete BS. You could never have that conversation with a non-propaganda based reporter. If Nancy Pelosi stood before the Capitol Hill Press Corp and made an argument that ridiculous, they would savage her, and she would care about that, because she is a person who cares about truth. If you don't care about truth and you're only talking to Fox, you can say whatever you want.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Now, I am very suspicious of this sort of linguistic silver bullet discussion. Right? Whenever Democrats have trouble and we're not winning elections, or whatever it is, we bring in linguists, and we're like ... Do you guys know who Frank Luntz is? He's this Republican pollster who famously made a lot of terrible things sound less terrible. People are always like, "Who's our Frank Luntz?" I am less concerned about the specific wording of the message, although it should be clear and inspiring, than the broader story we are telling. Right?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Obama's great success as a politician is not that he had some amazing slogan, although yes, we can was a great slogan. It was that everything he did told a broader story about where the country was, where he wanted to take it, and why he was the right person to take it there. When we try to reverse engineer our ideas from what we think is most appealing to people is when we lose the forest for the trees. I am a big advocate in figure out your story first and your bumper sticker second. Right? It is almost impossible to come up with a brilliant, pithy, 280 character rationale for your candidacy if you can't give a 30 minute speech about why you're running for president. Right? Story first. Slogan second.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, there was this piece of research done around if progressives talked in terms of more conservative values, that they'd get more done. If they talked about the things they want to advance in terms of family values and using some of the terms that you hear more on the right than you hear on the left, that those ideas that seem more progressive and to the left would be more adopted by people on the right.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I mean, I've seen the research. I have some skepticism about it. What I do think is very true is in order to communicate any idea to persuade people to things, it has to resonate emotionally. Right? You have to be able to draw a connection to a set of values, because all policy discussion in politics in campaign season are largely about ... they are a proxy conversation for the values and character of the person you're electing. Right? It's not that I love their plan. It's that I trust them to stick to this plan, or if they have to change the plan, to make the right decision, because I trust who they are. Right? That is really important.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It's also important to remember that Democrats and Republicans have two different strategies. Republicans win elections when fewer people turn out. They want to motivate a committed base of certain Republican voters to vote, people who vote regularly, and they want to persuade people in the middle or who are non-voters that all politics is terrible. It's a lesser of two evils. Don't bother. Right? Cynicism is their friend. So, fear works for them. For Democrats, our math is very different. We have to persuade some people in the middle, but we also have to convince people who vote infrequently or have never voted before to get involved in the process. So, where fear works for them, inspiration and hope works for us. So, we're often going to be operating playing two completely different games in order to achieve the same outcome, which is winning elections.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Sounds nice.

Lauren Schiller:                  Does anyone here want to win an election in 2020? Okay. Actually, this idea of what motivates you, is it fear or is it hope, I mean, do you feel like we have people on the democratic slate who are raising their hand to run for president right now that are extremely motivating and are going to have what it takes to get people excited about turning out to the polls?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I do. I do. I think we have a tremendous field of candidates. I was obviously disappointed that Senator Harris ended her campaign, because I thought she was someone who had perhaps the greatest potential of anyone running to replicate an updated version of the Obama Coalition. This is a hard time in the process. The primary process is about exposing the warts of all the candidates. You basically have to spend a year, year and a half engaged in this sort of absurd Kabuki theater before a single person casts a vote. We're very focused on what folks are not good at or where they might fail or why they might lose at this point in the process. Most people start voting and you get the validation of the electorate than I think they always ... I remember someone saying to me, when we were getting ready to run again Mitt Romney, and he was looking ridiculous, in 2012, and this person who had worked in politics before said, "As soon as you win the nomination, they put an S on your chest, because you have just accomplished an amazing feat." So, I think that will happen with our nominee as well.

Lauren Schiller:                  When you look at what happened with Kamala Harris' campaign, what are your thoughts on that? I was so sad to see it, and it felt like it happened so suddenly.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Right at the time that I saw the news I was in my head crafting a column I was going to write about how this could be her moment for a comeback. Fortunately, I had procrastinated on Monday, so I hadn't-

Lauren Schiller:                  Dan.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         ... put in any words ... Well, it wasn't going to get out there. I don't think the deciding factor was my column on Crooked.com. They're just like waiting. When is that coming? Hitting refresh over and over again. They're like, "I guess we'll mail it in." Because I thought she had been through this very rough patch. If she could make a few changes, there would be an opportunity for, because I think she's a tremendously talented politician, for a comeback narrative. There's still 60 days until Iowa. When John Kerry won the democratic nomination in '04, his campaign was in the toilet and he rose up. John McCain, when he won in 2008, his campaign was in the toilet. All the stories that you've read about Kamala Harris' campaign were also written about those. I was like this could be she has potential here.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         But ultimately I think two things happened to that campaign. One is it was an imperfect campaign. They made mistakes. She was never fully able to articulate, despite how talented a communicator she is, articulate a specific rationale for why she was running, other than she thought she would beat Trump. I find that compelling. There was the famous Roger Mudd question of Ted Kennedy, which is, "Why are you running for president?" That's a thing you should be able to answer before you get in. But, having said that, I think it also speaks to the fact that Kamala Harris, senator from California, who had 20,000 people show up at her announcement not very far from here, raised a bunch of money, had this amazing, viral moment, like with Bill Barr, and with Brett Kavanaugh, and on the debate stage with Joe Biden, left the race two months before a single vote was cast. I think that says so much about the racial and gender prejudices that go into the concept of electability, which is we are so ...

Dan Pfeiffer:                         All of us are so scared of losing to Trump. This is the difference between 2008. According to every poll, any person you talk to, the single thing we care about most is who is most likely to beat Trump. We're reviewing the prism of the best way to beat Trump entirely through who can persuade some group of white men in Wisconsin to vote for a Democrat. That has provided a tremendous advantage to white candidates and white, male candidates in particular, because what happened to Kamala Harris was she made some mistakes and then she lost the perception that she could win and the bottom fell out. Now, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg have all made mistakes of equivalent level to the ones that Kamala Harris made in her campaign, and they are doing fine, because they are bolstered by this idea that is incorrect that the best way to win is to persuade white voters in the mid-west and that the best person to persuade white voters in the mid-west is a white person and a white male in particular.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Now, I would note that we had a president recently who won Wisconsin by 14 points, won Michigan by almost 20 points, won Pennsylvania by a bunch, won Florida, won Indiana once, won North Carolina once, won Virginia twice. That person was not some white governor from the mid-west. That was Barack Hussein Obama from the South Side of Chicago, from Hawaii via Indonesia with a father from Kenya. I'm deeply concerned about the fact that we are going to most likely have a debate stage in November that has seven candidates on it, all white, five white men, two white women. I think that is going to disadvantage the conversation, because Kamala Harris had started this conversation in the last debate, which I think is so important, which is persuading white men in Wisconsin is not enough. You do have to do that. That's what the math is, because we have an electoral college. But you also have to turnout communities of color. We need a candidate who can do both those things, and we have to view it through the prism of both of those things.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think it's really problematic that the facts that are influencing the race most are polls from Iowa, the state I love, because Barack Obama would not be president without Iowa. They gave him a tremendous gift and show of support, but it is a state that is very white. Those polls are influencing everything. They're influencing donations. They're influencing media coverage. They're influencing the polls in more diverse states, like South Carolina. If nothing dramatic happens here, we as Democrats, need to fundamentally rethink our primary process. As a larger political conversation in the media, social media, pundits, all of us as voters have to disabuse ourselves of the notion that the best way to win is to nominate a white man. We know this, because we won twice with a black man, and we took the House in 2018 by running women of all races all across this country. We have to remember the most recent lessons of history.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. I have one more question, and then I really want to talk about what's happening with the impeachment, which is there's this famous moment, and you do talk about it in your book, Yes, We Still Can, about how you got Obama on the set of Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis. Does anyone remember that? Yeah. What I didn't remember at the time was that he was really there to plug Obamacare, Healthcare.gov. Right?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  But I'm wondering if there is a candidate on the democratic slate that you could see, if Between Two Ferns was still a thing, sitting there doing that. The charisma test basically. Right?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         What's that?

Lauren Schiller:                  It's the charisma test basically. Can you-

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I think every candidate has to run a strategy that is authentic to them. What would work for Barack Obama would not work for Hillary Clinton. What worked for Barack Obama would not work for Joe Biden, or Elizabeth Warren, or whatever else. Obama I think had a particularly natural sense of comedic timing. His correspondent dinner speeches were quite funny. He riffed, despite the many hours spent editing, and trimming down, and making essentially appropriate the Between Two Ferns script, the president basically tossed it out and did his own thing. The very mean jokes about Zach Galifianakis not being Bradley Cooper were all Barack Obama.

Lauren Schiller:                  Wait. Did you go to school with Bradley Cooper? Is that [crosstalk 00:49:25]?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         We didn't hang out. He was a couple years ahead at me at Georgetown. I did not know him to be Bradley Cooper. I knew him to be the guy that many of the women that I knew were particularly fond of. He was famous on campus, because he had very long locks in a ponytail, and he kind of had a European satchel he wore, and everyone called him Fabio. Years later, someone was like, "Fabio was in this movie called the Hangover." Look. I think the candidates this time have been very ... Elizabeth Warren just did an escape room with Desus & Mero on Showtime.

Lauren Schiller:                  I missed that. Okay.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         It is quite good. They almost didn't get out, which would have been devastating for the candidate with a plan I think, but they made it. Bernie Sanders was also on Desus & Mero and was really funny. I think Bernie Sanders could do a lot of this stuff. Elizabeth Warren showed a lot of chops there. Pete Buttigieg has done every media outlet humanly possible and succeeded on all of them. I don't think it could be just like Obama, but the candidates, because it's so hard to get attention in this environment, are doing a lot of really interesting things. So, I hope they continue that as president.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. All right. Did anyone listen to any of the impeachment hearings? Yeah. I'm fascinated by ... I was under the impression that the Democrats were trying to slow walk this, and now suddenly it seems like it's going really fast and that the articles of impeachment will be filed before Christmas, which is just in a few weeks. What are your thoughts about how this is unfolding, why it's unfolding at that pace? If there any chance anything is going to go differently than we might expect along party lines?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I have been an advocate for a long time that the Democrats should impeach Trump and that it should be a wide-ranging inquiry that looks at not just Ukraine and the things at the heart of the Mueller Report, but the fact that all of our tax dollars are going to his pocket via his hotels. There is a textbook example of an impeachable offense that comes out every day. We just discovered he gave a $400 million no-bid contract to a donor in North Dakota to build part of the fake wall. There is crimes everywhere, and we should investigate them.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         But I have to say, as I sit here now, that the way Adam Schiff has handled these hearings today was so flawless, and the evidence is so ... The fact that that man never once raised his voice at Jim Jordan, if we could nominate him for a Nobel Prize, I would do it. But the evidence is so overwhelming of what Trump did. The fact that what Trump did is literally the most obvious example of an impeachable offense that any constitutional scholar could conjure is that I think we should proceed at this pace, because what has benefited Democrats in this argument thus far is the facts are on our side, and the media's on our side. But I think, knowing Democrats as I do, and no one knows them as well as Nancy Pelosi does, if it lingers too long, we're going to start getting these moderate Democrats in purple districts calling Politico and venting their concerns to the media, instead of using an inner monologue like they should. We'll start to look divided. I think our unity is on our side. We should proceed as we do.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. That's to get it through the House. Then when it goes over to the Senate, is there any chance of it going ...? We can all guess that they're going to have some discussion, and then they're going to decide that they don't agree. Do you think it's going to go any differently than that?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         No. I think that's how it's going to go. There's actually something that's really interesting about this. I was accidentally watching CNN the other day. Joe Lockhart, who was the White House press secretary when Bill Clinton was being impeached, was talking about the differences between then and now. Even though that both of these were mostly partisan affairs, what Joe said that I thought was really interesting was that Democrats back in '98 criticized Clinton's conduct and the things he did, but decided it didn't rise to the level of impeachment.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         What is different now is the Republicans won't even criticize what Trump did. They cannot even admit the fact that ... it is a credible-ish argument to say, "Look. It's probably inappropriate what the president did. Rudy Giuliani was running off on his own. He seems like kind of a loon. The White House is not particularly well-run. But we have an election in 11 months, and you shouldn't remove our president from office for that." But they can't even admit that what the president did was wrong, because there must be a complete fealty to Trump and this Republican administration. The other thing I just want to say about impeachment is ... I don't know. Did you guys watch the hearing with the law professors?

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         There are two things I took from that hearing. One was the look on all the three professors' faces the Democrats invited as they're getting asked these questions, it's like if they in their constitutional law class asked a student to give them an example of an impeachable offense and they wrote out what Trump did, they would penalize that student for not being creative enough, because it was so obvious. They're just sitting there like ... You look and they're just like, "What are you people talking about? Of course it's impeachable. It's exactly what the founders meant is you can't try to extort foreign countries for political benefit. That's why we have it."

Dan Pfeiffer:                         The other thing that I thought was notable was the Republicans kept saying, "Look. Impeachments should not be partisan. They should be bipartisan affairs." I'm sitting there saying, "Well, you know who could change that? You." In fact, it is bipartisan, because Justin Amash, a Republican congressman from Michigan, supports impeaching Trump. What do the Republicans do? They kicked him out of the party. Sorry. I get very frustrated watching television.

Lauren Schiller:                  Do you have any thoughts on how it will affect the election outcome?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         If you were to ask me is it more likely to be positive for Democrats, negative for Democrats, or neutral, the answer is probably neutral, because we live in this terrible memory hole, where it was only two months ago that Trump used a Sharpie to alter a hurricane map in order to reverse engineer a tweet to truth, which is a federal crime. You are not allowed to alter weather maps.

Lauren Schiller:                  Is that true, that's a federal crime?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  Why isn't that in the ...? Do you think maybe that'll be in the articles?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         We could be here for years doing the various crimes. I don't know that people remember it. I do know, from some of the polling that we've done at Pod Save America, that one of the things that most annoys the voters that Trump needs to persuade, people who voted for Trump in 2016, but disapprove of him now, people who voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 instead of Trump, these sort of middle of the road, moderate Republicans or independents, the tweeting and the crazy, the chaos is a real problem for them. They're becoming exhausted by it. So, there has been this political advantage of keeping Trump at an 11 for the last few months. Right? Where he's having temper tantrums at NATO. He's going home with his tail between his legs.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         In working for Obama, like I mentioned this earlier, that in August of 2001, Obama's poll numbers were basically what Trump's are, not good. That is not a good thing. As the Republican primary was heating up and true giants of public life, like Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann, were debating on stage, we had this very specific plan to focus Obama as a president, focus on the economy, all these things. Between Labor Day of 2011 and New years, Obama's approval rating went from 39 to 49. On election day in 2012, Obama's approval rating was 49. So, we basically won that election in the fall of 2011. This is the moment where Trump should be gaining strength and undoing the damage that's been done. By doing impeachment, Democrats have kept him occupied, and he is on trajectory to end this year at the same place he was in the summer, and that is a problem for him.

Lauren Schiller:                  You have a new book coming out called Un-Trumping America, A Plan To Make America A Democracy Again. Give us some scoop. What are we going to get out of that book?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         The book is based on the idea that Trump did not break our democracy. We have Trump, because our democracy is broken. Don't get me wrong. There is nothing more important than beating Trump in 2020, but that is not going to be enough. Democrats have to engage in an aggressive, proactive, strategic strategy to fix our democracy. We have to fix our problems in the Senate. We have to eliminate the filibuster. We have to make DC and potentially other places a state. We have to take on fixing our courts.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         We have to make ourselves the party that fights for democracy, because on the current path, even if Trump loses in 2020, on the current path America is on, because of voter suppression, gerrymandering, stolen Supreme Court seats, we are in a world where a growing progressive, diverse majority of Americans will be governed by a shrinking conservative minority of mostly white Americans. That is an unsustainable situation for our country over the longterm. Democrats have to take that on, because if you care about Medicare For All, Green New Deal, gun safety legislation, none of them will happen if we don't fix our democracy. There is not going to be a world where Mitch McConnell is going to all of a sudden give 10 votes for a true gun control proposal, or for Medicare For All, or Medicare For Some, or Medicare for one additional person. So, we have to recognize who the Republicans are, what they've done to our democracy, and we have to be the ones who fix it. That's what my book is about.

Lauren Schiller:                  All right. Is there a plan in there?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. Every chapter is an item of sorts.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. That comes out in-

Dan Pfeiffer:                         February 18th next year.

Lauren Schiller:                  And you can pre-order it?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         You can pre-order it now.

Lauren Schiller:                  Are you still donating?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Yes. Thank you. You're doing such a great job of this.

Lauren Schiller:                  You're welcome.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I am a naturally terrible book hocker.

Lauren Schiller:                  I was in marketing.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         You're great. What are you doing around February? I could use you for a month.

Lauren Schiller:                  We'll talk.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         In the presale period, between now and February 18th, I'm going to donate a portion of the proceeds from every book sold to Fair Fight, which is Stacey Abram's organization, to protect the right to vote. Thank you for that just-

Lauren Schiller:                  You're so welcome. I think it's great you're doing that. What would you like to leave everyone here with in terms of where they should most focus their energy, be engaged to make a difference for Democrats?

Dan Pfeiffer:                         I want to just say first that in my time in politics, I have never seen a wave of activism like I've seen since election day 2016. We have people, as Barack Obama would call them, young people and the young at heart, marching, knocking on doors, canvasing, voting, getting involved. That is why Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House. That is why Obamacare is still the law of this land. It is why we have been able to stop a lot of the worst things that Trump wants to do is that people got involved in politics. They saw what happened in 2016, and they saw that you cannot ... that citizen is a full-time job in America. You do not get to take a day off. You have to fight every single day for your rights, for your community, for what happens.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         If I could encourage anyone to do anything, whatever time you have, full-time, part-time, while you're waiting in line at the grocery store, to hook up with an organization like Swing Left or Indivisible. Go work for a candidate. Volunteer your time. Register people to vote. Find five friends of yours on Facebook who preferably live in Wisconsin, and register them to vote. Use your social media platforms, if you have them, to push back on Republican lies. The ell democratic stories. Tweet, Instagram, Facebook, whatever about the candidate you care about, because Republicans are always doing that.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         Just get involved in any way you can that's comfortable for you, because if we do that, if all of you do that and we win this election in 2020, we keep the House, we take the Senate, we send Donald Trump packing to whatever federal institution he's going to spend his retirement, then I ... If we do that and then everyone stays involved, I think it would be such a beautiful irony if the election of the worst citizen in our country activated a generation of citizenship that extends well beyond this presidency. So, anything you can do to get involved will help.

Lauren Schiller:                  Thank you. That was Dan Pfeiffer. Our conversation was presented by Cal Performances at UC Berkeley. Dan is a host of Pod Save America, former senior advisor to President Barack Obama, and author of the book, Yes, We Still Can. As you heard, he has a new book on the horizon called Un-Trumping America. I'll put a link to both books on my website, InflectionPointRadio.org, where you can find future events by clicking on the events tab. I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point, and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  Today's episode was made possible by the generous support of the Harnish Foundation. That's our Inflection Point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple Podcasts, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NRP one, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know a woman leading change we should talk to? Let us know at InflectionPointRadio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible, monthly or one time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to InflectionPointRadio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at InflectionPointRadio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point society. Our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small, daily actions. Follow me on Twitter at LASchiller.

Lauren Schiller:                  To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go, InflectionPointRadio.org. Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco and PRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver. Our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host, Lauren Schiller. Support for this podcast comes from the Corporation For Public Broadcasting.

Dan Pfeiffer:                         From PRX.

 

Screen+Shot+2019-12-13+at+5.17.33+PM.jpg

Eve Rodsky is Ending Gendered Division of Labor at Home

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

When Eve Rodsky found herself sobbing on the side of the road over a text about blueberries, she knew something had to change. Hence began her seven year quest to create a more equitable division of labor at home. Her book is called "Fair Play. A Game-Changing Solution for When You Have Too Much to Do (and More Life to Live)" and her solutions are based on extensive research with experts from sociologists to neuroscientists to behavioral economists and conversations with couples all over the country.

TRANSCRIPT: We do our best, please forgive or let us know any errors.

Eve Rodsky:                           I find myself sobbing on the side of the road over a text my husband, Seth, sent me and it just said, "I'm surprised you didn't get blueberries." And you can picture the scene. I just had a new baby, my second son, Ben was just born. I am on the side of the road sobbing with a breast pump and a diaper bag in my passenger seat. I have returns for a new baby in the back seat of the car, because God forbid they have more than a 30-day return policy for clothes. I have a client contract on my lap with a pen, sort of a sticking me in the vagina as I'm trying to mark it up at every red light traffic stop. As I'm zooming to pick up my older son, Zach, who's about almost turning three at the time, in his toddler transition program.

Eve Rodsky:                           In America, since we really value working mothers, those programs are like 10 minutes long. So I was trying to zoom back and I was like, "Okay, I'm probably going to get into an accident if I'm crying, and my contract's going to get all runny." So I pulled over the side of the road, I just started crying. I knew I was going to be late to pick up Zach, but that was a day I always say, "Thank God Seth sent me that text." Still married. We're very happily married, thanks to Fair Play. But back then it felt like my breaking point, and I said to myself, you know, I'm done. This is not the career marriage combo I thought I was going to have.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and that is Eve Rodsky, the author of a new book, a revolution called Fair Play. We spoke on stage for Inforum at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco this October, to a very lively house. What is this Fair Play you might ask? Well, here's what it's the opposite of.

Eve Rodsky:                           Second shift, mental load, emotional labor. But my favorite came out of a 1987 article by a sociologist named Arlene Kaplan Daniels, and her article is called Invisible Work. And why I love that one so much was because you can't value what you don't see.

Lauren Schiller:                  Eve set out to find out why women are what she calls the she-fault, for all things domestic and more to the point what can be done about it. This is Inflection Point with stories of how women rise up.

Eve Rodsky:                           I had women saying to me, WTF, I'm doing it all. Another woman said to me, "At this rate, after looking at this spread sheet I'm not going to stay in my marriage." And so I realized I had unleashed this rant without a solution. And every other book up until Fair Play, every other book had said, make a list. But there is a problem when you make a list sometimes, right? Because you enter consciousness. But if you don't have a solution, when you're woke and you just are sitting in that resentment, it actually can be worse before it gets better.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so that's where I realized I needed to put my mediator hat on and say, I do this for a living. I develop systems. I'm a Harvard trained mediator. I am product of a single mother who vowed this one happened to me. I went to my first equal rights amendment march when I was 15 months old. I was there.

Lauren Schiller:                  You were? Oh my God.

Eve Rodsky:                           We were there together. It was still happening to me. So I went on a quest to find out if that was true. And the good news for Fair Play, the bad news for society is that it was happening to lots of other women too.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yup. Well since you mentioned your mom and you mentioned that march, and maybe if I go back through old photos I can find you as an infant.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah, I have that photo.

Lauren Schiller:                  I was only like seven. But anyway tell us about your mom a little bit and growing up with her, and like what you used to do for fun on your birthday.

Eve Rodsky:                           Oh yeah. So my mother, we didn't have a lot of money for fancy birthday gifts. Even if we did, I'm not sure she would have given me any, because she doesn't really believe in possessions. But instead what we would do on my birthday, she said she would give me the gift of being the change I want to see in the world. That's the Gandhi quote. And so what we did was she said, I could look at anything I wanted, any civic engagement that was happening in Washington DC. We lived in New York City.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so around my birthday, she said she'd buy me a Greyhound bus ticket, and we'd pack lunch and we'd go down, and usually it was a march. So every year my birthday starting around seven, we'd go to Washington D.C. and we'd march for whatever social justice civic engagement thing was happening at the time. And I think it really impacted me because a, obviously it's this idea of not materialism b, it's this idea of birthdays, being gratitude for other people, but c, it was the camaraderie to understand that if you go and there's other people there, there's more people than you, who are caring about an issue and that leads you to do more.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so that was also like the beauty, my love letter to you. Fair Play is a love letter to women, and it's also become a love letter to men. Because I get to share your stories and that's sort of the beauty of the march of this idea that we're all in this together. And it was the cathartic thing for me was that, it wasn't just a me problem. My favorite sociologist C. Wright Mills says, "Private lives, public issues." And I realized this was a serious public issue, yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  So in the start contrast to your moment on the side of the road, you tell a story in the book about being on an airplane and checking off this dude across the aisle. Can you share the story and kind of what epiphany that brought?

Eve Rodsky:                           Absolutely.

Lauren Schiller:                  We'll hear that story and more right after this short break.

Eve Rodsky:                           So the man on the plane, I call this case of the man on the plane. My cousin and I, right when I was discovering all these issues, getting to consciousness about what was happening, I was becoming the defaults. Or like I like to say in the book that she-falls, for every single thing for my household and family, regardless of whether we work outside the home, women do two thirds of what it takes to run a home and family regardless of whether we work outside the home. So before that was a statistic I was undeniably living, but I didn't know at the time.

Eve Rodsky:                           So around the time when I was undeniably living this, but didn't know it at the time, I was on a plane with my cousin, she was coming back to L.A., she was coming out for work. I was coming home from a work trip and we had our grab and go Chicken Caesar Wraps. We went to Hudson News to buy presents for the kids. The second we enter boarding area, DirecTV decides to call me. I'd forgotten I'd scheduled a satellite installation appointment from six months earlier. If anyone's ever dealt with ATT, you don't want to ever deal with not taking that satellite appointment.

Eve Rodsky:                           So I'm trying to install a satellite dish on FaceTime with these men at my house. My cousin at the same time, her phone blows up, her au pair didn't know where to go for soccer practice, and didn't have the cleats or the shin guard. So she's sending him back home. The au pair back home to get her stuff, and we're having this very interactive boarding session. As we get to our seats, my cousin, as I'm still on the phone with ATT, realizes she left her laptop bag back in the boarding area.

Eve Rodsky:                           So we're pushing through to try to get back off the plane. I'm screaming the whole, the plane, the first class flight attendants weren't that happy, that people all the way back in coach were trying to disrupt the first class passengers. She gets off the plane, we get back on the plane, and it was this collective staring at us like, "Ladies, get your shit together."

Eve Rodsky:                           Now on the other side of the plane where you're sitting, this man walks on and we became very interested in this man, because he's about our age. He just takes out a laptop. He literally has no luggage, and we see sort of his screensaver is a really cute brunette, and some kids on his screen saver and he just starts typing, just starts typing. And somehow he manages to finish a PowerPoint deck as we're in the air. And then my cousin keeps looking over and she's like, "What is he doing? He's like solving world peace. He's like solving like calculus."

Eve Rodsky:                           He was using this sort of weird grid, this geometric grid, and then he fell asleep. And then he was doing some candy crush on his phone and there was obviously no good movies on to be watched. We were just became sort of obsessed with him and about five hours into the flight from New York to L.A., my cousin just looks at me and says, "I just wish I was that man." And it was this idea, right, that what is the value of an unencumbered mind? It really is truly priceless. And Virginia Woolf talks about this, almost a hundred years ago that Shakespeare couldn't have been a woman because her mind is too encumbered.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so that really got me thinking about the cost of women, right? The cost of women, of being on our side of the plane, and the motherhood penalty for being seen as not having our shit together, and what the beauty is. And so that set off this idea of the pricelessness of an unencumbered mind. So then from there, my passion, what I call my unicorn space, became this idea of how do we get women, how do we get women to have less of an encumbered mind? We're never going to have a fully unencumbered mind, but even if it's a little less, even if there's one less satellite dish appointment, maybe we're just dealing with the au pair, it'll be a little bit better. Maybe I will have 20 minutes to play candy crush in the airport too.

Lauren Schiller:                  So in the book you talk about the difference between equal and equity.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Like that the goal is actually not... So all this stuff that we're responsible for, which, I mean that is a whole other conversation. It's like why are we the she-faults? Actually I'll just ask you that. Did you learn about that? Like why are we the she-fault?

Eve Rodsky:                           There's two phases... Well, I have three phases of research. So phase one was figuring out why we were the she-fault by going through every single article and book, because I'm a really good researcher. My college roommate can tell you that. That ever been written on the subject of what I call the she-fault. And it turns out that she-fault has a name actually many names, second shift, mental load, emotional labor. But my favorite came out of a 1987 article by a sociologist named Arlene Kaplan Daniels. And her article was called Invisible Work.

Eve Rodsky:                           And why I love that one so much was because you can't value what you don't see. So what if, and this was my first foray into this idea of the solution was, what if I made visible the invisible. And I finally showed Seth all that I do. And so that has led me on this mission to create what I call the Shit I Do spreadsheets. And it was a really fun exercise that took me months. But what it started with was me writing down every single thing I did that took more than two minutes, that have a quantifiable time component.

Eve Rodsky:                           So you can't quantify love, but you can quantify how long it takes you to buy the flowers for the recital. So that became gestures of love, in one of my Excel tabs, and slowly I started building and I don't know if any of you that use Excel, but it had 98 tabs, 20 items of sub tabs, over a thousand items of visible work. And then I sort of sent it to my friends to say what am I missing? And I had friends who say, "Well you forgot sunscreen." I say, well obviously you don't have to use Excel then, because it's tab 72, under medical and healthy living, you just didn't down to item 21, because it's there.

Eve Rodsky:                           Another woman who I didn't even know, literally a friend of a friend that found my list through the Jewish Federation in Arizona said that she noticed I didn't have allowance on there. And I said, "Well then you really don't know how to read Excel because it's under tab 55, it's under family values and traditions." It's item number seven because why else are you giving allowance unless it's to have some sort of family value. So I think they were like freaked out, but they were very happy that it was that thorough.

Eve Rodsky:                           And I finally get the courage after these months and months to send this 19 million megabytes spreadsheet off to my husband, with the very eloquent need or like perfect communicator in the subject line that said, "Can't wait to discuss," with no context other than that, and just send it off into the ether and waiting for his response. And I'm waiting and waiting, and I finally get Seth Rodsky, unread email in my inbox. I open up the email and it's just one monkey covering its eyes. That was that. I didn't even get the courtesy of the three monkey trio. So sad, just to see no evil.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so obviously in my household, right, this has triggered a see no evil reaction. That's where I realized I needed to put my mediator hat on and say, I do this for a living. I develop systems for very difficult families, and if that doesn't make sense to you, just picture the HBO shows succession. Those are my clients. You should feel bad for me. But the good news is that working with families like that, I've had a decade of experience in mediation and systems building around shared values.

Eve Rodsky:                           Where even the most difficult clients, who would literally storm out of the room, when their son would be speaking, can share and have communication with grace and humor and generosity around very difficult family issues. So if that can happen for those families, I thought, "Well why not bring the same systems learning into ordinary households?" And that's sort of how I started developing Fair Play. Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. So let's get to this equity question, versus equality question. Because I mean it seems like the very first place that you would go is like, okay, there are a hundred items on this list or a thousand items on this list or whatever it is for you or your family. So if I just give you, my partner, half of them, everything's good.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  But you actually say that's not true. So talk about that a little bit.

Eve Rodsky:                           So the Shit I Do spreadsheet evolves over time into the 100 Fair Play cards. And what I found was, the science backs this up. 50/50 is the absolute wrong equation. And I actually think 50/50 has held us back for a 100 years, because it's never 50/50, and then when you think it's going to be, there's a lot of disappointment and resentment and on and on and on. So what I realized, and the science backs this up, is that perceived fairness is a better indicator than actual fairness, whatever that means in the home in terms of how you view your partnership.

Eve Rodsky:                           So my perceived fairness may look different Laura than your perceived fairness. But what it comes out of after doing all the research is ownership. And so what I mean by that is everything you sort of need to know about Fair Play, you sort of can learn from the life changing magic of mustard. And what I mean by that is somebody has to know your second son, Johnny, like spreads French's yellow mustard on his protein, otherwise he like gags on protein, right? So if he dips it in French's yellow mustard, he eats his protein. That's what I call conception.

Eve Rodsky:                           That's what organizational manager's called conception. Then somebody has to put it on a list, or notice that the French's yellow mustard is running low. That's what I called planning. Then someone actually has to get their butts to the store to purchase the French's yellow mustard. And that's what I call execution. And that's when men step in. And that's a big problem, because they always bring home spicy Dijon, the nasty scene, they just do. And then men all over the country are saying to me, "I'm never going back to the store for my wife, because I went to the damn store, I got the mustard and I can't ever do anything right."

Eve Rodsky:                           My love letter to men, women all over the country were saying things to me like, "Well what do you mean Eve? You want me to trust him with making our living will? He can't even bring home the right type of mustard." And so it led to this trust spiral, where women just kept on taking more and more and more back on their plates. So what happens when you own the full mustard situation? When the conception, planning, execution stays together, when you have context? Well, if I'm the one who notices that my son needs a mustard and plan for the mustard, and I execute mustard, then something beautiful happens. You actually bring home the yellow mustard.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so Fair Play is predicated on that notion of ownership. And so that's why I say it's not 50/50, because men are not taking 50/50 of the cards. Even stay at home dads often don't have 50 cards, but when you have ownership there's perceived fairness, and so back what I just said, perceived fairness is a better indicator of marital happiness, and that's what I kept seeing all over the country, when you own the mustard situation. And if you don't believe me and you say, "Well, yeah, right. That's definitely not how we do things in our family."

Eve Rodsky:                           I just say, "Let me stop you because the most successful organizations do it that way." Netflix calls it the RRP, the rare responsible person, where they're given context, not control, and you never wait to be told what to do. Apple coined the term DRI, which is a directly responsible individual, where you own a task from conception and planning to overseeing the execution. So I believe it's time to start treating our home with some respect and rigor. That our home is our most important organization, because who would ever walk into your boss's office and sit there and say, "So, hey, what should we be doing today? I'll just wait here to tell me what to do."

Eve Rodsky:                           You wouldn't have a job the next day. But that's how we're doing things in our home. So I'm asking people to just bring some respect, some rigor. Like I said, treat our home like an organization, because when you do, then things start to change.

Lauren Schiller:                  So what about the idea of who has more time? So you actually break down kind of three or so, maybe it's four categories of situations that women are in, why don't you say what the categories are. Because, you've got women who are working full time and you've got women who are staying at home, and somehow there seemed to be equally responsible for as long the same things. But this idea that especially the women who are staying home, by choice or otherwise, theoretically have more time.

Eve Rodsky:                           Well the first thing again is back to fairness, right? Fair Play is a very customizable situation. So my affair is not going to look the same as your affair. Again why I think 50/50 is the wrong equation, because what does 50/50 mean, in a stay at home marriage where maybe you are taking on more of the marriage, the responsibilities in the home. But back to your question Lauren, about time. So why is Fair Play not just a card game? I wish I could just like hand out decks. But what I realized was that, and you've said this a tone sort of switches.

Eve Rodsky:                           The first half of the book really it has to be some consciousness raising, and then you can go to the South Beach diet part where I give you like what to eat and when to eat it, and that's where men come in, because they do like the prescriptive stuff. But the beginning was so important because of my finding. I had this giant finding that I wasn't expecting, and it sort of predicates everything that comes after in Fair Play. And it was this idea that women and society view men's time as finite, like diamonds, and women's time is infinite like sand. So what do I mean by that?

Eve Rodsky:                           Well, men were saying things like, "My power hours, I make more money and she has more time." So we were hearing it from men that, we know that from equal pay, we go into the office for the same amount of hours. We're paid less for those hours. But what I didn't expect was that the worst purveyors of not valuing their time would actually be women. And so women all over the country were saying things to me like, "Of course I should pick up the extra slack in my home, because my husband makes more money than me," not true.

Eve Rodsky:                           Other women were saying to me, "I do more in the home because I'm just wired differently. I'm a better multi-tasker." So I went to the top neuroscientists in this country to find out that that's 100% not true. And one actually said to me, off the record, "Don't use this in the book, but you can use this on your tour. Imagine you can convince half the population that they're better at wiping asses and doing dishes. How great for the other half of the population." That's that multitasking message. Hence, there's a 100 CEO's in the Forbes list this month, and guess what they all have in common except for one, they all are men.

Eve Rodsky:                           Okay. Other women were saying to me, "In the time it takes me to tell him how to do it, I might as well do it myself." So I went to the top behavioral economists who think all only about longterm thinking, 1000% not true in terms of longterm planning and my favorite were the two people with the same job? Yeah, we're both colorectal surgeons. Yeah, we're both shipping supervisors, but my husband's really busy and overwhelmed and I just find the time. And so I like to say, unless we're somehow Albert Einstein and we know how to fuck with the space time continuum, we definitely can't find time.

Eve Rodsky:                           There's literally no way to find time. But there is time choice of how you use your time, and if I have less choice of over how or use my time, then my time is less valued. So having to break those down for women especially was really important. So a lot of the book is looking at our own views of how we view our own time. And so I like to say, imagine a world where we're all time is created equal, right? Where we actually really believe that an hour holding our child's hand in the pediatrician's office, is just as valuable as an hour in the board room.

Eve Rodsky:                           If that becomes true, then guess what? Men will be more likely to do it, and then we'll start having some real changes in those workplaces. So all time is created equal, that's where the fundamental premise came from.

Lauren Schiller:                  So I mean, that is a huge societal shift.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Right.? And you know, I guess change starts at home. Have you learned about how that might ultimately ripple out to being rewarded in our larger society? I mean what do you think needs to change kind of from other directions?

Eve Rodsky:                           That's a great question. I'll tell it to you. Can I tell a two minute story that actually illustrate some sort of change that's happening? So I'll tell you a story about my friend Julie and Ed, who wanted to try Fair Play around the holidays last year. It's a terrible time to try anything new. But this actually was after the manuscript was submitted. So you're hearing a story that's actually not in the book. So Ed is the type of guy who said things to me like, "I'm the CEO outside the home, and my wife's a CEO inside the home, so throw up."

Eve Rodsky:                           Okay. But that's Ed. I like him. That's sort of the way he came at this. And so Julie wanted to try Fair Play, because she was super overwhelmed, and she says to me, "My mom just entered the hospital. Ed says he wants to help. I'm taking the kids to school. I'm working part time. I'm still making their lunches. I'm trying to decorate the Christmas tree, try to do a holiday card, plan our Christmas travel, and I'm at my breaking point."

Eve Rodsky:                           So I said to her, "Well, what's breaking you?" And she said my second son, Brody, second grade secret Santa project, because it has to be made from scratch. I always say thank you to the schools. It's so nice to do that to us around the holidays. But they do. And so she said to me, "Well typically if I hadn't heard about your Fair Play concepts, I would just give Ed a list of all the things I need to get for me for the secret Santa project. And when I got home from sitting my mother in the hospital, I'd be building the project with Brody.

Eve Rodsky:                           But you're telling me not to do that. You're telling me to ask Ed, CEO outside the home to own the homework, this one homework projects for one day, one card for one day." I said, "Yes, I am asking you to do that." And so Julie said to me, "Well I wouldn't even know where to begin? Like that's completely not our habit." And she was sort of panicking, because she wouldn't have the tools to ask him to own the homework card for this project. So Fair Play at its core is really based on values. It's not a score keeping exercise where you throw cards at your partner.

Eve Rodsky:                           I asked you to back it up to what is your why. So I did that with Julie and I said "Why do you value this project? Let's just start with that. Why is this the project that's breaking you?" And so she said to me, "Well it's the signature second grade project, because we're supposed to be teaching our kids that Christmas is not about a $100 [inaudible 00:25:56]. It's about a lack of materialism and the fact that you can get a nice homemade gift that you actually are excited to open, means a lot to me in the school."

Eve Rodsky:                           Okay. I was feeling like that was a very articulate answer. And then she says, "On top of it, my son Brody drew the name of a new girl at school, and I watch her, I'm the one who drops off in the morning, because I have a part time job. And so I watch this little girl sort of walk around, and no one's really talking to her. And it would be really nice if my son who is popular and athletic and who has been at the school since kindergarten would make something really nice for this new girl. Like maybe would make her feel more welcome, and it would foster empathy for him."

Eve Rodsky:                           So I tear every time... You know, when she said that, I still tear up telling that story. So it felt very powerful to me. Her why. So I said, "Just say that to Ed. Just what you just said to me. When you're calm, not when you're feeling overwhelmed, but when you're calm, articulate that. Exactly what you just said to me. You say to him." So I was interviewing a lot of people at the time, so I almost forgot about checking back in with them. But I'm so happy I did because Ed gets on the phone and tells me that right after Julie told him that he began Googling secret Santa projects for little girls with his son Brody.

Eve Rodsky:                           Remember this is CEO outside the home guy, and that's what I call conception. Because they decided in a Popsicle stick jewelry box, and then he tells me that they start writing down on a list everything they need to build that project. So they wanted color, this is all Eds details. They wanted colored, Popsicle sticks, glue, glitter and Brody even wanted the little girl not to have to use two hands to open her jewelry box. So they were buying a knob for the box that was on their list.

Eve Rodsky:                           So that's what I call in Fair Play, the planning. And then Ed tells me that he found this really cool store named My Goals. And it wasn't even that difficult because you could just go to one store, and get everything you need. So wow, that sounds like a really cool store. And they go to My Goals, they pick up everything they need for this project and they come home. And they start building it. And so Julie chimes in and says, "Well, my life changed in that moment." And I said, "Well that's a pretty big statement. So what was changing for you in that moment?"

Eve Rodsky:                           And she said, when she saw Brody and Ed on the floor working on gluing these pieces together for this Popsicle stick jewelry box, that she noticed that Ed had glitter on his hands. And she said to me, I said, "Well, what was making that so meaningful to you? And she said, "Because it finally felt like he was in it with me. And because glitter is a fucking pain in the ass to get out and it's always in her hair and on her hands. And how cool if he actually gets it on his hand and here and realizes that."

Eve Rodsky:                           And so that sort of got me thinking right, about small micro changes. I didn't ask this man to take a 100 cards. I didn't even ask him to take homework for the year or the month. This was ownership of one card for one project, and his wife gave him trust to do it. And so imagine all men have glitter on their hands. Because back to what you said about societal change that starts in the home. So Ed's also a very high up position at a very important East Coast company. What if he recognizes that there's value in doing secret Santa projects?

Eve Rodsky:                           Maybe he'll let his employees leave earlier. Maybe he'll understand that women, their time matters, and so we should pay them the same. But I do think it all begins with glitter. Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. I actually have to ask you about the CEO of the home business, because I was just chatting with someone this weekend who said that that's what their tax advisor put down on her tax return as her title, and she was happy about it.

Eve Rodsky:                           Okay.

Lauren Schiller:                  But you're like, "Hmm, so what?" What is the downside of that?

Eve Rodsky:                           The downside of that is that it means that ownership of every single card is landing on the woman, and nobody can hold all the cards. I mean in single mother of households, yes, they do try to hold all the cards like my mother did, and stuff falls through the cracks. And there's societal issues, we're not valuing that. We could talk all day about single mothers, but if you have the solution, privilege, to have a partner at home, I say to you, "Nobody should be holding all the cards."

Eve Rodsky:                           And so again, what I found was that men like Ed... So let me just tell you another thing, one last thing about Ed that I don't often tell, but in this context I think it's important. He also told me that Brody, his son started crying in the car on the way back from My Goals, because he was sad his grandmother was in the hospital. And I think the reason Ed told me that, I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I want to go back and ask him. I think he told me that because he felt privileged that his son was finally confiding in him.

Eve Rodsky:                           And there's a connection there when your son's willing to be vulnerable and cry to you. And what does that do for him? And so people know, I love these types of stories. So I got a call two days ago from a client in Seattle, who told me he was at a funeral, not to get all existential. And he said, "You're going to love this story about the funeral." I said, "Well, that's really cool. You think I love stories about funerals. But tell me why I'm going to love this story." He said, "This man, again, very powerful man in my clients realm. My HBO says, you know, succession realm passed away.

Eve Rodsky:                           He wasn't my client, he was a friend of my client. And his daughter... So even though he was super powerful, I guess he was always a tooth fairy. He held the magical beings card for his kids, and his daughter read all of the poems she ever received from him as the tooth fairy at his funeral." And so I think about what is that for men? What do we care about at the end of our lives, right? We care about those things, those connections we make. And so I saw men who were getting ownership, not given a list, not what I call rat fucked, the random assignment of a task, but actually given ownership, they were getting more meaningful connections out of their family life.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so it's not good for men either to live in the CEO of the home CEO outside the home siloed living. Even if it's not, like I said, 50/50, trust in the home matters. When you're doing it together, I saw huge shifts in how people were interacting with each other and their children.

Lauren Schiller:                  I think it's worth spending a few minutes talking just functionally about how this works. Because I've been having fun pitching it to various people.

Eve Rodsky:                           I got my ambassador.

Lauren Schiller:                  And I'm like, "This is going to change everyone's life. It's going to change my life." But I was able to go to my husband and say, "Well I have to prepare for this interview. Right. So I need you to play this game with me. That's going to create more efficiency in the home." And I like watched to see what his reaction was. And I was like, "Or," because you've got several pitches that you can make to your partners. Right?

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  And I was like waiting to see which one he'd most respond to. Meanwhile, my 14-year-old daughter is listening in because she hears everything and she keeps asking me, "Mom, what's this game? Like are we ever going to play the game?" So I'm like ready to take a pack of cards.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yes. You're going to take on cards.

Lauren Schiller:                  So let's talk about you. I mean, you've obviously referenced the 100 cards and, a few of the different categories and that you need to have the concept planning and execution.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  There's also things like minimum standard of care and all that. So could you just give a little rundown of how this game works?

Eve Rodsky:                           Yes. Remind me to get right back to that. Because you just said something important about communication.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay.

Eve Rodsky:                           And then we'll get right to the practicality of it. So just one quick thing about how women communicate, and men too. So a lot of women out there were saying to me very powerful women even, and ones that again have less economic privilege that they can never have a conversation about these issues in the home. It's hard that they didn't want to bring it up, that this was too tricky. So one woman said that to me, and then completely unironically about 20 minutes later. She's like, "So yeah, it's when my husband didn't put the clothes in the dryer, I just dumped the wet clothes on his pillow."

Eve Rodsky:                           Another woman said the same thing. "I can't have a conversation about this in my home." But then I find out she has an Instagram account called the shit my husband doesn't pick up, and she takes pictures of all of it and she posts it on Instagram. So what I'd like to say to all you women and men out there, is I promise you, you are already communicating. I will go on your nest camera, watch you for a day, circle every single time you are communicating about home life. Even if I don't see your words coming out of your mouth, you are already communicating.

Eve Rodsky:                           So when I could say to women, you were having a conversation shift, but not a start. Women felt a little bit less scared to have these conversations. And so that is one way to do it. To say we're going to have a shift and not a start because we are already communicating about home life. Now another thing is if you need lots of tools, Fair Play gives you those tools. They give you all the mediation tools that I have out of my practice, but it's also again back to the work we have to do in ourselves, why Fair Play is not just a car game.

Eve Rodsky:                           I have a lot of quizzes in the book, not just on who said it when, but on what type of personality profile are you, what toxic type messages have you given yourself, and also what type of communication vulnerability do you have? So a big communication vulnerability that I had and a lot of women have in my data set, was they love to give feedback in the moment.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so when emotion is high, cognition is low. When you're giving that feedback in the moment, it's super unhelpful, but we love to do it. So my editor laughed at me because I had about 20 pages of explaining to women why not to give feedback at the moment from a neuroscientist perspective, from a psychologist, from me, from clergy. And so she said, "I get it that you really want to get this point across, that you have to hold your tongue to a time when emotion is low and cognition is high. But we can't spend 20 pages dissecting this. They're just going to have to believe you with three supporting experts."

Eve Rodsky:                           So it's about four pages in the book of that point. And so you have to start with using tools, sitting down, communicating at a time where you're calm, and that's where the cards help. So back to the practicalities. So if you're communicating, and not giving feedback in the moment, and you're sitting down, when you're calm, what happens is you have a full set of tools, right? Your brain is in a place that can have conversations that are more than just take the damn dishes card, because I never want to do dishes again. That's when Fair Play fails. And that's sort of the beauty of why this took me seven years. It was all to get to the last chapter of the book, which is called the top 13 mistakes couples make and the Fair Play fix.

Eve Rodsky:                           Because I needed to have testing subjects from all walks of life that mirrored the U.S. Census to get a sense of what was tripping people up. So you get to read about all the people's mistakes and how to correct them. But a big mistake was jumping right to the division, because it just became another list. So I did that. That was my first mistake, before I used my own mediation training to sort of develop the system. I just sort of had this game of fight idea, and I gave Seth the garbage card.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so what started happening was I started just following him around the house, sort of as his shadow. I even like opened the door under the sink to just remind him that that's where the garbage liners were. And so he could like trip over it as he was trying to get a snack. And he stopped me one day and said like, "This garbage thing is not working because you're literally stalking me over garbage, and I'm not going to own anything if this is what it feels like to own, something because you're literally stalking me over garbage."

Eve Rodsky:                           So this is my own mistake of just jumping straight to the division. So that's when I had a backup and say, My entire mediation practice for decade is based on values based mediation, where I ask people what is their why? So why am I not bringing that into the system? Well, it's because it's a really weird conversation to talk about your values over garbage, who does that? But what I found was that when you do that, it brings transformative change into the home, transformative change that lasts. And so that's what I started doing.

Eve Rodsky:                           I sat down and said, "So let me tell you why I value garbage. As you know, you went to my house, you saw my apartment on Avenue C in 14th street look like, you saw the Chinese takeout bag that sat on a knob. You saw that there was no garbage can in my house growing up." What happened was garbage would spill on the floor every single day. It would have this little bag, it would overflow. And so I was a very dehydrated child, because after sundown I was afraid to turn on the light in the kitchen, because we have cockroaches and water bugs that would just scatter everywhere.

Eve Rodsky:                           So I'm extremely triggered by garbage. But I'd never thought to tell Seth that. And so we sat down and I told him the story of my upbringing, and then he responds by saying, "Well, I slept on a Domino's pizza box as my pillow, my whole fraternity life. So I don't really care about garbage. I actually like garbage. It doesn't bother me." And so what happens, right when you have such different values over something as simple as garbage. Well then you borrow what I did from the law and from medicine, and you come up with what's reasonable, a minimum standard of care.

Eve Rodsky:                           And that's what we did. So I said to Seth, he said, "I will hold this card. And what feels reasonable to me is if garbage goes out once a day, and I will take it out once a day at 7:00 PM. I'll put it in my calendar like a work appointment, as long as you never fucking mention the word garbage ever again." And ever since that day, garbage goes out at 7:00 PM, and sometimes we re-deal when he's not home, and we take other cards. But that's what happens. 20 minute conversation. You invest in those conversations, and it's a lifetime of change.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so when women say, "Well, I don't want to spend 20 minutes talking about garbage." I love to just grab their phones, and I go to their screen time app, and I promise you they've been on Instagram or Facebook longer than 20 minutes. Invest in your partnerships, treat the homeless some respects because it pays off spades. I really believe change starts in the home. Yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well one of the things that I was really excited about in reading this book was, aside from the very obvious benefits, is this notion of unicorn time, and that that gets to be a card. And when I saw your book, I'm like, "What's this little unicorn doing on that scale there?" So can you explain what you mean by that and let's talk about it.

Eve Rodsky:                           Yeah. It's this idea of unicorn time, unicorn space. I call it that because it's like the mythical equine, it's this beautiful creative space, that we used to have before kids and partnerships. But it doesn't freaking exist, unless we reclaim it. So it's really this idea and it changed the way I wrote the book. I really am an organization manager. I'm a mediator. I get to the presenting problem, the underlying problems. But what stopped me, which kept pulling me back into the fact that this was bigger than just a game, was not only the toxic time message we were giving ourselves, it was the identity loss that was being reported in so many women after children.

Eve Rodsky:                           I don't know who I am anymore. One woman who had three Ivy league degrees said to me when I said, what is your unicorn space? What is your creative space that makes you uniquely you, and how do you share that with the world? She said, "I don't even understand what that question means. It's physics." I said, "What do you mean?" She said, "Well, I'm an object at rest. Object in motion stay in motion, objects in rest stay at rest, and I'm object at rest. I won't even know how to answer that question."

Eve Rodsky:                           And why that was so important. It was because I asked a very provocative question of men. I asked men all over this country, are you proud of your wife, of your wife or your partner? Men always went to, "She's an amazing mother." Okay. I said, "That's great. That's a role." And then they said, "I couldn't do it without her." I said, "That's great. That's a personal assistant, so tell me more." If a woman had her self-worth, something that made her, her, right? Whether it's volunteering with the firefighters, like one woman I interviewed who does American Ninja warrior, or for me the gender division of labor, or baking pies or whatever it is, then the man immediately went to that.

Eve Rodsky:                           It was never like, "Oh, she's an amazing dental hygienist." One guy said to me, "The dental hygienist husband, my wife's perfecting rhubarb," and he went off for 15 minutes about how hard rhubarb is to work with. Because she wants to add rhubarb to her pie collection that she's going to enter in some contest. I don't bake myself like that, but I guess apparently rhubarb gets very runny, and so you have to like perfect it when you're baking. But this man knew so much about rhubarb, because it was his wife's passion. He was picking up on her passion.

Eve Rodsky:                           And so I said it's not about a shaming ourselves to say our spouses need to be proud of us, but it's about us being proud of ourselves. Feeling a little bit like we were here, before we had these roles of being parent, partner and worker. And it really, really affects women and men too. There were some men who said, "I really need to find my unicorn space," as well completely we both need it, and we can't resent our partners for taking it.

Eve Rodsky:                           So I'll just end on that. That's my Harper's Bazaar article, you can look out for it. It's called the Real Midlife Crisis. What happens when the person who loves you the most resents you the most? Because my finding was the three things that most people said made them happy, were adult friendships, self care, true self care, not CBD oil pedicures, but like working out, or walking to the beach with your dog and unicorn space. Those were the three things that we didn't want to give our spouse anytime for.

Eve Rodsky:                           So it's not about breast implants or a Ferrari, it's about bringing back in our happiness trio, which starts with unicorn space, in saying that we all value this. I deserve this as much as you do, even if it's unpaid. And that was the hardest for stay at home mothers, because they said to me, I'm already doing all this unpaid work. How can I add in baking pies on top of that? But they have to, because it's about your marriage. And then what I found out from the research is also about our longevity.

Eve Rodsky:                           It's about our longevity, being who we are and being able to share that with the world and a little, even if it means just like bringing a pie to your neighbor, that is about our longevity.

Lauren Schiller:                  And it's also just about being interesting. You talk about being interesting in the book, interesting to yourself and-

Eve Rodsky:                           You have a right to be interested in your life.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah.

Eve Rodsky:                           You have a right to be interested in your own life. And so many women said to me, "I don't feel I have that right to be interested in my own life anymore."

Lauren Schiller:                  All right.

Eve Rodsky:                           Sorry to end on such a downer. The good news is that the after, which is a sequel that I'm writing now, is all these women and men who rediscovered their unicorn space, and it's the most inspiring thing to watch.

Lauren Schiller:                  I just have to say, I feel like it is... how many people here would say they have unicorn space? You know, something that they really value and they get time to do. That's awesome. I mean, is that a good percentage?

Eve Rodsky:                           That's great. I love this room.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's right.

Eve Rodsky:                           40% of the room.

Lauren Schiller:                  Keep doing. Yeah. Yeah. So for those of you who don't, there's a little workbook.

Eve Rodsky:                           Workbook and how to get it back. But I will say that, when I was in blueberries time, right, when I was sobbing on the side of the road, anytime someone would forward me a find your passion and you know article, I would say that's just another fucking thing. I don't have time to do. So thank you for shaming me. You wanted me to have self care. Great. Then you take my kids to school and try to mark up a contract with a pen in your vagina. You try to get some self care time.

Eve Rodsky:                           So I found these very condescending messages to women along with lower your standards, all these other messages I could tell you about all night, because it's just putting more shit on us. So I only believe in unicorn space in the context of domestic rebalance, only in that context. Alone, it's just another thing on our list of shit we don't have time to do.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Eve Rodsky, author of Fair Play, a game changing solution for when you have too much to do and more life live. Speaking with me, live on stage at Inforum at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco. I'll put a link to Eve's book on my website, inflectionpointradio.org, where you can find future events by clicking on the events tab. Come on out. I'm Lauren Schiller, this is Inflection Point and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  Today's program was produced in part by the generous donation of Gabriel Howard and Martin Scoble. That's our inflection point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple podcasts, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast.

Lauren Schiller:                  Know a woman leading change we should talk to? Let us know at inflectionpointradio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one-time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to inflectionpointradio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at Inflection Point Radio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point Society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. And follow me on Twitter at L-A-Schiller.

Lauren Schiller:                  To find out more about today's guest, and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go, inflection pointradio.org. Inflection point is produced in partnership with K-A-L-W 91.7 FM in San Francisco, and P-R-X. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver. Our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host Lauren Schiller.

Announcer:                           Support for this podcast comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

 

2019.10.16_Eve+Rodsky+30_JM.jpg

How Tiffany Shlain Turns Off Tech to Turn On Creativity and Activism

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Tiffany Shlain is the author of "24/6. The Power of Unplugging One Day a Week". She is also the founder of the Webbys, Character Day (where you can find her Tech Shabbat challenges) and the creator a number of films. In today's episode Tiffany brings it all together. You'll hear how taking time off from technology and taking time to reflect helps fuel your creativity and activism.

TiffanyShlain.jpg

TRANSCRIPT. We do our best, please forgive or let us know about any errors.

Tiffany Shlain:                      My name is Tiffany Shlain and I'm a filmmaker. I founded the Webby Awards and I just finished my first book that came out called 24/6: The Power of Unplugging One Day a Week. And it's about my family's decade-long practice of turning off all screens from Friday night to Saturday night for what my family calls our technology Shabbat and how much it's made our life better. And then Saturday is just literally everybody's favorite day of the week. We just, we hang out, we cook, we nap, we read, we journal, we space out. It's literally everybody's favorite day.

Lauren Schiller:                  Today, Tiffany Shlain tells us all how to step away from our screens just one day a week. But why would you do that?

Tiffany Shlain:                      It's good to have a day where you're, I can be reachable to the entire every news headline, every family member, every text alert. It's actually that's what have, I love being available to them the other days, but I need a day to just ground myself.

Lauren Schiller:                  What was the inspiration to take this break from technology?

Tiffany Shlain:                      I had this really intense year where my father was diagnosed with brain cancer and I found out I was pregnant in the same week. And those nine months, I thought a lot about life and death and what are we doing when we're here. And whenever I visit my dad who was quite sick, I would turn off my phone of course. And then he passed away and my husband's, and my daughter was born days later and we just knew we just wanted to change the way we're living.

Tiffany Shlain:                      And then shortly after that, we're part of this group called Reboot, and they had a national day of unplugging, which was one ceremonial day a year of turning off the screens, national day of unplugging. We did it and they asked us to write something for it, and it was this really wonderful night. And the next day, it just felt so good. No screens, it was this cleanest day, it was the longest day. It was the most present and happiest I'd been in a long time and we never stopped doing it.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So now it's been almost 10 years and the benefits just get. I see them more clearly and they just multiply and amplify. Just in terms of my sense of creativity, I feel very creative both on Tech Shabbat because I'm just, my mind is wandering and the next day is probably my most productive day of the week is Sunday and I laugh a lot more. I just feel I'm there for the funny, I'm just present for life more, feel more connected to myself, to my kids, my husband. It's this day every week that is so important to us and grounds us and even my teenage daughter, she is in her junior year of high school, which is super stressful. And in the last month because she knows she just started school.

Tiffany Shlain:                      She has commented I think each Saturday, I'm so glad I have this day. There's no homework, there's no being on, she gets to kind of reset and regroup, which we're not giving ourselves any time for it anymore. And especially with the news and we're waking up to the stressful news. We're going to bed with the stressful or FOMO or this or that or whatever mishmash of things you get on your phone. And so in the book I really talk about how much it's changed us and it has this ripple effect to the other six days because I've incorporated all these kind of smaller things into the week to not have the screen dictate my every move. And I was starting to feel like a marionette also, but the book also talks about kind of the history of time on time off the concept of a day of rest and all different cultures and why we need to bring this ritual back.

Lauren Schiller:                  So when does Saturday night end or are people sitting around waiting for midnight?

Tiffany Shlain:                      No It's funny we... If you are an observant Orthodox Jew, you wait till three stars are in the sky but for us it would be the three closing screens, no it's five o'clock so 5:00 PM Ken and I get ready to go out on a date and the girls get ready for what they call their double date with technology. And this is the great thing is that not only do I run towards Friday night, turning off the screen each week and everyone does, but on Saturday night you reappreciate the marvels of this miraculous tool called the web and technology all over again. So sometimes I extend it, but a lot of times I, there's something I wanted to look up the head to ponder all day. The pondering is actually quite delightful I think we've forgotten how to do that. Not be able to look something up immediately, but so it has this dual effect each week where I both can't wait to get off the screens and then I reappreciate what they can do when I come back on at five.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller this is Inflection Point, I love this idea of taking a day off of screens and I thought you might like it too. So next up Tiffany Shlain tells us how to start our own Tech Shabbat, stick around. I'm back with Tiffany Shlain let's just start with how do you pitch this to your family?

Tiffany Shlain:                      This is the question. Do not say to your kids, we're going to turn off screens one day a week, they might start crying no one's going to want that.

Lauren Schiller:                  No one wants that.

Tiffany Shlain:                      Here's what you say. Tip number one, ask every member of your family, including yourself. What do you wish you had more time to do? Everyone's got a list, I mean everybody has a list. Why do you wish you could do more of, is it skateboarding? Is it painting? Is it reading? Is it napping? Is it hanging out with your friends? What's the list? Everyone write their own list and you fill your day with that. It'll become everyone's favorite day of the week. So it's not what you aren't getting it's what you get back. And that's a whole framing because I think people are so attached to their phones for everything, which I think is problematic and kind of reminds people to even jog their mind of all the pleasures in life that don't require a screen.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So that's exercise number one. What are those things that you love doing? Think back when you were younger, what did you like doing, what do you want more of? And then make the day pretty much all of that and it's just, there's so many things that are pulled away from the screen, you're in a moment, whether it's reading and then you're reading and then it makes you think of something on your phone and then your phone and you're on Instagram and you're off the book. I could say that sentence with everything. So I think it's a framing thing. It's that we need to remind people how incredible it is to be human and to be really present for the people right around you instead of the people in the phone or the things happening in the phone.

Lauren Schiller:                  I feel I do have a bad habit of when my kids come home and I'm on my computer, my kids come home and on my phone and then I get mad at them for being on their phone when I'm trying to have a conversation with them some modeling.

Tiffany Shlain:                      That's why this is really good, it's modeling and we made this film called Dear Parent, which I don't know if you saw it, it's a two minute film. It is so much about modeling behavior and a lot of kids do say their parents are the one, just the culprits too. So if you make it like a family experiment and I mean I always wish when my kids see me on the computer and I'm working, you wish there was a light blinking above your head. Actually I'm working right now, I'm helping to pay for the bills I'm not just scrolling away.

Tiffany Shlain:                      But it is about it being an all in family thing. And I think that's a key part of the toolkit is that everyone has to be in and you're going to have your own rules. I think part number two about rules, so for us it is the screens or the conduit to every distraction and work and all the mishmash of things. So, and we really like kicking it off with a dinner and that's also fun. Who do you wish you spend more time with? Who do you wish you saw more? Everyone's got that list oh, I wish I hang out with that person more. What's a neighbor you want to know better? Who do you want to spend time with that you're not distracted by the phones. And it is such a different experience when phones aren't on your lap in your pocket.

Tiffany Shlain:                      It's a whole different dinner, it's people are really there they're not half there. And then we've done it with two kids in soccer, we've done that unfortunately they're not both in soccer right now. But you can do it with making plans you have to do a little prep in the Friday afternoon.

Lauren Schiller:                  So do you put the word out ahead of time, is there an auto reply or something?

Tiffany Shlain:                      I have some haxe on our website for the book and with all these resources is 24sixlife.com and there are some haxe to put auto responses on your text message. You know how when you get the do not disturb I'm driving, you can actually set that to go. I don't have it on my email because people know I usually do a tweet, I'm on Twitter, that's my preferred social media.

Tiffany Shlain:                      I usually will on Friday night say turning off screens for my weekly ritual see you on under the tide just kind of remind people they can do that too. And then we invited everyone to try it on mass and we have so many resources for people now on our site and with all these kind of research and short films and ways to get people on board and tips to prepare for your Tech Shabbat. And it is kind of an amazing thing that we need this much to unplug from the network for one day a week I mean the irony is not lost.

Lauren Schiller:                  It's begging for a camping trip, the inflatable bed.

Tiffany Shlain:                      And I think it's about just remembering our humanity that we're so often. I walked down the street and everyone's looking down and I listen, it's not I have digital perfection down the other six days I actually think it's harder. I do a lot of mini things the other six days I don't look at my phone when I wake up anymore and that's hard. But I'm don't look at that phone and I get my coffee and I journal, I do a five minute journal. We're talking it's a 10 minute experience that I'm not on my phone but it sets my day in such a different way. But I think it's harder during the week to do all those, don't have it at the dining room table at my film studio no phones on the desks anymore. It is too distracting, so it's in your bag until you go to the bathroom and check it on a break.

Tiffany Shlain:                      But on my Tech Shabbat, the phones away because it's the visual, even seeing someone else's phone on a table when you're having lunch, it could be off it's their phone. You're not as present because you're looking at their phone, which could ring and it reminds you of your phone, which maybe is in your bag, whatever.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So we just don't realize how much we are pulling ourselves away from just being where we are. So I think it's actually of course I know people have so much fear around it. I think if people just layered it back and reframed it, as I said from this more positive space, it is literally something I run towards now. I'm I can't wait for it. And I feel I just remember how to live in a different way. They say for creativity, I mean, you do so much creative work and it's good to put your mind in a different mode, even if it's just one day a week and every week it just feels this very deep relaxation and different mood that kind of carries me over to the next week.

Tiffany Shlain:                      And listen, there's a handful of times a year where I'm traveling, I can't do it. And I feel unmoored I just don't feel quite as solid. I feel oh, I didn't get it.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well you talk, there's a chapter in the book that talks about creating rules and breaking them?

Tiffany Shlain:                      You're going to find your own rules, for a while we only listened to Vinyl on a record play, which is really fun, but we really like to cook on our Tech Shabbat. I don't have time to cook during the week as much as I on the weekend. And we started using Alexa as our timer, we have an echo Alexa verbal speaker now, for us that counts.

Tiffany Shlain:                      That's okay because it's not a screen, I literally say Alexa set the cooking timer for 10 minutes, but I'm not on a screen. If I did it on my phone then I'd get a text and an Instagram and a notification and I'd be off. So for us, we still listen to Vinyl but we also use that as [inaudible 00:11:29]. So that's our rule, I mean you're all going to come up with your own rules. And I have a friend who has special needs child and she was saying I have to be available and a grown child, and I was, what if you got a flip phone that was like your bat phone for that day to kind of force you to just communicate in a different way. So you were always available even if you're out of your house but you weren't mindlessly scrolling being distracted from everything.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So I think you really need to look at what your family, in the book I have talked about, if you're single, if you're older, I don't know one person in my life or I've talked to so many people about the book that doesn't feel they're on the screens too much. So how do you build this? It's a very old from our people practice. Again I'm not religious but I love going deep on the cons it was such a radical idea. A day of rest it put a period time was ongoing there was no ending and it was a day of rest. It's the fourth commandment above, do not commit murder is after six days you shall rest for a whole day. That', a huge thing to say. So it's such deep wisdom and it's thousands of years old.

Tiffany Shlain:                      It's free, it's available to everyone. And I do meditation and yoga and I don't consider myself Hindu or Buddhist, but these are practices that bring great balance back into my life. And I would love for people to engage with a full day of Shabbat because then again, most Jews I know that did Shabbat, maybe they do a Friday night dinner. That's probably the most, but the only people I knew that did a full day were Orthodox Jews. And I was always marvel, you don't drive, you don't use money, you don't wow. That's, so I was marveled at it, but I think that it's not for me, but I think in this modern era, I don't know anyone that doesn't feel they're on their phones too much. So how do we bring a very old practice into the 21st century and make it work?

Tiffany Shlain:                      So getting back to your rules question, I think if you kind of, and we have a series of exercises in the book to kind of walk you through the questions, how many hours do you think you're on a day? When does it not feel good? When does it feel good? I mean, there's lots of times I love the work I do and these global conversations as the best of you get a text from an old friend or there's so many incredible moments. You look something up and you go down this whole beautiful rabbit hole of ideas. There's so many goods, but it just seems it's infiltrated every part of our lives and it doesn't feel good. And so all day long when you feel a marionette doll, which I feel there are thousands of behavioral scientists and engineers, their job is to keep your eyes glued on the screen.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So when you feel you can't take your eyes away from that screen, it's because that is an intention. So to kind of reclaim yourself one day a week it gives me perspective, every week I really get to detach and think about what's happening and how I can try to help change it. Because there's stuff on a personal level, there's in your family you can model behavior and your kids are living in your house until they're 18 you run the household, you can set some new frameworks and at your company you could say, hey let's put our phones away from our desks let's try this. And then there's some legislation that's coming out we're doing these short films, dear parents, they're all two minutes. To your student, to your CEO, to your legislator and to your fellow human, and they're all approaching this idea from these different perspectives.

Lauren Schiller:                  You got to talk about the things that you need. What are the tools that you need? [crosstalk 00:14:48].

Tiffany Shlain:                      And remember what it was like landline. First of all, landlines are very inexpensive, and how much is your sanity worth? They're good for real emergencies. I mean, we've got earthquakes they're really good if there's a real emergency, they're good if you want to find your lost cell phone and they're really good if somebody really needs to get in touch with you on your Tech Shabbat. So landline I just think is really good to have. If you don't have a printer that might be good but I've also just written things by hand, when we did have two kids in soccer, so Friday afternoon I look at what's happening Saturday, which fields are that? I would remind the team just to reminder, we're not on screens, we'll meet you there.

Tiffany Shlain:                      That's how it used to exist before cell phones, before everyone would be I'm 10 minutes late, I'm around the corner, I'm parking, who cares? We don't need the updates. So especially like the most profound fact I found during researching the book was that it takes 23 minutes to get back into flow after you've been distracted by a notification or a text. So just imagine how much we're taking people out of their moment every single day. So I text a lot less since I've written this book. So Friday afternoon I do a little prep and it's not much just write it and keep it on the counter with a sharpie. I love writing with a sharpie and that is also good for Friday night when there's inevitably things I'm, oh I forgot to do and just all the things that tumbled from your head just to have a place to put them. There'll be there on Sunday for you to deal with, so you just remind people and then you know remind people of your landline and you are liberated and set free. I think people forget how good it feels to not be so reachable.

Lauren Schiller:                  When we come back Tiffany Shlain tells us how to get into the habit of taking 24 hours away from our screens and how it will help us all be better at leading change support inflection point with a tax deductible donation toward our fundraising goal at inflectionpointradio.org just click the support button. We'll be right back with Tiffany Shlain.

Lauren Schiller:                  Lauren Schiller:                  Am back with Tiffany Shlain. I'm just going to make the leap of faith that most of the people that are listening to this cares deeply about, feels needs to change feels we need to make progress on and that there's not a moment to spare.

Tiffany Shlain:                      But here's the thing, by taking a day for yourself, you're going to be that much more able to do your activism. I remember after the election, I mean you were doing so many women's rights issues and so much stuff and I was exhausted a year in exhausted by Trump, exhausted by it all and I had to re master my strength and on my Tech Shabbats', I feel you have to be able to recharge. This is a long fight, this is a lot of not even, I don't want to use the word fight because issues around the environment that's long term behavioral change, women's rights that is longterm changes.

Tiffany Shlain:                      These are all marathons and if we're running a million miles an hour, 24 seven activism you're never going to recharge and you're not going to be as effective. And I come up with my best ideas, I do a lot of activist films on my Tech Shabbat because I've pulled away from all the noise and I can think we're not giving ourselves space to think. There's a quote it's something about, it was again with the women's movement, you have to find the joy that you can't it's exhausting and it can be, I mean you have to find the joy in life to keep going and I find most of my joy on these Saturdays and then I feel completely recharged to fight for the... I'm not usually out in nature, so I'm appreciating nature. I'm seeing that I get perspective on women's rights, on our government issues.

Tiffany Shlain:                      I just get the perspective, I don't feel I have the other six days. So, and then lastly I'll say that if everyone took a Tech Shabbat day off, from consuming maybe we'd, that would be one great step for the climate change crisis. We're all consuming and doing 24 seven and that's also not that healthy for crop or for ourselves. And I think it'd be better why is 24 seven our goal, why is growth always our goal doing more and more.

Lauren Schiller:                  You are sending out a series of emails leading up to character day many challenges. Could you just review what each of those three or four of them?

Tiffany Shlain:                      They're still available. And this is something that we're, we're having these resources up all year round. So if you wanted to step in and go, okay, I want to try this.

Tiffany Shlain:                      By yourself or with your family, whatever. It's an eight week program in total on the first week was don't look at your phone when you wake up, 15 to 30 minutes, replace it with something else you love and again it's not the year without, it's what you get back. So before you go to bed, before you go to sleep and at meals, put the phone away. So I was challenged number one, and then the second week was go and walk without your phone for 30 minutes. I know that sounds hard, but it's so great once you're ah, I am without my phone, I am no one's tracking me. No one can find me am just with myself. So that was week two, and then the third week was how do you cultivate your character online and off.

Tiffany Shlain:                      So really start to think about where your dad is going, how do you know if something's accurate? What is the effect on you when you're only reading negative news, which is the majority of news activating your amygdala, how can you do other things? So really how do you bring your best self when you are online? And then the fourth week because the Tech Shabbat challenge a whole day with yourself or family. It's good to have a buddy have somebody a squad do it with you for a day, but the key thing is not just about one day is put in your schedule four weekends in a row because building any habit you have to, it's the ritual of it. To me, the power is that we do this every week, go completely off and see how that feels and I promise you it's the best thing I've ever done in my life and I love the web, but we can't lose our humanity when we're using it.

Tiffany Shlain:                      I feel people don't make eye contact anymore. They're just grunting their way and scrolling it, they literally I remember it was gauche when you in pull out your phone, you're talking to someone now everyone does it. It's always at the table. It's what's important to us and let's think 10 years into the future, if we keep going in this direction, it's going to be the movie Wally. And is that what we want? I used to be a smoker, which I'm not proud of, but I came from a doctor's family, so I was rebelling and who would've thought, I mean everyone used to smoke in San Francisco and I would have never thought that no one hardly smokes anymore.

Tiffany Shlain:                      But it was a combination of laws and awareness and not coolness and everything. And then the behavior changed and I'm not completely equating smart funnies because of course smartphones brings so many good things but the habits around them are ridiculous right now. So the pendulum has swung so far, so just try this very simple practice to bring it a little back and I promise you it's going to make you feel better about the way you're living.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Tiffany Shlain, author of 24/6: The Power of Unplugging One Day a Week to find films, resources, and research about how technology is rewiring our brains and what it's doing to teens and youth plus to find the rest of the weeks of the Tech Shabbat challenge, we'll put a link to Tiffany's website, characterday.org on our website along with the link to her book. It's all at inflectionpointradio.org I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's our inflection point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple podcasts, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know women leading change we should talk to let us know@inflectionpointradio.org while you're there, support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one-time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to inflectionpointradio.org we're on Facebook and Instagram at inflectionpointradio. Follow us and join the inflection point society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions and follow me on Twitter @laschiller. To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter you know where to go inflectionpointradio.org. Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco and PRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver, our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host Lauren Schiller.

Speaker 3:                              Support for this podcast comes from the corporation for public broadcasting.

 

Feminist Detective - The Case of The Fleabag Crowdfunder

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Introducing a NEW Inflection Point segment “Feminist Detective” in which journalist and author Ruth Whippman joins me to seek out sexism in all its tiny guises so we can make big changes. This week we dig up the original crowdfunding page of the mega-hit show Fleabag from back in 2013, and discuss how the tone of it shows us the crazy lengths women have had to go to reassure and placate men that equality is not threatening.

This segment premiere is presented ad-free. Support Inflection Point with a tax deductible contribution and help fund production of more of them!

Lauren Schiller and Ruth Whippman

Lauren Schiller and Ruth Whippman

Candace Bushnell–Is There Still Sex in the City? Live On Stage

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Candace Bushnell gave us a reason to sit on our couch every week to soak in the stories of the women--and men--of the 90s television culture-changer "Sex and the City". Candace has written a number of books since then and her newest book is called "Is There Still Sex in the City?" This October I teamed up with Women Lit of the Bay Area Book Festival to have an on-stage conversation with Candace Bushnell, hosted by INFORUM at The Commonwealth Club of San Francisco. Bushnell kicked off the evening with an update about what she’s been up to lately and a reading, and then we got to sit down and talk--friendships, love, loss and dating over 50.

Candace+Bushnell.jpg

TRANSCRIPT: To err is human. If you find an error, let us know.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point with stories of how women rise up. On today's episode, Candace Bushnell.

C Bushnell:                            Like Sex and the City, once I started dating again, I discovered that there were certain types of guys out there just like there were in Sex and the City. And there were some surprises. One of the things that seemed immediately clear was guys your age no longer find you attractive and it does go both ways. Yes it does.

Lauren Schiller:                  Now that's a driveway moment. Stick around.

C Bushnell:                            At one point, I had this idea for a TV series where the women were going to run, it was a brothel, but it was for other women and they were going to employ these younger guys because there were so many young guys who, I don't know. And I thought the idea was really kind of interesting, but everyone's like, "No." But you know, I had a lot of wacky ideas about what I was going to do with all these stories and this material. And I really went back to the structure that I used in Sex and the City which is, it's really fiction written as journalism as opposed to journalism written as fiction.

Lauren Schiller:                  This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller with stories of how women rise up and that was Candace Bushnell. Yes, that Candace Bushnell who gave us a reason to sit on our couch every week and soak up the stories of the women and men of Sex and the City. She's written a number of books since then. She's a prolific writer and now she's out with a new book. This October I teamed up with Women Lit of the Bay Area Book Festival to have a conversation with Candace on stage hosted by the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco. Candace kicked off the evening with an update about what she's been up to lately and a reading, and then we got to sit down and talk. Here she is on her new book called Is There Still Sex in the City?

C Bushnell:                            Is there still sex in the city? Yes. Yes, but less. And everybody's having less, including the millennials. They're having the least of all. Well, we'll talk about that later. This is not a sequel to Sex and the City, but it has different characters. But the inspiration for writing it was the same feeling that I had when I started writing Sex and the City. And when I started writing Sex and the City, the feeling was really like, this is uncharted territory. Writing about single women's lives in the city and the mating and dating rituals. And at the time we thought, oh gosh, this only happens in New York city. But it turned out that it actually happened everywhere. Now back in the mid nineties, I was a woman in my mid thirties and I felt like being single was really like a feminist kind of statement and it meant that you were kind of willing to break the rules and pursue your own dreams instead of maybe necessarily pursuing finding a man.

C Bushnell:                            And what's so interesting to me is that 20, 25 years ago, if you were a single woman in your mid thirties, people really felt that there was something wrong with you. Now, and I think partly thanks to Sex and the City, people just think you're normal. And so I think that's a bit of a triumph. But when I was writing Sex and the City, I felt very much like an outsider. And like a lot of my Sex and the City friends, I did end up getting married and I guess I found my Mr bigger and also maybe my mister was a little bit younger. And most of my friends also ended up finding their Mr big, their Aiden, their Harry or maybe even their Steve. Now all you guys, you know Sex and the City, right? Okay. Because I don't want to be like, people are looking at me like who is she talking about?

C Bushnell:                            And then something happened and I personally ended up getting divorced when I was 52. And so that was kind of the end of my, what I thought would be happily ever after because I really didn't think about it that much. And my first instinct was to run away. So I ran away to Connecticut, I started riding horses and then I had two other girlfriends who they didn't have children and I decided to do what women are always saying that they're going to do when you're younger. We're all going to live together and we're all going to live close by and we will be like the golden girls. And honestly, for six months it worked.

C Bushnell:                            We went to the vegetable markets, farm stands, we made dinner, we had one friend of mine Sassy, she came up with any excuse to have a party and wear hats. And I sort of thought, okay, this is going to go on forever. But then a whole bunch of my other friends ended up getting divorced. And what happens when women become single again? You go to where the other single women are. So all of a sudden, all of these newly single women, all in their 50s came to Sag Harbor, which I call the village in this book. Now when I got divorced, I really thought I did not want to date at all. I really felt like I've already done this. I've already done the reproductive cycle where I got married, I was in love, this and that, and then it didn't work. Why am I going to attempt to do it again? Isn't there's something better than we as women can do now that we're in our fifties besides looking for men?

C Bushnell:                            Okay. The answer was pretty much no. Because all of my friends and women who I know wanted to start dating again. And once again, and it's not just dating, but it's also reinventing your lives. And so once again, it felt like this is really uncharted territory because they are women who are dating again, they haven't dated for 20, 25 years. And things have really changed. And the other thing that happens when you get somewhere in your fifties is that there can be a feeling of invisibility and there's a question of are you still relevant? Children leaving the nest, careers may end, all of that kind of stuff. So there's also that struggle. But like Sex and the City, once I started dating again, I discovered that there were certain types of guys out there just like there were in Sex and the City and there were some surprises.

C Bushnell:                            One of the things that seemed immediately clear was guys your age no longer find you attractive. Okay. So 50 something guys, and I know there are men in the audience like, "I'm not like that." We're not really brought up to think of somebody in their 50s or 60s as being attractive and being like a potential sex partner. And it does go both ways. Yes it does. And one of the things that one discovers is there are younger guys who are interested. That's another story. And then one of the things that you do is okay, guys your age aren't interested. They're interested in younger women. So why not try to beat the odds by going for guy who's older? Maybe dating a man who's 15, 20 or even 25 years older? Which is fine except that given the fact that you're now middle-aged yourself, that means that man who could be 70, 75 or even 80.

C Bushnell:                            You wouldn't think that there would be a large contingent of men out there at that age who are dating. But when you think about demographics and how so many of the boomers are now in their later years, it makes sense that there's a crop of 60, 70 and even 80 something men out there acting like they're 35. I personally encountered one of these men at a party given by a married couple in their early sixties, and they decided to just get it over with and invite all the newly 50 something single women. I don't know how many of you guys have been in that situation. And then they would invite a couple of eligible guys who they could dig up.

C Bushnell:                            So there were lots of 50 something single women there and two or three of these senior age players or SAPs. These are older single men of means, meaning they have enough money to add it to their list of attributes and are often still employed in a lesser version of the high powered career they once had. At some point during the evening, I must've talked to one of these men because a few days later, Ron, the host of the party contacted me to let me know that out of all the 50 something women there, and I was in my fifties then, now I'm 60, he wanted to let me know that a fellow named Arnold had picked me out of the bunch to ask me out. Now, Ron was very excited about this and he was suddenly very impressed with me that I could attract a guy like Arnold because Arnold, he said was a big deal and everybody really admired him.

C Bushnell:                            Arnold played Ivy league football and he was once an oil man and a newspaper magnet and all the Park Avenue hostesses were always inviting him to their parties. He was sought after. I thought I remembered the guy. A tall, thick battleax type who was definitely older, too old for me I decided. "How old is he?" I asked. "He's a little bit older than I am," Ron said. So that would make him like 68. The thing is these guys often lie about their ages. They fudge somehow forgetting about that truth revealing device called the internet. Sure enough, when I Googled him, Arnold turned out to be 78 and that made him much closer to my father's age than mine. My father was 83, Arnold was just five years younger, but they couldn't have been more different. My father is very conservative and Arnold apparently is not. According to Ron, Arnold used to be somewhat of a notorious wild man at Studio 54. And even to this day, Arnold still has much younger girlfriends. The last one being 42.

C Bushnell:                            "I don't know how he does it," Ron said. I wanted to tell Ron that I didn't want to be the one to find out. And so I tried to say no to this fix-up. Peer pressure however, is one of the things that I hadn't counted on in middle age, and when it came to dating, it turns out there was a lot of it. My friends kept reminding me that it was good to go out and it was really good that someone had finally asked me out, when was the last time that had happened? Of course I should go. What's the harm in it? And besides, you never know. Of course the problem with you never know is that so often you actually do know. I knew or I was convinced I knew that I was not going to date a 78 year old man, no matter how wonderful he was. What if he fell down? I didn't spend my life working this hard to end up taking care of a strange older person.

C Bushnell:                            But every time I tried to explain this to people, I realized how ageist and judgy and anti-love hopeful I sounded because I didn't know. Did I? I didn't know what was going to happen. What if I fell in love with him, in which case his age wouldn't matter, right? Plus, I didn't want to be that creature. And you know that shallow woman who cares more about practicality than the blind illusions of love. Plus, as Ron reminded me, I must feel so honored than a man as powerful as Arnold wanting to spend time with little old me. In preparation for the date I went to my friend's Sassy's house and we looked at photographs of Arnold on the internet. His photos would have back about 35 years. He'd been a big man and rather handsome. "Oh honey," Sassy said, "he could turn out to be absolutely wonderful. You must keep an open mind."

C Bushnell:                            And so arrangements for a date were negotiated. We could have gone to a restaurant in my town, but Arnold really wanted me to see his house, which was in another town about 30 minutes away. However, he offered to pick me up and take me to his town and then I can always spend the night at his house if I needed to. And he would be really willing to drive me back to my house in the morning. A sleepover with a 78 year old man I didn't know? I don't think so. Thank you.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point and that's Candace Bushnell reading from her new book, Is There Still Sex in the City? We'll take a quick break and when we come back, I get to ask her a few questions. Inflection Point is a listener powered independent production. I hope you'll consider supporting us with a tax deductible donation toward our fundraising goal at inflectionpointradio.org and clicking the support button.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point. I'm talking with Candace Bushnell, whose new book is called, Is There Still Sex in the City? We spoke live on stage at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco for Women Lit, a program of the Bay Area Book Festival. Arnold. So-

C Bushnell:                            Yes. You know-

Lauren Schiller:                  You didn't spend the night I take it.

C Bushnell:                            I'm sorry?

Lauren Schiller:                  You didn't spend the night. He showed you his bed. He really tried hard.

C Bushnell:                            I mean, the thing about ... actually, I really made it funny and I worked hard to make it funny. He was really, really sexist, like shockingly so, and really quite oblivious and very entitled. Like one of the first things he showed me was his bed, which was 20 years old or older and he shipped it from California and he said, "I had a lot of really, I've had a really lot of good of sex on that bed and I expect to have a lot more." And I was like, this is just too much. He was, yeah. I mean it's-

Lauren Schiller:                  I want to know why your friends were so invested in you meeting with this guy.

C Bushnell:                            Well, I think it's something that we as women do, we want each other to be taken care of and it's still somewhere in the back of all of our minds, even though it really doesn't happen. That somehow the mail is going to be the protector and you'll be okay if you're partnered up. And I do, I think as human beings, we tend to feel that way. The problem is that they're looking for a relationship that's really just about fulfilling their needs.

Lauren Schiller:                  But it seems like from reading the book, what was so exciting to your friends about this guy is that he had a little bit of money and he had a little bit of power.

C Bushnell:                            Yes. Exactly.

Lauren Schiller:                  And so it seems like at this point in our cultural history in this moment that we're in right now, that maybe that would become less important, but yet it's still lingering on. What do you see happening with all that?

C Bushnell:                            I think it's still lingering on, but what's frustrating of course is that men like Arnold are not ... I don't know. I mean it's not what a lot of women are necessarily looking for and powerful men, they like to enjoy their power. And for powerful men, often part of that is a certain amount of sexual freedom. And that was Arnold.

Lauren Schiller:                  He was raring to go.

C Bushnell:                            He was raring to go. And I think, but that's the other thing that's very shocking, but it won't be shocking to any of the men here.

Lauren Schiller:                  Are there any men here?

C Bushnell:                            But when you start dating again ... there are men here, I saw them already and they're like, ah-

Lauren Schiller:                  Just checking. Okay.

C Bushnell:                            They're like, "We're going to kill her."

Lauren Schiller:                  Is Arnold here?

C Bushnell:                            They want sex immediately. It's like really? But I find though also when I talk to women who work in like old age homes and that kind of thing, they're like, "It's really a problem. These men, they want to kiss you, they want to do all of this and it's just not appropriate."

Lauren Schiller:                  Do you think it's just, you get into your seventies, I mean, neither of us are there yet, but like let's just cut through the crap. Let's just get to the sex. I mean is that maybe part of what's going on? Who knows?

C Bushnell:                            No, no, I don't think so. I think that this is somebody who that's how he operates. He has these certain things that he's going to tempt you with. Like he had this little pool and he was like, "You could come and swim in my pool any time." And I was like, "No." No. On the other hand, the thing that makes these situations so tricky is if the guy had been like incredibly attractive and all of that, that might've been something that I wanted to hear. So that's unfortunately human nature.

Lauren Schiller:                  Right. But what's interesting about, I mean we don't need to totally overanalyze Arnold for a guy but-

C Bushnell:                            No we don't. Because everyone's like, "We want to talk about this today." We don't even know who Arnold is and you probably won't even be in the TV series.

Lauren Schiller:                  But just that he expected that something would happen with sex and you, and like no matter what, like maybe, I mean I know he picked you out of the crowd at the party and everything, but that you maybe were more discerning.

C Bushnell:                            Well, one of the things that he said was that he asked how old I was, when I told him how old I was, and I think at the time I might've been 57 or 58. He was really shocked and he said that he had just upped his age group to maybe include 50, but he wasn't really thinking that that would be somebody who was like 58. And he made it very clear that ... because I think at a certain point I got so pissed off at him and I was like, "Why do you think women have sex with you?" And he said, "Because I buy them handbags."

Lauren Schiller:                  Oh my God.

C Bushnell:                            And this was a real thing. I mean this is another thing that I hear a lot from men is that they are hypersensitive, a lot of them and maybe rightfully so or they're incredibly aware of the power that money can have over women. And I do hear men complaining about things like women just want money from them and women just want them to buy things for them and this and that. And to a certain extent there are women like that. So that was Arnold's set up.

Lauren Schiller:                  Could you imagine a future where the power dynamic is totally reversed?

C Bushnell:                            Yes, I could. Although I don't know what makes me say that.

Lauren Schiller:                  And would that actually be better? I don't know.

C Bushnell:                            But you know power is it's about money really. But I know there's personal power, which is the power to get things done and make things happen on your own. But men, they exercise a lot of it's economic power over women. Economic and educational and access.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, it was really fun reading the book and I mean it just, I want to say it starts with a bang, but it actually it starts with a bang. I'm just going to put it there and I'm ... not like that kind of bang. Okay. It's an action packed to beginning. And anyway, I got about 10 pages in and then I was like, "Wait a second, is this a memoir? Is this fiction?" And then I looked and it says fiction. So, talk about how it's constructed.

C Bushnell:                            We're calling it auto fiction because it's a lot of autobiographical elements of my life in a fictionalized setting with fictional characters. But yes, I mean there are a lot of things that that did happen to me in the book and a lot of very poignant things because the other side of all of this is that your 50s is a very different time than your thirties. In your thirties, you are not generally, I mean you can be hit with all of these life altering events, but it's not the same as being in your 50s or 60s when you're hit with a certain amount of loss.

C Bushnell:                            And that's one of the things that's a big difference. In your thirties, you're looking up, up, up, and you know you're going to move forward. You're going to ... maybe you're already in a relationship and you're raising children and you're doing that into your forties and your career. Everything's going up. And then when you get into your 50s, things can kind of go ... And you know there, a parent will probably pass away. A friend will probably die unfortunately. And so while I was writing the book, my father actually did die while I was writing the book and one of my best friends took her life. So it's an interesting experience. And I talked a lot with my editors. Like originally I had one editor and he was like, "It's just supposed to be funny. We don't want death." But it's like that is such a part of people's lives at this time. And it's one of the things that shapes this period and it changes you psychically and psychologically. And because it does, it can be an opportunity for growth.

Lauren Schiller:                  We had a chance to talk before we sat in this room and one of the things that we were talking about is that, well, just like your editors were saying, "We want it to be funny. We don't want any death in the book." That there's not great role models out there for how to process the death of a parent or a friend or even prepare for it.

C Bushnell:                            That is true. And you know, I mean one of the things that's really different in the last 50 years, maybe the last 30 years, I think it was like in the mid 1960s or maybe even 1970 or 75, 76% of the population over 50 was married. So that was pretty much everybody was married unlike today where it's 50% of people are single, maybe even more people. So when these things happen to you, they happen to you in this in a sense, in the comfort of your own home. And it's happening and you tend to have like relatives and people who have dealt with this, people are there.

C Bushnell:                            You still have a partner, you've got a family, you're probably in the same house that you've lived in for a long time. Today when these things hit you, that is not necessarily true. You may be single again, chances are you may be living on your own, you may have moved, you may be getting divorced. There are a whole bunch of things that happen that don't really insulate you from these situations. And I think that's one of the things that that makes these things a little bit tricky.

Lauren Schiller:                  While you're writing the book, you lose your father, you lose your friend. How did you process those events and then, I mean, was writing the book a way of processing them or did you have to kind of go through it and then figure out how you were going to write about it?

C Bushnell:                            You know, I kind of had to figure out how I was going to write about it kind of while it was happening. Like I went to see my father, I knew he was going to go and I was like, "You know, the reality is if you're a writer, as Nora Ephron said, 'Everything's copy.'" I mean, I hate to say it, but I was just very, tried to be very aware of my feelings, et cetera, and tried to process them in an adult way, which means not having a breakdown and figuring out, I mean that's really what this time is about. You know what? At 50 you're an adult and you have to be. You kind of do.

Lauren Schiller:                  You kind of want to have the breakdown though.

C Bushnell:                            I just do. Being an adult is not necessarily being busy all the time. Being an adult is being able to stand back, assess the situation, take your ego out of it and figure out what is the best thing to do, how to move forward in a way that is the most humane and kind to everybody around. And it's a time when you have to kind of reach down and figure out how to move on. And it's hard. I mean there were a lot of times when I was writing this book when I was like, I was depressed writing the book. But as I was writing the book, I also felt something was lifting. And when I've looked at that U-shaped curve, the realities for most people, the bottom of that U-shaped curve, it is in your fifties and then things kind of start to go up again.

C Bushnell:                            So it was this personal journey for me through my fifties and it wasn't always easy. And I do, you know, I have friends who are ... I've seen people in a lot pain and I've ... this is also a time when you see that some people just, they can't get it together and they just can't make it. Men and women. So for me, this is something to explore and to write about.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, in that, and one of the things that you've written about consistently is friendship and female friendships specifically. What role does friendship or has friendship played for you in coming through those kinds of hard times?

C Bushnell:                            I think it's what it always is. It's like people being there for you. I mean, I had like one friend who she just decided, she's like, "I never turned down a funeral." She's like, "I'm going to them all. I'm going to figure out ... I'm figuring out how to do this." And it's like you got to show up for your friends in a different way. At one time maybe you were showing up with dating advice. Now you're showing up with soup. I don't know. But yes, it's again, another time of finding it's for a lot of people it's like reconnecting with people who you were friends with before you got married and had kids. Because when you have children, your friends tend to be the parents of your children's friends. And if you end up getting divorced, all of these things are changed.

Lauren Schiller:                  This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller talking with Candace Bushnell. When we come back, the Mona Lisa treatment. I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point with a live on stage recording with Candace Bushnell for Women Lit, a program of the Bay Area Book Festival that we recorded the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco. Do you want to talk about the Mona Lisa?

C Bushnell:                            Oh gosh, yes. Well, first of all, it's a laser that ... and I know some of you have heard of this and they use it to restore elasticity and et cetera into your vagina. So it's a laser, but it's for inside and it's ... yes, they put it in your vagina and it works like lasers work. I mean it's just, it's skin. Okay. So it makes sense that it might work, but I want to preface it by saying that it's something that it's so easy for us to make fun of. The idea of women pursuing something, I don't even think it's sexual dysfunction, but something to enhance their sexuality or whatever. And there are basically three things for women and there are 77 products for men. So let's start with that.

C Bushnell:                            So it's actually could be a good thing. But what happens was I was thinking about doing it and it costs $3,000, but I thought if I'm going to do it, I only can do a before and after. So I have to find someone to have sex with before, and get the treatment done, because how am I going to know? I don't know.

Lauren Schiller:                  You don't think you'd be able to tell?

C Bushnell:                            I don't know. I'm making that up, but I don't know. Probably yes, because-

Lauren Schiller:                  I would hope for a $3,000-

C Bushnell:                            Well, I first heard about it, I heard about it from my gynecologist and then I brought it up at lunch with this guy, like have you ever heard of this? And he literally went pale, but he said, "My wife got it." And he said, "She's divorcing me and she's gone off with a younger guy." And this, I was like, "Wow." I heard the story about 20 times from other people of the same thing. So I thought that was very interesting of women actually leaving their husbands when, and really just being rejuvenated or whatever and saying, "Hey, I'm going to go out there and I don't feel like giving this up." So-

Lauren Schiller:                  Well let's, while we're on the topic, let's talk Tinder because you did a whole event experiment with [crosstalk 00:38:29].

C Bushnell:                            I did a Tinder experiment and-

Lauren Schiller:                  Everyone know what Tinder is?

C Bushnell:                            Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm just making sure.

C Bushnell:                            How many of you have gone on Tinder?

Lauren Schiller:                  Oh, show of hands.

C Bushnell:                            It's all the young women and it's a guy.

Lauren Schiller:                  Oh, you met on Tinder? No. Okay.

C Bushnell:                            You could meet on Tinder. I mean Tinder there are no filters or anything like that and people make their own choices. So, but I discovered an app like Tinder, it really is a game. It's designed like a card game and you know the app doesn't care if you meet somebody or not. It just wants you to be on it and stay on it. But what I found interestingly with Tinder, and this is something that I feel like I'm hearing it more and more out there from guys, and I think the thing that was most interesting about Tinder was how many men, first of all thought that the other men on it were absolutely horrible. And when men think like other men are bad, you really should pay attention because normally they cover up each other's bad behavior.

C Bushnell:                            And the other thing was how quite a few guys said how much they hated themselves when they were on Tinder and how it brought out like the worst sexist sides of their personality where they really just felt women were objects. And it was really interesting to talk to these guys and get their take on it and it's not heartening. And I ended up also talking to a lot of 25 year old women in their twenties who are on Tinder and they talked a lot about their frustrations and their biggest frustration seem to be with the quality of the men that they were meeting. So hello, maybe you shouldn't go on Tinder. And I thought, I mean I'd heard women complaining about dating before. Dating's never been easy, but it was really like the first piece I did for this book. And it was very eyeopening how much more negative women had become about dating and men.

C Bushnell:                            And I just heard like a lot more anger. I mean look, there are always women out there who are they're having a great time. It's all working out for them and they have it all together. But you know, a lot of women didn't and they insisted that the guys that I was going to meet on Tinder were going to be maybe not what they said, that they would have undiagnosed mental illnesses, and that a lot of them would use drugs, and that they were really unreliable and that this sort of thing. So I went on Tinder. The first thing that happened was Tinder set my age range for who I would be attracted to based on my age. I couldn't lie about my age because I didn't know I wasn't skilled enough on Tinder. And so it matched me up with, there were like two guys over the age of 58 and they were both like smokers.

C Bushnell:                            So I set the age, I was like, "What's going on?" I set the age range. I was like, "Okay, I will say 22 to 32 and see what happens." I got tons and tons of hits, so many hits and I really was like, "Wow." And people were writing really nice things. And I was like, "Those girls are so wrong." And then I matched with this guy who, he was 33 I think, and everyone kept saying, "Oh, he's a real man man." He had a beard and a lot of hair.

Lauren Schiller:                  Sure sign.

C Bushnell:                            And so we agreed to meet up, we met up and he told me a lot about like Tinder and how all the horrible guys were on it and this and that. And he was a vegetarian and the only place we could go, I could find to go was like a hamburger place. But he was like, "Don't worry, I'll deal. I'll just eat French fries." So I was like, "Okay." But it was interesting. It was fun. We kind of ... it was friendly and he seemed like a really nice guy. So then he asked me out again and we went to see this really cool downtown play and I was like, "Hey, this is like groovy. It's great. This guy's really cool." And then he asked me out again and I was like, "I really shouldn't do this, because I'm not going to date anybody for a story."

C Bushnell:                            And I wasn't really interested, but he asked me to go to this Shakespeare play in Brooklyn. So I thought, Well, why not? Am I doing anything else? I should go. So I was crossing the Brooklyn bridge and of course I couldn't help but think about that scene in Sex and the City when it's Miranda and Steve, they're going to meet on the bridge. And I was like, I'm crossing the bridge, maybe something's going to happen. Isn't this nice? Like I'm going to prove to everybody that you could meet a great guy on Tinder.

C Bushnell:                            And so I get there and everybody's pairing up and going into the theater, and then they're ringing the bell. And I didn't have the tickets, supposedly this guy had the tickets and he didn't show up. So it was an expensive taxi ride there and back. It was like $40 each way. And I was like, what's, you know. And so I texted him and I said, maybe we got the date wrong or something like that. And I didn't hear from him for two days. And then I got a really, really long text that said I am so, so sorry. I lost track of time. I took MDM PD do, some kind of new designer drug and I don't know what happened, but I tried to drive my car, I was arrested and then I was put in a 48 hour hold and it went on. And I was just like, he turned out to be exactly what the Tinderellas had said I would find. And I really thought Tinder, it's like Vegas, it's the house. It always wins.

C Bushnell:                            And then I was going to this black tie event and I saw this woman outside and she was really beautiful and she was smoking a cigarette. And I was like, "Wow, someone's still smoking a cigarette." I used to smoke. So I was like, I'm just going to go near the cigarette smell. And I just started talking to her and she was incredibly attractive. She was tall, blonde, she was maybe 32. She seemed like she had it all together. And so I decided to ask her about do you go on Tinder? Now I forgot to mention she was Russian.

C Bushnell:                            And she was like, "Yes, of course I go on Tinder." And I was like, "But why? You're so beautiful, you certainly don't need to be on Tinder." And she was like, "It's when you go on Tinder, you get more Instagram followers. It's all about Instagram." And I was like, "That's it." So there you go.

Lauren Schiller:                  And this is why millennials are not having as much sex obviously.

C Bushnell:                            Well, I don't know if anybody watched this. You know, there was that Lisa Ling thing about pornography and its effect on young men. And again, there were a lot of young men on there who were really very distressed about this constant use of porn and how they become addicted and how it affected them psychologically and how difficult it made them to find real women attractive and how it wasn't ... and how being around real women made them very nervous, very uncomfortable. They didn't know what to do. And again, like how they really, really did not like themselves.

C Bushnell:                            And I mean, I think that, and that's something that I hear. And I heard this when I was writing this Tinder pieces well from guys about how it's impossible for them to avoid pornography and how they get so much pornography, whether they want it or not, and how it's affects them in a negative way. And that's definitely, I don't know. I mean, I don't know, porn is such a big money making industry that we are never going to get a straight answer on it. I promise you. I'm not a fan of porn. I think I know too much about it.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm just thinking about how women in their fifties and up are depicted in the media and in movies and in our culture in general. And how we can start to see a shift toward that being, we're not just irrelevant. It's-

C Bushnell:                            Yes. Well I think that is-

Lauren Schiller:                  New world.

C Bushnell:                            It's really, I mean, it's changing so much because I feel like the Sex and the City woman who to me, I mean, to me the Sex and the City woman is a woman who's my age. I'm 60, but it's about really it was a change that happened in the late seventies and the early eighties. And it really happened because of feminism, the pill. Also women's magazines at that time were really very important and they were just seminating information to regular women out there about things that you could have that you could never have before. And one of them was an orgasm and the other was a career. And-

Lauren Schiller:                  And that ladies and gentlemen is having it all.

C Bushnell:                            Exactly.

Lauren Schiller:                  Forget everything else.

C Bushnell:                            And in the late seventies and eighties, there was a huge influx of women into the workforce. This has happened a couple of times in the 1920s, for instance, but then it always, women end up going back to the home. And it happened at that time. And that really made for a lot of changes and it was a group of women who they were going to go out there and do something that their mothers hadn't done. They were going to try to have it all. It was really like the first generation of women that were encouraged, told that you could have it all, that you could have a family, you could have a career.

C Bushnell:                            So this is not a group of women who are shy violence. This tends to be a group of women who they're used to challenging the status quo and they're used to going out there and changing things and changing perspectives. And this is really the same group of women, but they're older. And they're not going to go away. So I do think-

Lauren Schiller:                  So now's the time to show up. They're showing up.

C Bushnell:                            Yes. Yeah. I mean I do think it's a different time.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Candace Bushnell speaking with me live on stage at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco for Women Lit, a program of the Bay Area Book Festival. Candace's new book is called, Is There Still Sex in the City? I'll put a link to it on my website influctionpointradio.org, where by the way, you can find future events by clicking on the events tab there. I'd love to see you. I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's our Inflection Point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple podcasts, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know a woman leading change we should talk to? Let us know at inflectionpointradio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to inflectionpointradio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at inflectionpointradio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. And follow me on Twitter at laschiller. To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go. inflectionpointradio.org. Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco and PRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver. Our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host. Lauren Schiller.

 

Jessica Reaves is Calling Misogyny What It Is–Another Form of Extremism (Interview + Toolkit)

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

We're hearing more from and about American extremist groups lately, like white supremacists and Incels. One thing their members have in common is misogyny. Today's guest is Jessica Reaves, the Editorial Director at the Center on Extremism at the Anti-Defamation League. She and her team monitor extremists across the ideological spectrum. In today's episode you'll hear what she's learned about these groups, why she thinks misogyny should be treated as another form of extremism, and how we can put a stop to it.

Jessica Reaves headshot.jpg

RESOURCES:

ADL Resource Library

Report: When Women are the Enemy: The Intersection of Misogyny and White Supremacy

TRANSCRIPT: We do our best on these, if you see an error, let us know!

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point, with stories of how women rise up. On today's episode...

Jessica Reeves:                  It's a terrible moment and yet I'm hoping that when we look back on it, future generations look back on it, we recognize the extent to which this has been a moment maybe that led us to a place of honesty on these issues that we've never had before.

Lauren Schiller:                  You can only hear that conversation on Inflection Point coming up.

Jessica Reeves:                  My name is Jessica Reeves and I'm the Editorial Director at the Center on Extremism at ADL or the Anti-Defamation League. My job mostly consists of, well, it entirely consists of overseeing the entire body of work produced by Center on Extremism staffers. We're a staff of about 12 around the country, and we monitor extremists across the ideological spectrum and produce reports and work with law enforcement and the community to educate them on extremism and the risks that various movements pose.

Lauren Schiller:                  Does that mean that you and your staff are looking at these movements and events as they unfold from the outside in or are you deeper inside what's going on? Do you or any of your staff actually have relationships with people inside these movements?

Jessica Reeves:                  Our research is outside in, we tend not to participate in any of the activities even as sort of observers. We just look at it from a journalistic perspective. We do have ways, which I will not get into here, but we do have ways of keeping track of what's going on inside of these movements, and some of that is based in technology, some of it's based in experience, some of it's based in past relationships. So we have a fairly broad toolbox to work with when it comes to understanding what these groups are doing, what their activity looks like on a day-to-day basis. It helps us stay abreast of the very quickly changing landscape these days.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point, with stories of how women rise up. In today's episode, I'm talking with Jessica Reeves of the Anti-Defamation League or ADL, and she, as you just heard, studies extremist groups. Many of these groups that she studies including white supremacists and incels, so-called involuntary celibates, have one thing in common, they would like to keep women down.

Jessica Reeves:                  This has always existed. This has always been there. We are a country founded on white supremacy. We are a country founded on misogyny. There are so many things that formed the backbone of this country in our society that we have to deal with, and we have never dealt with any of these things. And I just think it's such a... it's a terrible moment, and yet I'm hoping that when we look back on it, future generations look back on it, we recognize the extent to which this has been a moment maybe that led us to a place of honesty on these issues that we've never had before.

Lauren Schiller:                  We hear about white supremacists, we hear about white nationalists. Let's just start there. Is there a difference?

Jessica Reeves:                  There is no difference, no. White nationalism is just a sort of prettified version of white supremacy. If somebody says there are white nationalists, there are white supremacist. They may try to differentiate themselves by saying, "Oh well, as a white nationalist, I believe that white people should have their own space. We should have our own territory within the United States and non-whites can have their own territories. So I'm not advocating for the injury of anyone else or for the expulsion of anyone else per se, I just want my own space. But in fact, it all just comes back to I believe that white people need to be separate because I believe they are superior and different and better in all of these different ways, and I want my own country based on race."

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, let's talk about misogyny. Define misogyny.

Jessica Reeves:                  Misogyny is just a step up from everyday sexism. Misogyny is taking action that will injure women. That doesn't mean physically, it could mean emotionally, it could mean in terms of jobs, it could mean professionally or educationally or any of those things, but you're doing something to injure women, you're doing something against women, and it doesn't even have to be knowingly, there's a lot of internalized misogyny as we know, as we saw in the last election, there's... All of these things can play out in a non-extremist looking way and I think that's what's so interesting and challenging about studying misogyny is that we all have experienced sexism.

                                                      Most of us have probably experienced misogyny, it's just harder to put our finger on what made it different. And I'm still grappling with how to explain the nuance there because sexism is treating women differently, misogyny is treating women differently in an overtly or explicitly harmful way. Misogyny is rooted in a hatred of women and often a fear of women.

Lauren Schiller:                  You've recently released a report on the connection between white supremacy and misogyny. And it's very obvious just in the first few minutes that we've been talking, that those two things are connected by hate of an other, but there's so much more to it. There was something that you wrote in that report that was, they want femininity over feminism. And so now the next question is really, what are their views on feminists that make us so vile?

Jessica Reeves:                  Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  I laugh wickedly, [crosstalk 00:06:53] -

Jessica Reeves:                  Feminism and feminist more generally are the enemy of white supremacists as well as misogynists, and I can talk more about the various strains of misogyny that we're following and that have come to the fore, especially in recent years, but the beef with feminism and feminist is that women are attempting to take stature away from white men, and this victimhood narrative is just pervasive throughout white supremacists ideology and misogynists landscapes. So this is one of the things that connects them, is this sense that, okay, all of these opportunities, all of these things that I've theoretically worked for, and I'm using air quotes, which is not helpful on an audio recording, but these things that are supposed to be mine, and this is the white man talking, are being threatened by advances by women and advances by people of color, and God help them if they get close to a woman of color, then that's a whole other... All of their fears wrapped up in one.

                                                      It's just a victimhood narrative, it's a sense of being cheated out of something, it's a sense of being denied their birthright, and they see this as an encroaching issue. They also, white supremacists also are very clear in that they link feminism back to the Jews because everything always comes back to the Jews, and this is part of a larger white supremacists conspiracy theory about Jews controlling things including immigration, which is a plot to replace white people with non-white people.

                                                      Anyway, there's a whole underbelly of horribleness that we could get into there, but just to keep the focus on feminism, again, we're back to that grievance. There's just a constant state of grievance among misogynists and among white supremacists. And when I started working on this report that you mentioned, it was spurred on by the Alek Minassian van attack in Toronto, which happened in 2018, and that was definitely not the first time that we'd seen someone who identifies as an incel, which is involuntary celibate, act out against women violently, strike out against them, murder them, but it was a sort of turning point in the sense that people were starting to really pay attention to this issue in some cases for the first time, or they were starting to take a broader look at this issue for the first time.

                                                      The Alek Minassian attack led me to start looking at some of these message boards where incels spend a lot of time and I noticed how frequently their language mirrored the language that I saw on white supremacists message boards, their language about women. White supremacists have a very specific view of how women should behave, how women should be... Of their role in the household, of their role in society. White men in the white supremacist movement want women who are fertile, a, that's their most important function. They are breeders who can create the next generation of white warrior babies. And then after that they're supposed to be supporting their husbands, they're supposed to be building and keeping a beautiful home. And then of course raising all these many white children.

                                                      That's the very specific set of demands that are placed on women in the white supremacist movement, and there's a lot of overlap in terms of what the misogynist sector of the internet, which is broadly referred to as the manosphere, they have their own views of how women should behave, but it's all very retrograde, like it's 1950 all over again. They're, women need to know their place. Women need to understand that men are in charge. Women are taking too many liberties with the way they dress, the way they speak, the way they run for public office. So there's very much a need to contain women, and that's true across the board, there's just different ways of expressing it in the white supremacist community versus the misogynist online sphere.

Lauren Schiller:                  The first question I have is, why would a woman go for that? I imagine that half of the population is women just like the rest of us and that many of them are bought in full force. What are some insights around why that would be?

Jessica Reeves:                  There actually aren't... There aren't a huge number of women who are active in the white supremacist movement. There are [crosstalk 00:12:14] -

Lauren Schiller:                  They're not all married? They're not all married to women who are buying into this idea of the breeder?

Jessica Reeves:                  A lot of them seem to be single based on what I've seen, and or suffer from tremendous marital problems, which is in some ways not all that surprising, but certainly there are women who provide support to these men, who make sandwiches for them or whatever when they're going out to protest against a synagogue or a gay rights rally or whatever they are doing that Saturday. But there are just not that many sort of visible members who are women. So it's been hard to understand them, that population, because they just don't speak publicly.

                                                      There are a couple of women who do and who will coach other white women on how to behave, and that's where the 1950s housewife ideal comes into play. That's how we know what's expected of white women in the white supremacist movement. But again, we come back to the good old internalized misogyny. If you are brought up in a situation where you're led to believe that you are less than, that you're not a full person, that your worth is dependent on the acceptance and love of a man, and that a man is supposed to control everything in your life, you're going to seek that out obviously in your own relationships. Or if you just have really low self-esteem, that's a running issue throughout extremism.

                                                      A lot of these people who are most susceptible to being recruited into extremist movements, they're looking for a place to belong, they're looking for a purpose in life, they're looking for a group that will accept them. Many of them struggle with social anxiety or social alienation growing up, and we see recruiters from the white supremacist movement capitalizing on that. We see exactly the same thing happening when let's say ISIS wants to recruit people. You seek out the people who do not have a sense of who they are yet, what they believe, where they stand on issues, and you mold them. So that recruitment process is very similar across extremist movements.

                                                      And it's true for the women as well. We know that a lot of these women do not have strong senses of self. There's not a huge amount of self-esteem going on. Sometimes we have to take on the role of armchair psychologist, but sort of a fascinating subcommunity and I think we're just starting to learn more about these women. We're seeing some women leaving the movement and they will of course be the best sources for inside information. You know, what goes on, what kind of recruitment happens for women.

                                                      I gather there are matchmaking efforts made to sort of pair up the men in the movement with eligible women. And by eligible, generally speaking, we're talking about quite a bit younger, I would imagine mostly legal age, but still quite a bit younger than the men or at least a bit younger, and the key thing is, for the white supremacists, is that the women cannot have ever had a relationship with a non-white man. Because if that happens then they're ruined and they are off the table altogether. They are no longer even considered human in the eyes of the white supremacists.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point, with stories of how women rise up. I'm speaking with Jessica Reeves, the Editorial Director at the Center on Extremism, at the Anti-Defamation League. You can reveal your true power with a contribution to our production at inflectionpointradio.org, and by subscribing to our podcast on your favorite podcast app. When we come back, we'll talk about why extremism seems to be on the rise and what we can do about it.

                                                      I'm Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point. My guest is Jessica Reeves, the Editorial Director at the Center on Extremism, at the Anti-Defamation League. What is happening in our country right now that it feels like we're seeing a rise in this movement? And subquestion, are we seeing a rise in this movement or is it just sort of the same percentage of our population but they have risen more to the surface or somehow seem to gain more attention or possibly even power? I don't know.

Jessica Reeves:                  Yeah, it's all tied up. Certainly in the last presidential election in 2016, we heard language used that we have never heard in mainstream politics before. Language about immigrants, language about women, language about non-white people, and that changed the game. This was a signal to a lot of these extremists, a lot of these white supremacists, a lot of these misogynists, that it was, "Hey, come on out. Everything's safe here. You're allowed to say these things." You can express your views freely because this guy is out here talking about these issues and using these words and nothing's happening to him.

                                                      So we can't discount how powerful it is for these people to hear someone at the upper reaches of power in this country talking about women and non-white people in a way that we literally have never heard before from a public official.

                                                      To your question about whether there's more of these people or if they're just more visible, I would say there are more of them in the sense that if we define them as [inaudible 00:19:46] people who can engage with other racists and white supremacists in chat rooms or online otherwise. That doesn't necessarily mean they're out in the streets, that they're going to Charlottesville, that they're taking part in these white supremacists rallies, but it does mean that they are spending time in these forums, on these message boards, where these views are shared and celebrated and elevated and where they're egging each other on too often to commit horrific crimes, obviously not anywhere near all of them commit crimes, but we do see this echo chamber effect which is just creating a really very like sort of a cacophonous space where these guys are all yelling and screaming at the top of their lungs and they're finally finding people who will listen to them.

                                                      These people have always existed, but they just have a much broader reach now because of the internet, and they've also been to a certain extent, given a microphone, because of some of the discourse we see from public officials.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. Well, that's another thing I've been thinking about is what this rise in their vocality... Is that even a noun? Means for who runs our country, and which one led to the other? Did Trump get elected because these guys felt emboldened and ran to the polls to vote for him? Or are there sort of like less vocal people who hold these views that felt emboldened and they felt like they found their guy without necessarily describing themselves as white supremacists? Somehow normalizing that behavior.

Jessica Reeves:                  A lot of white supremacists, I will say, do not like Trump. They think he's a sellout. They don't like that he's friendly with Israel. This goes against a lot of their fundamental core beliefs. But they love it when he says things, and we've charted this on our blog posts, at Center on Extremism, they love it when he comes out and says overtly racist things about immigrants or non-white people. When he made that comment about, why aren't we seeing more immigration from Norway? They loved that. That was right up their alley.

Lauren Schiller:                  Is that a classic dog whistle?

Jessica Reeves:                  That's another term, the dog whistle. Yeah, sort of having... White supremacists have long been enamored of all things Nordic, all things Scandinavian. So whether he was using it as a dog whistle, I don't know, but it certainly resonated within the white supremacist movement as, "Hey, this guy knows the lingo. He's speaking our language."

Lauren Schiller:                  Does that mean I need to get rid of the hygge book in my bathroom?

Jessica Reeves:                  No. We've all been feeling very, very, sad for all the very nice Norwegian and Swedish and Finnish people that we know and work with because their culture has been co-opted to a certain extent by white supremacists. That's been the case for quite some time. The Odinists are a group of white supremacists who have essentially co-opted a lot of these symbols, but anyway, no, you don't have to. We want to defend our Scandinavian friends as best we can. So, no.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. I guess one of the bigger questions I'm asking is, because we are hearing more about white supremacists, their views on misogyny, misogyny being normalized by our president, but at the same time we're in the wake of this Me Too movement and Time's Up, and sexual harassment being something that's on the front page as often as an extremist act is in some ways, is that a coincidence that those two things are happening together? Or have you thought about what the connection is just in terms of the pendulum swinging back and forth like this?

Jessica Reeves:                  Right. Well, two things. One, I think Hillary Clinton was robbed of this election victory because of misogyny, I will say that, and sexism. I think we all just have to accept that and recognize it for what it is. The white supremacists, even the full-on racists in the United States, do not make up a large enough voting block to have changed the outcome of the election. I think there's certainly evidence that there were people who just were uncomfortable, and I'm using air quotes again, with the idea of a woman being in charge and specifically with Hillary Clinton.

                                                      And obviously we can get into... There's so much political background there, but fundamentally, this is a country that did elect twice a black man to be president and we could not get it together to elect a woman, a white woman, but a woman, and it's like that means something. That means something about where we are as a country. I think a lot of us after 2016, I felt... I really internalized a lot of that.

                                                      It was sort of like, "Geez, this country hates women." And... I don't know, there was so much that came out of that that I think emboldened men who had a baseline of feeling that women were not on par with men, but it also fueled so much anger and so much frustration and so much righteous rage from women that, I have to believe that that was tied into women saying in workplaces, in Hollywood, around the world saying, "Enough. Enough. I'm not dealing with this. We just listened to this guy talking about assaulting women with impunity and he just got elected to be president of the United States. I personally am not going to put up with this anymore."

                                                      I think there are historians and social scientists who know this, what this pendulum looks like and how the... Could probably graph all of this out, but that's my lay person's opinion of why we saw what we saw.

Lauren Schiller:                  You study extremism, but then there's all these other tentacles that leak into the mainstream points of view, even as those same people might say they abhor the views of a white supremacist or a misogynist.

Jessica Reeves:                  Yeah. There are a lot of people who are perfectly comfortable and perfectly willing to live with what we consider sort of low grade misogyny or sexism, who wouldn't consider themselves to be sexist or misogynist. Which is exactly the same thing we see with racism. It's what you're conditioned to be okay with, again, with the air quotes. But it's all about what we are willing to put up with in our daily lives. What people of color are willing to put up with to keep their jobs, what women are willing to put up with to keep their jobs. That's sort of what defines what's acceptable and that's putting all of the onus on the people who are experiencing the discrimination. That's not cool. To put it scientifically.

Lauren Schiller:                  One of the things you say in your report on the connection between white supremacy and misogyny is that misogyny is dangerous and under-reported. How do we make it more reported and less dangerous?

Jessica Reeves:                  When I wrote the report, I was trying to really drive home the fact that we talk about prejudice in a certain way when it affects certain populations. So we talk about antisemitism, we talk about racism, we talk about xenophobia, we talk about homophobia, and all of those things are tied into extremist movements in different ways. But we rarely discuss misogyny, which is a, as we discovered through doing this research, is a cornerstone of white supremacy, but also of this specifically misogynistic group of men who exist primarily online and occasionally lash out in murderous rages as we've seen over the last couple of years. But how often do we call out misogyny as part of these extremist movements or as its own form of extremism?

                                                      I just wanted people to see them on the same level and to talk about them with the same frequency and to be willing to call people out on it. I just think that we let a lot of misogyny go, we let it fly, we let it sit, and that's really dangerous for women and for the young boys who are hearing it and who are hearing it be okay over and over and over again. And in terms of reporting, I think we just need to elevate misogyny into this space where people are taking it seriously, where people are calling it out for what it is, and where people are recognizing that it has real life impact, it has impact on women's bodily autonomy in terms of domestic violence, it has effect on women's ability to go to a hot yoga class or to walk down the street in Toronto or to belong to a sorority in Southern California.

                                                      These are all places where men have attacked women because they have felt that women were not treating them the way they deserve to be treated, specifically, that they were not having sex to the extent that they felt they deserved. And those are incel attacks, those are involuntary celibate attacks, all of which I chart out in the report.

Lauren Schiller:                  Incels and white supremacist, they share this misogynistic view, but if you're one, you're not necessarily the other?

Jessica Reeves:                  Right. Incels view women specifically through a sexual lens, whereas white supremacists tend to view women more through this traditionalist retrograde lens of being a housewife, being a mother. They do have very different views on women, but both of them denigrate women. It's part of their ideology.

Lauren Schiller:                  Going back to identifying violence against women as a demonstration of misogyny, but then also the connection between domestic violence and mass violence, it seems like in many of the attacks that we've seen in mass shootings, specifically, that these guys had already been in trouble for hurting their wives or girlfriends, would bringing misogyny more into the limelight so to speak and institutionalizing that as a problem that could lead to bigger problems be helpful?

Jessica Reeves:                  Yeah, absolutely. The New York Times did a really... Several reporters in New York Times did a really great piece in August, and the headline is A Common Trait Among Mass Killers: Hatred Toward Women, and they tracked a bunch of these mass murderers and looked at the relationships they'd had with women. I think we're getting to the point where we are starting to understand that there is a connection between violence that happens in private and violence that happens in public. And I think that there... Yes, absolutely. One of the things we can do is to talk to law enforcement and make sure that they understand, "Hey, this is not something that you dismiss. This is not something that you just write-off as boys being boys. This is a serious issue that can lead to violence against one woman, violence against many women." And I think the more law enforcement is talking about this, frankly, the better.

                                                      Scott Beierle, who's the guy who shot up the Hot Yoga studio in Tallahassee last year, he had been called in a couple of times to the police station because he had been groping women. He had been groping them, he had been following them, he had been stalking. I think one... There were all kinds of red flags going on, but in a couple of cases women didn't press charges. I think that speaks more to what's going on with our policing system and how women are treated when they do bring charges, and I can't speak to their specific cases obviously, but we know that women who bring charges of assault or violence or harassment against men are not often treated as well as they should be.

                                                      But if these things had been taken more seriously and if Beierle had not been able to get a gun, which he should not have been able to, then we might not have had that mass murderer in Tallahassee. It's all tied up in law enforcement response, in gun laws, and closing loopholes, and just legislation generally, both on a state and national level, taking violence against women more seriously and pursuing charges in a more vigorous way.

Lauren Schiller:                  What about these websites like 4chan and 8chan? 8chan, the founder even said there's too much violent rhetoric happening on this website. It should go away. Does that actually make an impact?

Jessica Reeves:                  Honestly, what we've found is that when one site shuts down another one springs up. For the tech companies at this point where it's sort of a whack-a-mole situation, they're trying to, to some extent and with varying degrees of success, monitor the conversations that are going on on their websites, on their forums. But when they shut one thing down, very quickly these guys find another place to be, another more forgiving or "Open" place to be.

                                                      There are a couple of tech companies that seem to take a very antagonistic view towards anybody trying to encourage responsible monitoring or enforcement of terms of service. That should be commonplace, but we just don't see that happening in a lot of these sites.

Lauren Schiller:                  How does that make you feel after you've spent an hour crawling through some of these websites?

Jessica Reeves:                  It's a challenge. I was a reporter for many years before I joined ADL and I think that really helped me set up a compartmentalization in my brain. I covered some rough stuff as a reporter and I got good at, reasonably good at coming home, turning that part off and focusing on the rest of my life. That's not to say everyone on the team doesn't have recurring nightmares. The people that you come to rely on in this work, are the people who really understand what you're going through on a psychological and emotional level on a day-to-day basis. So I rely on my co-workers and colleagues too. If I need a sounding board, if I'm just feeling run-down or just under too much pressure or if I just can't take it anymore, I know how to take a break, but I also know that I can call people that I work with and just vent.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. So when you go on vacation, is it just like a no technology zone? Like are you able to insulate yourself for a minute?

Jessica Reeves:                  Yeah, I try really hard to just leave everything at home. The problem is that, and this is something that affects our work in a global way, but I mean extremism is part of our everyday news cycle these days. So it's not as if I can just say, "Okay, I'm not going to look at extremist news." It means I can't look at the news generally because extremism has infiltrated so much of our day-to-day lives and it's in our political landscape, and the news cycle is just all about these stories. And so, yeah, I just have to say, "Okay, I'm not even going to look," and that's really hard for me to do as a former reporter and just as a sort of interested human. But it's so important to do it and I know I need to do it more often.

Lauren Schiller:                  All right. Jessica, what's the best advice that anyone's ever given you about how to stand up to someone who is spouting a worldview that is totally an opposition to what you believe to be right and true?

Jessica Reeves:                  Honestly, I think if you can stomach it, you just need to talk to people. It's very hard to hate someone when you know them. And I think the more people reach out to each other and spend more time around people who are not like themselves, the less likely we are to see racism or sexism or misogyny or white supremacy. We need to surround ourselves with people who think differently than we do, and that doesn't mean accepting terrible worldviews and dangerous worldviews, it just means talking to people and trying to get people to understand a more compassionate and empathetic worldview, and I know that's easier said than done.

                                                      My first reaction is always to write people off when they express views that I think are horrible, and certainly if they're dangerous views, you want to get away from them as quickly as possible. But I'm talking more about the, again, the garden variety racism or the sexism. You want to talk to people and you want to find out what's going on and you want to figure out if you can present yourself or someone in your circle or family, and this is only if you can do it safely obviously, but if you can present yourself as an opportunity for them to learn more about why diversity or being kind to each other or not embracing racist ideology is a good thing, then I think that's a moment of opportunity. And I don't think we can pretend that they come along all the time, but I think it's something that we need to be on the lookout for.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and you're listening to Inflection Point. Coming up, Jessica Reeves will tell us how to respond to misogyny when we encounter it online, at school, and at work.

                                                      I'm Lauren Schiller and you're listening to Inflection Point. And here's Jessica's toolkit.

Jessica Reeves:                  I tell parents, pay attention to what your kids are doing online. Everybody knows this. It's parenting one-on-one, but there's just so much out there that's so incredibly dangerous, and I will often refer them to a really amazing piece in the Washingtonian from May of this year that was written by a parent of a 13 or 12 year old, I think 13 year old boy, who had an incident at school where he was chastised for treating a girl badly, came home and started to look for support online because he was feeling wronged by whatever disciplinary action had been taken. And he went online and found all of these sites where he could talk about girls and how they were bad and they were taking things away from boys, and that escalated into full-on misogynistic commentary and forums and participation in that. And then he got sucked in to full-on alt-right websites.

                                                      Literally there's just this like algorithm to disaster that YouTube has perfected and it's just, it's incredibly unnerving to see how quickly all of this can happen and snowball online. So pay attention to what's happening online. We need to raise kids who are good at asking questions. We need to raise girls who aren't going to take guff. We're going to raise boys who respect women in a meaningful way. And we're going to make sure that we're calling out misogyny when we see it or hear it, and it doesn't matter where it's coming from. Whether it's coming from the president of the United States or whether it's coming from the leader of your cub scout group.

Lauren Schiller:                  Can you talk for a minute about the world of gaming, which everyone's got a different point of view on the world of gaming and its influence on our children? But you happen to have some data around what happens inside these online video games and what it means for recruitment of mostly young guys, I'm imagining?

Jessica Reeves:                  We are increasingly seeing these games that you can play on an open network used by extremists to recruit, especially young boys. So these games that you can play with people around the world where you're chatting with them, where you're having interactions with them. These are becoming recruitment opportunities for white supremacists, just as they've long been recruitment opportunities for people who are pedophiles and other horribleness.

                                                      The extremists are looking into these open network games because they know that they're finding boys especially who'll be susceptible to their teachings, to their way of thinking. They want to find new recruits, that's something that white supremacists are constantly doing. They're keeping an eye on college campuses. We've seen a huge rise in propaganda efforts on campuses, because again, you're targeting people who are at the right age, who haven't quite figured out who they are yet. So the idea of targeting these gaming platforms, these gaming systems, falls into the same line of thinking. If you can grab these kids before they have themselves sorted out altogether, you're finding a really... It's a very vulnerable population.

Lauren Schiller:                  So now that we've scared the crap out of some parents who are listening, who have kids who play on these open network games, what do you suggest to parents?

Jessica Reeves:                  If it were me, I would be closing those networks down. Just play with people you know. Just play it close. Play with the people in your family, play just with your friends who you can identify specifically online. I don't know that there's any reason for kids to be so exposed for hours at a time to a world that we know is not particularly safe at the moment.

                                                      It's really important not to dismiss sexist or misogynist comments just by laughing them off or saying, "Boys will be boys," and I will advise people, think about whether these comments were targeting a person of another race or ethnicity and does that change your perception of how serious the slur is? And it can be a really powerful teaching tool because we are reasonably good at detecting... Of responding to racism. What if we were that good at recognizing when sexism and misogyny were happening?

Lauren Schiller:                  What happens when you're in a moment as an adult where you are spotting sexism or misogyny in your professional or private life?

Jessica Reeves:                  Yeah, I think as with other prejudices and expressions of hatred, we need to be more comfortable with being uncomfortable. We need to call these things out when we see them. If you see something happening in your workplace that you know is wrong because a woman is being treated differently or talked about differently, or her femaleness is the butt of a joke, or anybody who's identifying as a woman is being treated poorly based on her gender or gender identity, that is a moment to speak up. That's a moment to say, "Hey, I don't appreciate hearing this. I don't think it's right. I want you to stop." And if you need to elevate it to an HR situation or if that's available to you, that's really important because I think systemically we are not set up to take these things seriously.

                                                      The more that the change agents, and I do think of HR department sometimes they can be change agents in their best iterations, the more that change agents hear about these things happening and these misogynist or sexist expressions, the more likely they are to start incorporating that into their teaching or into their training, and that's how change happens. It just has to happen on a personal level, at the same time that it's happening on a societal level. Because one really can't happen without the other.

                                                      I think we need to really demand that our law enforcement officials and agencies generally take violence against women seriously. We need to make sure that they are responding to calls in a meaningful way, meaning that they're not just brushing things off. We need to train law enforcement to understand what domestic violence can look like. We need them to understand when they're called into a situation that they need to look for specifically misogynistic red flags. And I think that's just part of a broader societal sort of teaching moment where we can all figure out, "Okay, we're going to start taking this seriously, misogyny as a social problem, as a social ill, as a form of prejudice, as an extremist mentality. We're going to start taking it seriously." Law enforcement is often the first line of defense and I think that we just have to make sure that they're well trained.

                                                      We also need to train our educators better to understand the language that can happen in classrooms, the language that will often happen between kids, and I believe firmly in the right to free expression. I think that the way to counter bad speech is with good speech. I don't believe that we should be censoring people for normal exchanges, and people should be able to ask questions. But I do think once you get into inciting violence, once you get into specific threats against specific people, that's when people have to act, whether that's law enforcement acting, whether it's tech companies acting, whether it's individuals reporting things to tech companies, I just think we all have to be much more vigilant about the language that's being used.

                                                      And we also need to ask that our public officials call out misogyny. We need to also ask that they not actively participate in or contribute to misogyny, which unfortunately seems to be beyond the scope of what's possible at the moment. But hopefully down the line we will get to a place where we are able to expect a degree of civility from our elected officials at large.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Jessica Reeves, Editorial Director at the Center on Extremism, at the Anti-Defamation League. I've got a link to her paper on white supremacy and misogyny on my website at InflectionPointRadio.org. This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller, and this is how women rise up.

                                                      That's our Inflection Point for today. Today's program was produced in part by the generous donation of [Paul John Turco 00:51:13]. All of our episodes are on Apple Podcast, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know women leading change we should talk to? Let us know at InflectionPointRadio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to InflectionPointRadio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at Inflection Point Radio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point Society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. Follow me on Twitter @LASchiller. To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go: InflectionPointRadio.org.

                                                      Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco NPRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver, our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host, Lauren Schiller.

 

How Stephanie Lepp Makes Room for a Reckoning (+TOOLKIT)

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Stephanie Lepp is the creator and host of a podcast about how people change their hearts and minds-- it’s about people who decided on their own to completely change their world views. It’s about people who took a look in the mirror, and realized they did not like what they saw. How do you do that? Her show is called Reckonings...and it sure feels like our society could use a reckoning right about now. But do things need to change on an individual level first? I invited Stephanie to share what she’s learned about how personal change can lead to positive societal change.

RESOURCES:

https://www.sandiego.edu/soles/restorative-justice/campus-prism.php

http://www.againstviolentextremism.org/

TRANSCRIPT. We do our best on these, if you see an error, let us know!

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller. And today on Inflection Point we want a lot of people to change their ways right now. How far are you willing to go to let them?

Stephanie Lepp:                It's amazing what a gesture can do and are we willing to let alone give the person a job, just let the bad guy change?

Lauren Schiller:                  Join me and Stephanie Lepp of Reckonings. Stay tuned.

Stephanie Lepp:                I am Stephanie Lepp. When I feel comfortable with people I would say that I'm a tuning fork. I would say that I am a gentle mirror.

Lauren Schiller:                  Tell me more about the tuning fork.

Stephanie Lepp:                The tuning fork.

Lauren Schiller:                  I love that.

Stephanie Lepp:                I mean, I just came out right now. I guess I am seeing the gravity of the situation or sensing the gravity of the situation but also responding to it in a way that is hopeful and creative and maintains imagination and maintains humor.

Lauren Schiller:                  But it seems like both of your metaphors are about being in touch with the world and wanting to kind of play back what you're seeing.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes, because I think that's part of the idea of in order to get to anywhere we have to start from where we are. Part of it is yes, must see the nature of the situation clearly in order to go anywhere, but cannot stop only at seeing the nature of the situation clearly. That can also just lead us to stagnation and depression. So there is both a seeing clearly and a dose of creativity and imagination and hope to move us forward.

Lauren Schiller:                  This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller. And that's Stephanie Lepp, the creator, and host of a podcast about how people change their hearts and minds. And this isn't about changing your mind on the small stuff like, "Oh, I wanted to cook dinner in but instead let's eat out." It's about people who decided on their own to completely change their world views. This is not an easy thing. I mean, when's the last time you did that, or I did that or made room for someone else to? Her show is about people who took a look in the mirror and realized they didn't like what they saw. As someone said to me, it's like they took their own hearts out of their bodies, took a good look at them, moved things around a little and put them back inside. How do you do that?

                                                      The show is called fittingly Reckonings. And it sure feels like our society could use a reckoning right about now. But do things need to change on an individual level first? I invited Stephanie to share what she's learned about how personal change can lead to positive societal change. So where did you grow up?

Stephanie Lepp:                I grew up in the North Bay [crosstalk 00:03:41].

Lauren Schiller:                  Of California.

Stephanie Lepp:                Of California. Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  Did that influence the way you think about the world do you think?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah, my mom is a yoga instructor. My dad is in technology. I'm a Mexican Jew. I was raised very much... Spanish was my first language and my mom is an artist who would always kind of take us to every single museum within a 25 mile radius of wherever we were traveling I feel like, grew up in an area and in a family that was definitely very much about being open and available and thinking freely and asking questions. And Judaism also has kind of a practice of asking questions, right? There's kind of like the reinterpretation and re-reinterpretation of every single thing in Jewish history. It's kind of like we continue to ask questions about the same old things forever and ever and ever.

                                                      I think I've just been aware of my evolving consciousness from a young age. I mean, I remember in second grade waiting for the school bus for second grade. And I remember thinking, "Last year I didn't know anything. Last year was first grade. I didn't know anything. Now I really know what's up. I'm going into second grade." And then having that same experience going into third grade, and having that experience enough times that I was like, "Wait a second. I'm noticing a pattern here. Maybe I don't actually know everything there is to know now that I'm going into fifth grade. Maybe my mind is actually just in a process of changing and growing and evolving." And that stuck with me.

Lauren Schiller:                  So this concept of how people change their hearts and minds, I mean, why is that something you decided you really wanted to explore?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah. So that was through my earliest experiences with activism and social change in college and early into my professional life the question would always come up am I changing anyone's mind? Am I actually moving anyone on climate change or mandatory minimums or whatever issue I happen to be focused on at the time, which then of course, begs the question, how do people actually change their hearts and minds? And that question just kind of became a little bit of a fascination of mine. But I almost didn't even know what am I even researching here. What's the search term in my googling worldview transformation? Is that even a thing? I know behavioral economics is a thing, but I'm not looking to find out what makes people floss their teeth more often. I'm looking to find out what moves people in fundamental ways.

                                                      And it finally just kind of occurred to me that that question might be really powerful to manifest in the form of stories of people who have made these kinds of transformative change as a podcast. And so that's where Reckonings comes from. It is an exploration of the question how do people change, and really kind of more specifically, how do people change in ways that connect to or scale into broader social and political change.

Lauren Schiller:                  And so when you think about your role in bringing this understanding to light, I mean, how do you think of yourself?

Stephanie Lepp:                I mean, a mirror actually is very apt. That's really what I'm doing for the person I'm interviewing. I'm just being a gentle... I deliberately don't do interviews in person. Because a lot of what I'm asking people I'm asking people to talk about some really sensitive stuff sometimes. Sometimes it's the thing that they are the least proud of, the thing that they are really reckoning with. And I find it more helpful if I can just kind of be a little voice in their head that holds up a mirror to them such that they can just see clearly what they have done, the impact that they may have had on other people, and then how they have learned from that and grown from that. I want to make an uncomfortable experience like a tiny bit more comfortable, just a tiny bit, so you can just hang out in it longer and speak from that place.

Lauren Schiller:                  From the standpoint of the listener or the person who you are talking to?

Stephanie Lepp:                The person telling the story. Are we just going to keep taking the mirror metaphor everywhere? We might. I mean, yeah, the listener, there is kind of maybe a collective mirror of us beholding our own capacity to change. That's certainly part of what I'm doing, because I believe that we can at least even just for me personally in producing the show it's like what does it do to us to wander through the world with the belief that the people around us can change? It just creates more room for new things to happen that haven't happened before.

Lauren Schiller:                  Have you ever wanted to turn the mic on yourself? I mean, is there a reckoning of your own that you've been wanting to explore?

Stephanie Lepp:                I find that so intimidating. It's amazing that no one... I've been interviewed a little bit, a couple times. And it's amazing to me that no one has asked me the question of what I'm reckoning with, which I dread, which is so amazing to me or just hysterical to me because yeah, I mean, obviously, that's what I'm asking my guests to do. But I'm kind of just in total awe of all of my guests. I think what they do is so hard. It's like basically asking you in some ways to have a public therapy session. I mean, you're just letting out the hardest things. Have I wanted to turn the mic on myself? No. That sounds really scary. Which is part of why I'm so in awe of my guests.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, what are you reckoning?

Stephanie Lepp:                So therefore, you're going to ask me the question.

Lauren Schiller:                  What are you reckoning with?

Stephanie Lepp:                What I am reckoning with is put really simply my relationship with productivity. It took me a long time to understand what I want to do. And so I feel like I've wasted all this time. And I have all this kind of old regret, and so therefore I must use all of my time super productively. And so I'm in this tug of war with time and I just hold my time accountable to... I mean, even just my understanding of what productive even means it prevents me from really just kind of being inside of and experiencing my life, is what it's preventing. And it became much more apparent to me once my daughter was born.

                                                      I thought she was going to start challenging me when she turned 13. It started immediately. It's like the second she came out of the womb, she was like, "Let me hold up a mirror to you mom and show you how addicted you are to crossing things off your list of things to do, because the second I need something from you have a really hard time diverting from whatever your plan was for what you were going to do in the next 10 minutes or the entire day." So it's just become that much more apparent to me as a mom, and I feel I am reckoning with... I mean, I guess it's also just the way I relate to and then have in my life and I am wanting to feel less like I'm struggling against my life or struggling against time and more in a experience of gratitude and awe for my life.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller being fully present with Stephanie Lepp, host of the podcast Reckonings, a show about how people change their hearts and minds. You can cross one thing off your list when you subscribe to the podcast and make a contribution toward our production at Inflectionpointradio.org. Coming up, Stephanie will share clips from her show, including the reckoning of a former neo-nazi. And she'll share what she learned from a sexual abuse survivor and her perpetrator, both of whom managed to work through it using restorative justice.

                                                      I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point. I'm here with Stephanie Lepp, host of the podcast Reckonings, and we're talking about how personal change can lead to positive societal change. Well, let's talk about some of the people that you talked to on Reckoning. I would like to start with your episode 19, which is about violent white extremists, because that... well, I mean, we can't walk away from it. So in this episode you talk with two different men-

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... Jesse and Frank.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  Why don't you tell us a little bit about each of those guys and then we'll play the clip.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah. So Frank is a former white supremacist. Jesse is a former jihadi extremist. And I weave their stories together. And part of the reason I do that is because I guess on the one hand we kind of think of those ideologies as somehow kind of like opposite or something. But you get to see how when you need something, when you are just feeling broken, and don't have many options and it's like you're going to reach for heroin, or alcohol, or white supremacy or jihadi extreme, whatever it is that helps you cope. And either one of them could have gone in the other direction. And there are times in the episode where you may not even be able to distinguish between their voices, but that's kind of part of the point.

                                                      So this is when Frank, he just got out of jail. He's looking for a job. He can't find a job. He has swastika tattoos all over him. And through a friend he manages to get a gig at a trade show with a Jewish antique dealer. And the Jewish antique dealer knows that Frank is a neo-nazi, but he says he doesn't care what Frank believes as long as he doesn't break the furniture. And so this clip picks up right after Frank has worked to this gig at the trade show with this Jewish antique dealer.

Lauren Schiller:                  And this guy Frank is the basis for the-

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... character that Ed Norton plays in American-

Stephanie Lepp:                American History X, yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  1998 for those of who are wondering when did that movie come out. Yeah. So if you've seen that movie or if you go see that movie that gives a instantaneous visual-

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... from what we're talking about here.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Frank:                                        He gave me a ride home that night. And when he gave me the ride home and then as he's dropping me off he just goes, "Hey, what do you do for a living?" I said, "I don't do anything." He goes, "Why don't you come work for me?" And I'm looking down at my Dr Martens on my red laces, which meant I'm a neo-nazi. And I keep looking down at the boots as he's talking to me, this Jewish man, and I'm trying to hide the boots underneath the other part of the seat. I'm just looking at him like, "Thank god this human being is in my life."

                                                      It's fear. I was full of fear. I was full of absolute fear for everything. And so I got with a group of people who also were fearful people, their fear for losing their homeland are going to lose their women to the black man. You name it. And my fear I felt made me weak. And so what they did is they turned my fear into an anger. And they made it to where it was my strong point. I was embarrassed. I was completely embarrassed of my beliefs. I was wrong, and I'd been wrong for the last seven years of my life. I'd been completely wrong. This is all [inaudible 00:16:42]. I believed in something that I was willing to die and kill for, something that is [inaudible 00:16:48].

                                                      I had so much seniority in this group. Seniority was important to me because I had nothing in this world. I cut everything and everybody that was not part of the movement out of my life. So that's all I have. So the car ride is coming to an end and he drops me off. And he goes, "I'll see you Monday, right?" And I took my pay and I went home and I could not wait to get home and get them boots off my feet. My whole image of me is gone. And I got to build something new.

Lauren Schiller:                  So for this episode the overarching question that you ask is what happens when we look past ideology.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  And, I mean, this guy that gave him a job, this Jewish guy that gave this neo-nazi with swastikas all over himself a job. I mean, it's kind of incredible.

Stephanie Lepp:                It's completely incredible. It's completely incredible. I mean, it's both incredible that he was willing to do that, and it's also incredible how much that does, how much a gesture like that can do. And yeah, it poses the question back to us if we were that Jewish man would we have given Frank a job? I mean, even less than that, like giving someone a job, even talk to people being willing to talk to people. So yeah, it's amazing what a gesture can do, and yeah, I take that back to are we willing to let alone give the person a job just let the bad guy change?

Lauren Schiller:                  I mean, one of the things that this episode made me think about and even just that clip is the responsibility of the person who is going to change or wants to change or maybe doesn't even know yet that they want to change and that it has to be a two way street. So there's the input from someone showing compassion. But then there's how is that received? How was he in that place at that time to be able to accept the work, even if he had reservations about whether or not he would get paid, which is part of what we didn't hear.

Stephanie Lepp:                Well, and it's a gradual... so Frank's transformation process actually started in jail when he started playing sports with black people and started getting to know black people really for the first time in his life. And it was coming from that experience and the confusion that that brought up of like, "Wait, actually black people are fine." Then he had this experience, so generosity from a Jewish person, and that just kind of sealed the deal in terms of revealing to him the absolute bankruptcy of his ideology.

                                                      And so it was a gradual thing. But yes, that is kind of what put him in the position and say, "Well, wait a second." Because you go through this process of like, "Okay. Fine, black people are fine, but Jewish people?" And it's like me with the school bus. After having enough experiences of seeing yourself repeat the same pattern you start to wonder is there a pattern here? Am I going to just say, "Okay. Fine Jewish people, but then the next person." Or am I finally going to say, "Actually, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with the way that I have been seeing the world"?

Lauren Schiller:                  So on this topic of domestic terrorism and white supremacism and the attacks in El Paso and Dayton and Gilroy, and you reference in this episode the Oklahoma City bombing. One of your characters, I wouldn't know if it was Frank or Jesse.

Stephanie Lepp:                It was Frank. It was Frank, yeah.

Lauren Schiller:                  So Frank, the same fellow has insight into the bomber.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  Timothy McVeigh. And so he wants to go and talk to the FBI-

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... about that. So can you just share a little bit about what happens as a result?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah, he watched the bombing or he watched kind of footage from the bombing on TV. And it was one scene in particular of a firefighter carrying I think a very young girl who looked like she might have been killed. And he just realized like, "I actually understand where this bomber was coming from, and I need to help. I need to use that understanding I have to help us prevent this from happening." So that's when he showed up at the FBI and he kind of... I think they first kind of were a little disarmed, but he showed up, he was like, "I need to talk to you about the bombing." Like, "No, I don't know information about the person but I understand where that person was coming from. And I need to help you understand where that person was coming from."

                                                      First I think he worked with the FBI and then even started working with the Anti-Defamation League and talking to Jewish audiences about what gives rise to these kinds of ideologies. And I guess this is kind of the concrete thing if you want to share with this episode. Actually both he and Jesse are part of this... It's called the Against Violent Extremism Network. This is unbelievable too me. It's a searchable database of former violent extremists. You can literally search for the kind of violent extremism you're looking for, so that you can find someone, a former extremists, who can then talk to current extremists or their families and basically help people exit lives of extremist violence, because they can speak to, they were there, they can speak to who they are coming from and kind of make the bridge to where they have come to.

                                                      And yeah, it's unbelievable to me that something like that even exists. But that's basically what they have made themselves, both Frank and Jesse and the others who are a part of it, made themselves available for is available for people who are still in those ideologies to even just kind of explore, experiment, or conceive of the possibility of moving in a new direction.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. Which gets back to this question of when is someone ready? How can their path change sooner before the violent act?

Stephanie Lepp:                I don't know if I have a specific answer to that question. But certainly making it possible, making it available for them. I don't know if the Against Violent Extremism Network has an anonymous hotline or something where you don't have to... yeah, I don't know. But at least having that be... and I don't know how it's promoted. And actually, here's a kind of a similar example. Are you familiar with Footsteps?

Lauren Schiller:                  No.

Stephanie Lepp:                And I do not want to equate these things at all but just kind of an analogy in the sense that... now I'm almost hesitating. But it's an organization that helps Orthodox Jews explore the possibility of leaving the orthodoxy. That's really all it is. And I don't know how they promote themselves, but even just knowing that there's somewhere you can go, maybe it's anonymous or the person doesn't have to know you where you can even just dip your toe in the water of change, just see how it feels, try it on, don't have to commit to anything, don't have to change your public identity about it yet. But yeah, I mean, it's like if we're going to ask people to jump ship we need to give them a ship to jump to. So to the extent that there can be ships out there, that is helpful.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, let's play a clip from another episode. This is episode 21, a survivor and her perpetrator find justice. For this one, you pose the question what does it sound like for a survivor to get her needs met? And what does it sound like for a perpetrator to take responsibility for his sexual abuse of power? Before we even play the clip I'm curious. How did you get answers to these questions? How did you find these people who are willing to talk to you?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah. So I was looking for them for a long time. I knew I wanted to find a perpetrator and survivor of sexual assault who managed to work through it using restorative justice. Because I just felt like that's what we weren't hearing and would be really helpful to hear the voice of a survivor who got her needs met and the voice of a perpetrator who actually graciously skillfully takes responsibility for his sexual abuse. And so I just reached out to and bugged all the practitioners of restorative justice for sexual assault violence that I could find, which, by the way, the fact that that's even a job that people have is amazing to me that that's some people's job, what they do for a living. So I reached out to as many of these practitioners as I could find. And someone named David Karp kept my name and got back to me a year later, and said, "I think I found your guests."

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, let's see hear this clip. So you've given names to these people. These are not their real name.

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes. These are pseudonyms. They gave themselves their pseudonyms.

Lauren Schiller:                  Okay. Great. So just introduce us to who these people are.

Stephanie Lepp:                Unwin and Sameer. Yes. So Unwin and Sameer met freshman year. Sameer was into Unwin, and they started kind of seeing each other a little bit, but then Unwin kind of blew him off and one night they ended up at the same fraternity party, which is when Sameer convinced Unwin to come home with him and then coerced her into sexual activity. So that was freshman year. And then their senior year, and you're going to have to listen to the episode to find out what happened between freshman year and senior year, but their senior year Unwin invited Sameer into a process of restorative justice.

                                                      Restorative justice basically is a response to crime that engages offenders and victims in repairing the harm that was caused. So Unwin invites Sameer into this process, and I also want to be really clear that in this episode we hear from both Unwin and Sameer, although in this clip we're only going to hear from Sameer. So this is kind of in the middle of the restorative justice process. This is right after Sameer reads Unwin's written testimony of what happened that night.

Sameer:                                   I thought in my brain I had asked her to take her shirt off. I didn't. I told her. I did not remember emotionally manipulating her to coming back to staying with me. I thought from my perspective I was being a potential teacher when it came to oral sex. Turns out, I was basically coercing her into doing this even though she wasn't comfortable. For my end I was like, "Oh, this was just a fun hookup." But then from her end it's like, "This guy is like pushing himself on me," and it didn't sound like me. It sounded like a monster. But that was the hardest part was that this guy who forced himself onto this girl is me.

                                                      I think it was combination of desperation, validation, wanting to finally get the girl that I've been after forever. I wanted to have fun and run around and just have a bunch of sex because that's what I thought college was. But now I wish I could just go back and talk to the kid and just be like, "Hey, dude, your heart is may be in a good place right now. But here's some things you need to know before you start engaging in sexual activities with other people that will prevent a lot of pain. You're a larger guy. You can't just go ahead and ask things and then expect people not to be intimidated by it. If it's not an enthusiastic yes don't do it."

                                                      I've made it very difficult for her to enjoy many parts of intimacy. I absolutely terrified her for years just being around. She would spend every day or at least once at some point almost every day trapped in that night and basically reliving it and she's had to think about it every single day. And I'm not sure if the wounds are all the way healed. I doubt they are but it's a pain that I can't take away no matter what I do. I can't take that away, and I know I've said it 1000 times but I am sorry.

Lauren Schiller:                  I've listened to that so many times and every time-

Stephanie Lepp:                Me too.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... it just gets me the same.

Stephanie Lepp:                Me too. Me too. Yeah. Me too. Me too [inaudible 00:32:00].

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. I mean, what was your takeaway from what they went through and what people who are listening to this could take away too?

Stephanie Lepp:                Well, first of all it's just so refreshing to finally hear a man take responsibility and do it in a... he did kind of at first get a little stuck in this whoa it was me thing, which is not... this isn't about you. You can't get too stuck in self pity because then you're not actually helping the other person. So it's not just about hearing someone kind of like grovel. It's see clearly what they did and then be inspired by it, take that as, I don't know if inspiration, but yeah, it's motivation to help and to heal and for Sameer to work on this issue in particular. And so it's really refreshing to hear a man do that gracefully.

                                                      And it actually sounds... I mean, that's part of what I feel like my job here is, is to make it sound more stunning, more powerful, more manly I could say, to take responsibility, and to, let's say even be also just communicate around sexual intimacy in an open and mature way than to do the other thing where we're just kind of aloof and don't know how we affect other people or maybe don't care about that. Part of my goal here is to make it sound more beautiful and powerful and sure, manly to do what he did. And it does actually sound beautiful and powerful to take a look in the mirror and grow from what we see.

Lauren Schiller:                  In kind of the bigger picture of social change and being convinced that there's a better way forward if we think things are going arise, say, I don't know, with our society [inaudible 00:34:07] people who we might not agree with on a whole host of issues from the political on down to the biological let's say. They think they're right and they don't need to change, and we think we're right and we don't need to change, and finding a way to open the conversation and communication feels like the hardest task of all. So in terms of the kinds of things that you've learned from hearing these stories, these stories of change, I mean, is there kind of an anatomy of change or a way to take this personal change and think about it in terms of how does that scale-

Stephanie Lepp:                How does that scale.

Lauren Schiller:                  ... to social change?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yeah, and that's kind of precisely what I'm playing with here, is the relationship between personal and social change, this idea that big change out there in the world can start in here, inside of us, and that therefore we can be the change. But how does that actually happen? What does that actually mean? Well, we can look at these episodes as example. How does Sameer's personal change translate into social change. It's one less dude who's just kind of going around engaging in sexual activity in kind of a mindless way and one more mindful dude who has done this thing and has really learned from it and grown from it and can talk to other men about it.

                                                      Frank. It's one less white supremacist and one more advocate who can talk to people who still live lives of violence and can also kind of help us understand where he was coming from and where people are coming from and what would speak to them. So part of it is, let's say, growing the cadre of advocates or allies, and these people are kind of like uniquely effective advocates because they are kind of these bridge people. Sameer can speak to guys. He's a young guy. Frank was a leader in the movement.

                                                      So part of it is growing the team. And I tend to think about things in terms of power. And we all have the power to change ourselves, but some of us have more power in this world than others. And put crudely, their personal change would therefore translate into even broader social change. There have been guests of mine, for example, who have a lot of influence. So let's say for former congressman Bob Inglis made a really dramatic shift on climate change. He has a lot of power, and so his personal reckoning had that much more kind of social impact.

                                                      Jerry Taylor was a prominent... he was kind of like the spokesperson for climate skepticism. And his transformation also can lead to... So when I think about my wish list of guests I kind of think about who are the fewest number of people that if they had a personal reckoning that would lead to the biggest social change? What if Charles Koch had a reckoning? But that's still kind of coming from how does personal change lead to social change. We can also kind of think in the other direction, how does social change translate into personal change? How does or should the experience of participating in social change kind of change us as individuals when we have participated or when I have participated in activism and social change? Has it made me more angry? Has it made me more compassionate? Has it made me more hopeful? How does even engaging in social change or how do we want it to kind of change us personally?

Lauren Schiller:                  Have you heard from any of the people that you've spoken with... Well, you know you can kind of like feel a cold coming on? You get a little tickle in the throat or whatever, have they ever talked about feeling a change coming on whether it's a mental or physical sign that I am about to think about something differently? And how do you recognize that?

Stephanie Lepp:                I love that question. I've never heard a guest say that. And also for some people, they hit a rock bottom and clearly something needs to change. A white supremacist I interviewed a while ago, he hit a point where he said he was sitting over a bridge with a gun in his hand, and he said, "Wither I'm going to kill myself now or I'm going to change." For other people there's also kind of a house of cards thing that happens where... because a lot of our ideas are kind of like interconnected or held up by each other.

                                                      And so once you start dismantling one thing the entire house of cards just comes crashing down. So there was a young man I interviewed who he was in the military. He fought in Afghanistan and he became a conscientious objector. And once he started dismantling his ideas about the military and war all of a sudden his ideas about religion, politics, everything came crashing down. So sometimes there's also just an initial change that is kind of like, I don't know, canary in the coal mine or the kind of like a sign that more change is coming.

                                                      A third thing I'll say is we kind of create opportunities for ourselves or at least we can for I'm thinking specifically of Yom Kippur in particular. Is my favorite Jewish holiday. It's a holiday where you basically take a day too fast and reflect on how you affect other people and how you want to affect other people. And thank God I could definitely use that once a year. It's really helpful. Thank you God.

                                                      I mean, that's kind of like planting opportunities for change in your life. So maybe it's not like I can feel it coming on like a cold, but I at least want to make a little space in my life for it to happen if it needs to happen, and it probably does need to happen on a somewhat regular basis throughout my life with intention.

Lauren Schiller:                  What are the lessons that you have learned from all of these stories that you're gathering?

Stephanie Lepp:                Yes. So I used to have this extremely unscientific list of things that I thought radically transformed people. So falling in love, near death experiences, psychedelics, sometimes very rarely information because we usually just trust information that confirms what we already believe. And from what I have seen from the hours and hours of talking to people who have made transformative change, it's not that those things make us change. What those things have in common, or what they do, is that they reveal to us the difference between who we think we are and who we actually are, or the difference between the impact we think we're having on the world and the impact we are actually having on the world. And it's seeing that difference. It's seeing that gap. That is what initiates the process of transformation.

Lauren Schiller:                  Well, what's the best advice that you've ever been given about how to change?

Stephanie Lepp:                How to change myself?

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah.

Stephanie Lepp:                What's coming up for me is a quote by a philosopher named Ken Wilber, which is, "Any good theory helps you get to a better one." So to kind of just treat where I am, what I believe as kind of the provisional on my way to where... it's not the end all be all. I haven't figured it out. It's just the next step. It's what's going to help me keep moving forward in my pursuit of unimaginable happiness, joy, understanding, peace, love, all of it. So yeah, to just treat what I believe now or where I'm at now as the provisional and part of the movement forward.

                                                      I'm not all for like peace, love compassion, always. I'm a mischievous, pragmatic pluralist. Within the context of restorative justice, restorative justice and traditional criminal justice are not mutually exclusive. Just because someone is sitting in jail doesn't mean they can't work to repair the harm that they caused somebody else. So people should enjoy the consequences that are appropriate to whatever they did. And if we're also interested in having people also learn from and grow beyond what they did well, then, restorative justice is really helpful. It's not compassion or consequences. It's all of the above, under the right circumstances, in pursuit of our collective liberation. We have the punishment thing down. We know how to do that in this country. Actually then learning from the thing we did, that's the thing that we like, have it totally engaged.

TOOLKIT

Lauren Schiller:                  If you're considering a change stick around and hear Stephanie Lepp's toolkit for how your small personal change can lead to greater societal change. I'm Lauren Schiller. And if you're wondering what personal change you can make that can lead to positive societal change here's your toolkit with Stephanie Lepp. First things first, Stephanie says we need to make room for change.

Stephanie Lepp:                Over the years of producing Reckonings I have been able to witness our human capacity to change. We are capable of all kinds of extraordinary change, and we need room. We need room to change. And we are such a punitive culture. It's like even after perpetrators have taken responsibility or let's say kind of healed things up with their survivor or their victim, which in my humble opinion that's the most important stakeholder here, we often are still not even willing to see them kind of beyond the worst thing they ever did, or let them help. I mean, Sameer is a perfect example. He tried. He reached out to local public high schools and tried to kind of tell his story as part of their sex ed program. And they didn't know how to let an ex offender help.

                                                      And so the personal change, I think we can make, that could translate into broader social change is yes, to make more room for each other to change and grow, to make room under the right circumstances for perpetrators to become allies, which might sound like a blasphemous thing, but then when you hear it within the context of Sameer that can make sense.

Lauren Schiller:                  Stephanie says to keep a conversation open try not to respond with judgment or shame when you hear ideas you disagree with.

Stephanie Lepp:                I mean, if you think about Me Too as an example let's think about how have we each kind of participated in the Me Too conversation, how have we talked to the older men in our lives or even the younger men in our lives, or what have we liked online, or shared online, or commented or tweeted? Have we kind of adapted our ideas about someone to the way they actually behave to whether or not they have actually taken responsibility? I mean, I can give a personal example. I had a really long conversation with my father-in-law recently. We ended up in a car together for a long drive. And he heard Unwin and Sameer's episode and he responded in, I hate to say it, but it's kind of like the typical way that men his age kind of respond which is like, "In my day that wouldn't have been sexual assault. And so is that really sexual assault?"

                                                      And my response to him is like, "Just because there wasn't sexual assault in your day doesn't mean it's right. It doesn't mean like someone wasn't hurt." And so I think in our conversation I guess I didn't respond to him with judgment or shame. I made enough room, I think, in our conversation for him to kind of expand his mind on this and in a way that actually made me want to talk to his siblings, like my aunt and uncles in law. They kind of came into the conversation at a certain point, and I decided I'm going to talk to them over Thanksgiving, which is the whole trope of not talking about politics at the Thanksgiving table. But yeah, I guess the question to ask ourselves is am I engaging in the issues I care about in a way that makes enough room for my adversaries To change.

Lauren Schiller:                  And number three, the easiest way to remove barriers is to make connections. Ask questions and understand where someone is coming from.

Stephanie Lepp:                What I have found is that you may actually have similar values or similar intentions or similar... My father-in-law is and example. It's like he would not want anyone to be hurt either. And so if we can agree from that then we can kind of reverse engineer how do we get there. The LGBT Center in LA, this is a story, but I think it'll help answer the question, the LGBT Center in LA so after Prop 8 passed in California, which anti gay marriage, there was this whole reckoning really like how did that happen in California, in a state like California.

                                                      And so they did this thing, which apparently is really rare and political polling, where they decided to talk to people who voted against them, who voted against gay marriage, to understand where they were coming from and kind of with this idea of like, "Maybe we're going to change their minds." And so firstly knocking on doors and talking to people and kind of like shaming them a little bit. And of course, that didn't work. And what they learned, what they realized was that all they have to do is ask people open ended questions. And you can actually watch these conversations. They have videos.

                                                      So you watch this person knock on someone's door. It's like, "Oh, how did you vote on Prop 8?" It's like, "Okay, do you know anyone who's gay?" And the person's like, ""Oh, yeah. My cousin is gay." It's like, "Oh, tell me about your cousin. It's like, "I love my cousin. We have Thanksgiving at their house every year. And he's amazing with my kids. And I love him," whatever. "Okay, great. Are you married?" Like, "Yeah, I'm married." Like, "Well, tell me about your marriage." It's like, "I have the best relationship. I'm in love with her. We've been married for 50 years," whatever. And it's like, "Does your cousin know how you voted on Prop 8?" It's like, "Well, no. I haven't really talked to them about it." "And so how do you think they would feel about how you voted?"

                                                      You watch this person in real time, a stranger just asking them open ended questions about their life. And what I've learned about what moves people to change it's really just about seeing the difference between who you think you are and who you actually are. And it's seeing that difference, seeing that gap, that is what initiates. So all these people are doing is just holding up a mirror. You think you are, whatever you think you are. Frank thought he was this defender of the white race, but here is what you actually are, Frank, You were just an angry and violent and bigoted individual. And that person can make their own determination based on that. And so yeah, I mean, this isn't like a short tip or trick but hold holding up a mirror showing people themselves asking them open ended questions about themselves. People can come to it.

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Stephanie Lepp, mirror, tuning fork, and the host of the Reckonings podcast. I've got a link to her show on my website at Inflectionpointradio.org. You'll find this episode in the Inflection Point podcast feed in two segments. One is the full interview, and the other is the toolkit you just heard. With three ways your personal change can lead to positive societal change. Find Inflection Point episodes in any podcast app, or go to Inflectionpointradio.org. This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller, and this is how women rise up.

                                                      That's our Inflection Point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple podcasts, RadioPublic Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know women leading change we should talk to? Let us know at Inflectionpointradio.org. While you're there support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to Inflectionpointradio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at Inflection Point Radio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point Society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. And follow me on twitter @Laschiller.

                                                      To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go, Inflectionpointradio.org. Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco, and PRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver. Our engineer and producer is Eric Lane. I'm your host Lauren Schiller.

 .

Stephanie+Lepp.jpg

How Kate Black is Getting More Women in Office–and how you can too (Interview+Toolkit)

 

LISTEN ON: APPLE PODCASTS | STITCHER | PANDORA | SPOTIFY | NPR ONE | MORE

Former Chief of Staff for EMILY's List, Kate Black, just published her first book, written with the actress June Diane Raphael. It’s called “Represent The Woman's Guide to Running for Office and Changing the World.” She shares the attributes of successful candidates, the stories of women who rose to office against all odds, and how to respond when you hear someone say this country isn’t ready for a woman president. Plus, how to determine if you have the time to get out there and run.

Be sure to check out Kate’s TOOLKIT FOR ACTION.


TRANSCRIPT: We do our best on these, if you see an error, let us know.

Kate Black:                            My name is Kate Black. I'm a policy advisor in the federal government and the former chief of staff and vice president of research at Emily's List.

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm just thinking about what position does a woman need to be in in her life to either afford to run or have the time to run? I'm thinking about all the things that are stacked against us. We're the primary caregivers, all the things that we're up against in terms of attaining leadership positions, you know, in a corporate setting let alone in a public setting. Is there kind of an ideal situation that you're in that says, "I'm equipped, I'm prepared, I have what I need to make it happen."

Kate Black:                            Well I think first and foremost it's really important to think about a couple of words that we say over and over in the book, which is that men are not waiting.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah.

Kate Black:                            Men are not waiting for that next, you know, promotion or for their children to grow up and move out of the house. They're not waiting for maybe an aging parent to finally get well. They're not waiting for that next training or webinar. Men are not waiting. I think to your point, is there a perfect time? I say no. I think you have to kind of understand where you're at currently and evaluate that. You're absolutely right, women are doing the majority of caregiving in this country whether it's paid or unpaid and we wanted to be really thoughtful about how we were addressing them but we also wanted to address self care and I think that self care gets a little bit of a buzzword these days but you have to really think about what you need to be successful and to bring your whole self, your whole, healthy self to a campaign.

Kate Black:                            If that looks like going to therapy, if it looks like taking a bath in some really nice lotion, if it means going to church, if it means going for a long walk with a friend or reading a book or doing some art. Whatever it looks like you need to make sure that you're making space for that in your campaign.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, I mean, it's hard to imagine. I'm trying to imagine Elizabeth Warren out there taking a long bath. I feel like-

Kate Black:                            I bet she does something. She has a dog, you don't think that dog goes for walks?

Lauren Schiller:                  I don't mean to create the imagine of now like, you know, potentially our future president in the bathtub. That wasn't my intention.

Kate Black:                            Right, Elizabeth Warren walking her dog. That I can see. I can see it.

Kate Black:                            [00:03:14]

Lauren Schiller:                  This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller and that's Kate Black. And while of course we're guessing on Elizabeth Warren's self care ritual, when it comes to getting pro-choice Democratic women in office, suffice to say Kate knows of what she speaks. Kate Black has been on Inflection Point before and returns to us because she just published her first book written with the actress June Diane Raphael. It's called "Represent - The Women's Guide for Running for Office and Changing the World."

Lauren Schiller:                  Tell me a little bit about how you and June got together to write this book in the first place.

Kate Black:                            Sure, so after 2016 June lives in California, I live in Washington DC, but like so many, in fact, millions of people after the 2016 elections were kind of called to do something more. A lot of us marched, a lot of us went to the streets and took up in the Women's Marches. A lot of us ran for Congress and for State House and got involved in politics and June and I specifically came together to write this book. She woke up after the elections and kind of I think like a lot of people kind of asked herself, you know, "If that guy could do it maybe I should." Looked around and there wasn't really a roadmap for her, you know? There wasn't a book that she could buy online or at her local bookstore that she could find. So she kind of made her way to me and we wrote this how-to guide, basically.

Kate Black:                            We wrote the story that we thought was missing. It provides that roadmap that I think June was looking for. It covers so many of the elements of running for office that uniquely impact women, you know? Where do you run? When do you run? Do you start talking about it? Clothing? Yes, we address clothing, and we address a subject that we hear a lot which is, "How do I help other women?" Through almost about three years from an initial phone call that lasted well over an hour to me going to LA, her coming to DC multiple times, writing a proposal, then writing the book itself and editing it and designing it.

Lauren Schiller:                  Is she planning to run or something?

Kate Black:                            You know, I think if you were to ask her that question, I don't want to speak for her but I thin if you were to ask her that question she would encourage all women to consider it and I think she's a woman that's considering it.

Lauren Schiller:                  What is the state of women in office right now? I mean, we were so excited at the last election when we elected all these congresswomen, you know? It seems like the momentum is really good but like what's the reality of where we are and where do you think we actually need to get to?

Kate Black:                            You know, the reality is that the work is not done. You're exactly right that after 2018 there was a wave of new women coming into all levels of offices and that was so exciting to see and I think what's been so great about that wave of, that newness, is that it's really invigorated our politics. You're seeing, I think, especially women coming into office with young children. They're having a voice in policy where they were absent before and I think that's super exciting. When you look at just the raw numbers it still isn't where it needs to be and that's precisely why we wanted to write this book. Women are over half of the population in this country but just barely a quarter of the seats in Congress.

Kate Black:                            There are almost half of the states across the country have never had a female governor. You know, and when you look at the mayors and the state legislatures we're making improvements there but we could certainly do more and we need to keep encouraging women to step up and lead. The same barriers that exist to women running for office remain. We know for a fact that it's harder for women to fundraise, especially women of color and our campaign finance system is just as it was. That barrier hasn't necessarily gone away but what we do in the book is provide some guidance and some advice for women who see that barrier in front of them and are just wondering like, "How am I going to raise this money? I have to raise probably thousands of dollars. I don't have that. How am I going to do it?"

Kate Black:                            What we do in the book is really try to rethink what fundraise can look like in your own campaign and instead of just seeing this huge number and budget in front of you and thinking, "I can't do it" instead we say, "Here's a way to jump over that barrier rethinking what you have in front of you."

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah and I want to get into some of the nitty gritty of that, too, because that is clearly like, how you actually go and get it done is so important. Imagining it and envisioning it is one thing but then actually getting on the ground and doing it is-

Kate Black:                            Yeah it's [crosstalk 00:08:11] one thing to write the book but it's still really hard and that was one thing that June and I felt so strongly about is when you're writing a book like this you want to make it for any woman who wants to run for office and there's an inherent kind of struggle in making sure that all levels of offices are kind of represented and running for city counsel in a small town is very different than running for governor of a large state. We wanted to speak to both so I think throughout the book you see this kind of pivot back and forth from federal races and big gubernatorial races to the very local races.

Kate Black:                            Trying to understand and unpack how much money it does cost to run for governor of Texas, for example, versus maybe school board in Virginia Beach. You know, those are two different races but similarly a woman could be easily qualified and feel up for the task for both. We want to make sure that both of those women have the tools that they need to be successful.

Lauren Schiller:                  That's actually something I've been wondering about and first of all, it was a great reminder that there are all these levels of positions that are available to run for. It's not just about, you know, we're more so focused on the presidency right now, for example, but it's not just about that level.

Kate Black:                            Absolutely.

Lauren Schiller:                  It can be effecting your community. The 25% that you cited, is that pretty much even across the board across all of these positions or are there positions where we're seeing more woman in-

Kate Black:                            Well let me take a step back. I mean, you brought up a great point that so often I think when we think about campaigning or running for office we think about Washington DC. That's kind of where our mind goes but the book really represents the full depth and breadth of elected offices that you can seek out. There are over 500,000 offices that you can run for in this country. It's not just the 435 in the US House of Representatives or the 100 in the Senate or even that Oval Office on Pennsylvania Avenue. It's this whole landscape that's available to women and so we really wanted to speak to that.

Kate Black:                            To your question, though, about the 25%. We kind of hover around that number whether you're talking about the federal level or state legislatures. There are some super bright spots, though. Like for instance we know that women tend to make up a larger swath of school board seats. We also know that there are some state legislatures that are majority women. I think Nevada is one of those. There definitely are some bright spots, like I mentioned, but I think across the board we need to do more so that there are not just women in some of these specific sectors but rather when you look across the kind of political landscape it's filled with women.

Kate Black:                            I want to see women everywhere. Especially if we're ever going to think about parity, you know, we really have to have a long way to go there.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah and keeping the momentum going and you know, I was thinking back to like, in the 90s it was the year of the woman, right? When Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein and three or four other women were elected to the Senate in a single year. That was like, a really big deal, but that was over 20 years ago. How do we make this not just surge and retreat, surge and retreat, but keep the momentum going? What's your vision for how that might come to be?

Kate Black:                            Well I think Barbara Mikulski actually has a fantastic quote about the year of the woman because she would get asked about it all the time, you know? "Is this the new year of the woman?" I feel like that narrative comes up almost every election cycle, you know? "Is this the new year?" To be honest, there has been almost a steady growth. Now, that growth isn't huge, but a steady growth of women in elected office over time. What happens, though, is that as women step up to run women who are currently serving are either leaving their seats to run for higher office, which we're seeing right now with the presidential. All of the women except for Marianne Williamson currently hold elected office. If they're successful, that means that there's no longer a woman in their current seat.

Kate Black:                            Sometimes that happens where a woman is in elected office but chooses to run for something else. That creates a vacancy and it's not always filled by another woman. Or what we have been seeing a lot, actually, on the Republican side is Republican women choosing not to run for reelection. It certainly happens on both sides where we have some growth but for different political or outstanding reasons a woman will choose not to go forward. But you know, I think going back to Barbara Mikulski, I think she would say that, "Every year is the year of the woman," right? That year was special but we should keep this momentum and this narrative alive.

Kate Black:                            It's not that it's this year, it's every year. I think that's helpful just as a reminder. It's not just about women on the ballot, it's about women voters, it's about the issues that matter to women. You know, I think too often we get so focused on a number and I think outside of all that, we strip all that away, you're actually talking about some really fantastic women who have stepped up to lead their communities. Whether it's running for city council, running for Congress or the Senate or even presidency. I mean, that is just in itself, should be celebrated.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, agreed 100%. I mean, and actually to the larger point, why is it important that we have more women in office? I mean, there's the sort of obvious like, well you know we are more than 50% of the population so we should have equal representation but beyond the numbers what are some of the advantages to our whole society for having more women in office?

Kate Black:                            Well first and foremost, you know, I think June and I fundamentally agreed from the jump when we started this book is that having a more representative government, a government that looks like the people it serves I think is a better government. Especially when we see photo after photo of rooms of men deciding things without women present that directly affect the lives of women and our children and our planet. So I think, you know, having us be at the decision making table or wherever decisions are happening about society at large, I think, brings more voices and more opinions and I think ultimately hopefully better outcomes to that decision making process.

Kate Black:                            If you look at the data, which I love, if you look at the data the data does show that when women are in office we get things done. That means we sponsor more legislation, we're more likely to work across the aisle, we're more likely to focus on issues that relate to women and families. That could look like education and health care, it could look like reproductive choice. There are so many things, I think, that women choose to focus on as priorities that make our society better. When someone asks me, "Why should I care if a woman is on the ballot or not?" Or, "Why should I vote for her?" It's like, well two things, number one, if you're tired of Washington not getting things done vote for a woman. The data shows that they just get the stuff done but also if you care about some of these bigger progressive issues we find that women when they're in office do vote and do support some of these really important issues like healthcare and like education, like I mentioned, that do impact families at large.

Lauren Schiller:                  Sometimes you hear about the talk about in terms of like, feminine values versus masculine values and that these areas of education and healthcare and social programs and reproductive choice and justice are more feminine attributes or more feminine values, you know? That's great because we can draw a line between women and those things happening. What I'm also learning and a study actually just came out today I just read the headlines of is that those things benefit men, too. I want to make sure that the outcomes feel like they are not just, "Okay we're going to get more women in office so women as a whole are going to do better" but that men are also going to do better as a result of these policies.

Kate Black:                            Absolutely. You know, I think about it all the time, even just the language that we use about issues. For example when you hear it tossed around especially in election season, "Women's issues," right? A whole bucket of things could be women's issues but that in itself kind of puts it into a segment and allows, I think, anybody, the media, candidates, pundits, whoever, to kind of segment it and park it over in a different spot where it's not part of the national dialogue. Instead of categorizing it just as "Women's issues," I like to think about it just as issues that are important to women. That is a whole host of things. It could be foreign policy, it could be domestic policy, whatever it is, those issues are central to the lives of women in this country and we should be putting them front and center.

Kate Black:                            Too, and anecdote that I would share with you to kind of color the point that you just made, I remember I was in a focus group, this was probably three or four years ago. It was a focus group in Pennsylvania about equal pay. We did a group of millennial men and I remember watching the focus group and the moderator asked a question, "Do you think the wage gap is real?" Half the room said, "No." Then she asked, she kind of explained it a little bit and by the end of the focus group I distinctly remember this one young man's opinion because he was kind of an older millennial and he was one of the few married men in the room. I distinctly remember by the end of the session he said, "So wait, let me get this, if my wife is making an equal wage as she should be, that actually helps me, right?"

Kate Black:                            I wish he could see my face behind the glass. I was like, "Yes 100% it helps you so like, get on board." I just, I will never forget him kind of having that light bulb moment of like, "Oh my gosh, this issue directly impacts me. My wife's financial security impacts me. I need to be for this." It's like, "Absolutely bro. Come to the party. I don't care that you're late but I'm glad that you're here."

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and I'm so glad you're here to listen to my conversation with Kate Black, coauthor of "Represent - The Women's Guide to Running for Office and Changing the World." You can change the world right now by subscribing to the podcast and making a contribution toward our production at InflectionPointRadio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  Stay tuned because coming up we'll talk about running for the highest office in the land.

Lauren Schiller:                  [00:19:16]

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point and I'm here with Kate Black, coauthor of "Represent - The Women's Guide to Running for Office and Changing the World." So you brought up the progressive issues. Are you saying this book is for any political affiliation or do you have a bias towards one political affiliation?

Kate Black:                            This book is for, I think, any woman from any party. We acknowledge, you know, I think on page two that June and I both come from progressive backgrounds, that we have both worked to elect Democrats. That's no secret in the book. We also say on that same page I think on the next sentence is that we hope that a Republican woman picks up this book, too, and is inspired and motivated and encouraged to run. I made the point earlier about parity but if we ever want to get to 50% of Congress, let's say, the Democrats can't do it alone. We need Republicans to do their part, too. That, I think, goes across partisan divides. I think if you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent or a member of the Green party or just out there by yourself. I would say you can pick up this book and see not only the advice that we give, which crosses parties, or the issues that we talk about which also cross party lines, I think you can also see yourself in some of the women that we profile and that we talk to and whose advice is kind of scattered throughout.

Kate Black:                            We talked to Democrats, we talked to Republicans, we highlight Republicans and we highlight Democrats. So I think our intention with this book was to make it non-partisan, both in the look and the feel.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, well right now we're in the midst of the Democratic primaries for the presidential race in 2020. What do you say to people who say, "Well, they're really smart and everything but this country's just not ready for a woman president."

Kate Black:                            Oh man, I would say look at the data. The data disproves that. I think there was a poll that just came out this afternoon that said that 56% of Americans said that the country was ready for a woman president. I think I would also go back to 2016 and for the record, a woman won three million more votes than the other guy. I think there's a lot of data points that we could show that shows that not only is the country ready but voters have spoken about this issue. Also, for the record, I think the women who are currently running for president, they've all won elections before in their districts or their states and so I think there's certainly an electability argument there that is percolating but I feel very strongly that both the country is ready, because they've shown it before, but also that these women are women who have won elections and can hold their own.

Kate Black:                            I'm excited to kind of see where it all goes but I'm just as excited to see these women who have proven records, proven track records of getting voter support.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah, I mean, it's really, it's kind of, sort of like a psychological game in a way to ask yourself the question, "Am I," especially in a position where I am hosting this feminist show, "Would I vote for them just because they're a woman or would I vote for the most qualified candidate who happens to be a woman or is the magic sauce that it's both?"

Kate Black:                            It could be the magic sauce. I mean, everyone has to answer that question for themselves but in that question I think I would challenge people to think about if you do value gender, if gender is for you, an unapologetic qualification, I think then the choice is obvious. I also don't think you have to be afraid of making gender a must have or value that you're looking for in candidates because this comes up a lot. This dialogue comes up or certainly the question, you know, we hear a lot like, "Yeah, are we ready for a woman president?" Or, "I just want to vote for the person who could win" or, "Her voice, just ugh, I can't." Or, "It's not her turn," or, "It's really time for him."

Kate Black:                            You do hear, or, "Why is she always playing X card," or, "She just doesn't represent me." All of those things we've heard before and what we wanted to do in the book was arm our readers with some kind of go to lines where they could interrupt some of that language. What we do in the book is provide a cheat sheet to interrupt sexist and racist, we say another word, comments about women candidates. It's meant almost to be cut out of the book and taken with you in your book bag, diaper bag, tote bag, whatever so that when it comes up you're kind of armed with something. It could be something as innocuous as, "Well tell me more about that. Why do you feel like you wouldn't vote for a woman just because she's a woman?" Or, "You say you just don't like her. Tell me more."

Kate Black:                            Sometimes I think people say these things because they've heard them before or they're kind of just memes out in the world and they're just repeating them but also I think sometimes there are real sentiments behind some of these comments and I think it's a dialogue that can happen from that interruption could be very valuable and could open up some thinking that might not have ever been kind of questioned before. We wanted to give the reader that part of the book. It was really, I think, a special piece that June and I wanted to include for sure.

Lauren Schiller:                  Actually that section is really helpful I think even as a woman reading the book. To interrupt some of the internalized sexism that we each hold within us because it's just like, baked in since day one of our birth, right, by living in this society.

Kate Black:                            Yeah. Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. You know, I think part of writing this book for me personally was understanding my own kind of voice and value and that I am enough to write this book and you know, you kind of have to get over a whole host of your own stuff to be able to do this. This was not an easy process for me and I think I can only imagine what it's like for someone running. The levels of kind of scrutiny and socialization and bias and all of these things that are kind of taught to women and put on women from day one. You know, it's a lot to get over and I think it's a lot to get over and when I think about women running for office I just applaud them from the jump because it's such an undertaking to kind of disrobe yourself from all of that baggage sometimes.

Lauren Schiller:                  You're obviously very qualified to write this book with the multitude of experience that you've had and your role at Emily's List. What were some of the attributes that successful candidates have had that you've observed and that you could call out?

Kate Black:                            Sure. Well I think when you look at successful candidates, and especially I think one of the great things about women candidates specifically is that a successful candidate listens. They understand that to hear from voters and to hear stories and to internalize those narratives and then communicate effectively outward so that they reach people where they are but also share a story that's powerful. That intake and output is not an easy thing and it's certainly not an easy thing to sit quietly sometimes, especially if you're running for office and everyone's kind of waiting for you to speak. It's not an easy thing to sit quietly and hear, and really listen to a constituent share a problem or share something that they're passionate about. Even more so I think we can get kind of bogged down in some [wonkyness 00:28:04] and some policy and that sometimes feels good because that's our home base. Especially if you're running for office you're probably been thinking about all of these issues really seriously.

Kate Black:                            Sometimes I think the most effective candidates are the ones that can talk to you like a regular person and really break down some of these hard to understand issues in a way that I think meets them where they are but also doesn't patronize or talk down to anybody. You know, in fact, I think, Stacey Abrams is a fantastic example of this. But she's also, I think, a self described introvert. I think for any woman maybe listening to this who is thinking, "Oh, Kate's just talking about someone who's outgoing" or "I need to be really gregarious or be able to talk to anybody. That's just not me." I would tell you some of the best candidates, I think, are actually introverts. Where they are able to kind of absorb from other people, kind of sit with their own selves but also then communicate so well and emote and connect with people in such a way that when you're campaigning is such a powerful force to watch and to see.

Kate Black:                            Ultimately I think that's how we win elections is when our own stories kind of fill in the gaps between where voters see us and where they want to be ultimately. I think when you think about that quality, I think women candidates have that so innately because we have so many stories and we have so many narratives. It's so easy for us to connect. This was such an important piece of the book for June and I that we broke it into two chapters. It's called, "How Does This Work in my Real Life Part 1 and Part Deux." Part One really focuses on your professional career and it focuses on money and time. There's a question in there about thinking about what office you want to run for, do you have to quit your job and what are the implications of that? What is the implications on your financial security? What does it look like for your long term career plan? Are you able to take a leave of absence? Have you talked to your boss about this?

Kate Black:                            All of these questions are valuable questions that we kind of lead the reader through so that she's doing this exercise. The next thing that we think about is our time and so to that end, June and I both do a time log. For two weeks we map out every hour and you see it in the book. You see June's and you see mine. We're very different people. She wrote hers out in a narrative, mine's in an Excel spreadsheet. It's fine. Turns out though once you do that exercise you see kind of where your time is going and you're able to assess. "Is there time I can give away maybe for a campaign? And is there time that I need to keep sacred?"

Lauren Schiller:                  One of the many things that I love about "Represent" is that you share the stories of a number of women who ran for office and won and one of the ones that really stood out to me, which I was hoping you would tell the story of Stephanie Murphy, the congresswoman from Florida and how she came to the country, how she attained the position. Could you share that? I just think it's so poignant at this particular moment.

Kate Black:                            Sure, so Congresswoman Murphy was elected in 2016 and her story is so powerful. She was born in Vietnam and her family fled when she was just a baby. They were in a dingy of sorts, they were in a boat and the boat was going to capsize and she was rescued by the Coast Guard. She came to the United States and she worked in the Defense Department, she worked in government, she worked in private practice. She and her family eventually moved to Florida and she was a small businesswoman with two children. She decided to run for office, I would say, five or six months before the general election and she decided to take on a man who had been in office for decades at that point. She was late getting into the race and everyone was like, "Who's this person?" And "Can she raise the money?" And "He's been in for office for so long" and "It's Florida. That's tough. Is she going to be able to flip the seat?" She won.

Kate Black:                            She won with such, I would say, great support from a whole host of different sectors of the voting populace. Her story is one that I think when she goes to Congress, she tells it so well because it connects with both our, kind of, patriotism that we all feel for this country but she was literally saved by people serving in the military. So her connection to not only public service is so real you can kind of, it's almost palatable when she talks. To be able to take on an incumbent who had been in office for so long and to bring in someone so new and so fresh to the public life is really, really exciting.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah and just, I mean, just her story of coming over. Fleeing a country that was under duress. Her family was under duress and being rescued and then making her way into some of the highest ranks of the US government to do more good for more people. I mean, just the full circle of it is just incredible.

Kate Black:                            It really is and I think it's a great example of one that, you know, we highlight so many different women in the book and one other I'll just share, too, is Lisa Murkowski, the Republican Senator from Alaska. Lisa Murkowski is a woman whose been in office for some time but she actually lost a Republican primary for reelection when the Tea Party was kind of hitting its stride. Instead of being like, "All right I lost that primary" she said, "I'm going to run as an independent and I'm going to do a write in campaign." Now imagine having to not only run on a different party line but also you now have to tell people, and teach people, how to spell your name correctly so that you get enough votes that count that are legitimate to win a general election. That's exactly what she did.

Kate Black:                            You know, one of her first campaign ads was literally showing people how to spell "Murkowski" and sure enough, she won that election and she's still serving in the Senate today and doing some tremendous things. Some tremendous bipartisan things, in fact. I love that we share so many different kind of origin stories of women in the book. Hopefully that shows women who pick it up and are inspired to maybe read it, run themselves or give it to someone else that they can see a little bit of something that sparks their interest and sparks maybe their own identity so they can take this on for themselves.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah and I mean, throughout the book you've got this running checklist and these are the 21 things that you need to check off in order to know that, I mean, literally to check the boxes. Make sure that you've got everything from your vision, you know, down to how you're going to get support, down to meeting the requirements for entering the race, you know? Everything is on this list but there's only 21 of them so that feels actually manageable and of course, some of them are going to take more time than others, right?

Kate Black:                            Of course.

Lauren Schiller:                  What was the thinking about structuring this, you know, the book around a checklist?

Kate Black:                            Well we wanted women to feel ... first of all, we love checklists. I mean, who doesn't?

Lauren Schiller:                  Me too.

Kate Black:                            I write things on my to do list just so I can cross them off.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yes, thank you. You're my people.

Kate Black:                            Yes, yes. I also know, you know, sometimes I think we need the details and with running for office there are many steps and there's, you know, to your point some things take longer than others but to make it feel as accessible as possible, why not make it a checklist, you know? As we started kind of building out our chapters we realized like, we're asking them to do things. We're asking them to kind of check things off of a list. Why not have that list build as the book goes through so that the final chapter you're able to really cross off that final thing on your list and looking back over it you'll see how many things you've accomplished. You know, you've written your pitch, you've figured out how much money you need to raise, you've identified where you're going to run.

Kate Black:                            You've also, what I love too about the final thing is you've named at least five other women who you're going to ask to run and give this book to. That's such a powerful closer to the list and I hope that there's women out there who are writing in additional lines because, you know, surely we can all name more than five women we should ask to run but hopefully you can add names as you go because I think that's incredibly powerful to have that kind of checklist in hand. Also know that it's never done because there's always women to ask to run.

Lauren Schiller:                  Yeah. I have to ask you a question that is sort of like a personal question because a few years ago I was asked to run for City Council in my town and I was super busy at the time. It didn't seem like the right time, I was very intrigued by the idea. I was completely overwhelmed by the idea and ultimately I decided not to do it but one of the things that was in my way is that I was imagining myself sitting in these highly bureaucratic meetings where everything moves super slow and as a person who likes to get things done, as you said, "Women get things done when they get into office." That for me was actually a barrier, thinking about the slow moving bureaucracy and procedural rules and things like that that happen in meetings where decisions do get made. Can you say anything to assuage my concerns on that front?

Kate Black:                            Well I don't think it's unreasonable. I don't think it's unreasonable, especially when you have people coming from all different types of backgrounds where they are getting things done or they're seeing change happen around them. Going into government can sometimes seem like, "Hmm, is this really the answer?" So what we do in the book is actually encourage women to think about what is the thing that fires them up? What is the passion that they're being moved by? What are they Tweeting about a lot? What is always coming up at Thanksgiving dinner? Use that as fuel to drive your campaign forward because that ultimately could be your platform. That could be small things. It could be getting a stop sign put at the end of the block so your streets are safer. It could be big things like healthcare or social security or taxes.

Kate Black:                            Reminding yourself about what you're passionate about, number one it's going to help you get through some of those meetings and some of the bureaucracy but two, you know, surely in government things take some time because you're trying to serve a whole host of the public with some of these big decisions. The beauty of being in elected office, too, is that you have a microphone. I would say to you, "You're going to be in meetings and you're going to be fighting for change and some of that change is going to feel bureaucratic and slow and granular and maybe not as exciting but the best thing is you get to leave that meeting and you have an audience and a microphone and a platform from which to speak about the things that you care about. It can be what happened in that meeting but it could also be what that meeting represents to your constituents and I would just carry that with you because there's going to be days when it's hard and there's going to be days when it's not fun but reminding yourself about why you're doing it and about the community that you're serving and about the issues that motivate you, that's what's going to propel you forward and keep you in the game."

Lauren Schiller:                  I will take that to heart, thank you.

Kate Black:                            Well hopefully you do run. I mean, you've got to do it.

Lauren Schiller:                  We'll see. I've got a different platform, right? We're talking on it right now, right?

Kate Black:                            Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Lauren Schiller:                  We'll let's- [crosstalk 00:39:29]

Kate Black:                            I will say though-

Lauren Schiller:                  Oh yes?

Kate Black:                            I will say, one of the big things that we did in one of the chapters which is about qualifications and feeling qualified, we did look at all of the professions of the 115th Congress, so what they did before they were elected and radio host is on there. There are radio hosts in Congress. You, too, could do it.

Lauren Schiller:                  All right. More checkpoints, more data points. The last question I have for you, I hope this makes you chuckle a little bit, is what's the best advice that you've ever been given about how to self promote?

Kate Black:                            Oh my gosh, so in the book, this will make me laugh. In the book we have a whole thing about self promotion and I was in LA at the time, June and I, we would get together for these multi day kind of writing sessions. They were all day sessions and I knew we were coming in to do kind of a self promotion kind of conversation and chapter and I had just gotten off of doing an interview with a friend who hosts a radio show and I said to June very proudly, "I know how to self promote. Here it is" and I showed her a Facebook post that I had done. It was, June's reaction was literal laughter. I think a belly laugh might even be more descriptive. She was just like, "Kate, this is not self promotion" and she's right because the post that I had done was not about me at all. In fact, it was about the subject matter and was about my friend's show and it was not about me as being an expert at all but really just about the fact that I was on a thing and June ...

Kate Black:                            We included this story in the book number one because it, I think, shows that we all get it wrong sometimes but two, how hard it is to self promote. June gave me some excellent advice and we reworked it and I ended up deleting the post and re-posting a new post which put myself front and center and my achievement front and center, which is not easy to do. In terms of the best advice that I've ever gotten around self promotion certainly boasting about it and then being proven wrong is not a great feeling and you definitely learn from that. But you know, I think for women self promotion is just such a hard thing sometimes because not only are we sometimes taught to be uncomfortable with boasting or bragging and feeling a little squishy about that and feeling, "Are we imposters? Are people going to judge us differently?"

Kate Black:                            You know, I think about when I see men talking about their achievements and I've certainly been in enough rooms where I've heard men talking about something that they've done and I've thought to myself, "Well if he can do it why don't I do it more?" I think it takes a mentality and just a moment of pause to think, "Why am I not sharing this awesome thing that I've just done? Is it about me? Is it about other people? Is it a combination of both?" Sometimes you just got to swallow it and just do it and the more that you do it the better it will feel and also the more that you'll get such great responses from people when they hear about the cool [00:42:51] that you're doing. I mean, that's so special and so [00:42:53].

Kate Black:                            I don't know if I have a great piece of advice but I would tell you definitely sharing what you think is self promotion with your coauthor is a great way to learn what is not self promotion but also trying to do it as much as you can, as frequently as you can is a great way to just kind of get comfortable with trying that on and eventually it won't feel like you're trying it on but rather it's a part of your [everydayness 00:43:18]

Kate Black:                            [00:43:22]

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and this is Inflection Point and while we're talking self promotion, I'm excited to tell you we're trying something new on the program and that is to provide a toolkit of concrete actions you can take on the issues that matter to you. Stay with us.

Lauren Schiller:                  [00:43:43]

Lauren Schiller:                  I'm Lauren Schiller and we're trying something new on Inflection Point, which I'm very excited about and that is to provide an ongoing series of toolkits in our show, from our guests, with concrete actions you can take on the issues that matter to you. We created these toolkits so that when you only have a few minutes or so you can get the inspiration and information you need to do something. Today's Inflection Point toolkit, my guest Kate Black, the author of "Represent - The Women's Guide to Running for Office and Changing the World" tells us how we can get more women in office. Whether you're deciding to run or supporting someone who is.

Lauren Schiller:                  When it comes to getting more women in office what are three things you need to know before you decide to run?

Kate Black:                            A couple things that I would say to anybody who's listening who's thinking about running, first things to do. Number one is to figure out what issue fires you up the most. You probably have been posting about this on social media, you might be talking about it all the time with your friends, it might come up a lot at Thanksgiving. Understanding and identifying that issue is the first thing to do because it's eventually going to be your platform.

Kate Black:                            The second thing I would say is start showing up. You know, identify how you're representing your community now. It could be looking at are you attending city council meetings? Have you asked for your local leaders to have one on one meetings with you? Are you going to protests? Are you going to community events? There's so many different ways that you can show up for your community. It's important that you start kind of being present because eventually if you run for office you're going to ask your community to show up for you and so it's important to be there for them from the start.

Kate Black:                            The third thing I would say is start talking to people. You don't need to know when you're running or what you're running for but running for office is not a solo activity. It is a team sport and it takes a village. Start telling people you want to run. This could be a small group at first, it could be your partner, your family, maybe your close friends. Our words have powerful, make powerful promises to ourselves when we say them aloud. When you say, "I think I'm going to run for office one day" that not only makes a promise for yourself but it also brings in a whole collection of folks into your journey along with you.

Kate Black:                            those are the first three things I would tell anyone who's thinking about running for office. Those are the first three things I would say to start doing today.

Lauren Schiller:                  So say someone has made the decision to run. What do they need to know?

Kate Black:                            For someone running for office the things that I would tell you to do first are identify the requirements that it takes to run for the specific seat you're looking at. You know, for Congress that means you have to have been a resident and a certain age to run. For local and state offices there might be different requirements around residency or how old you need to be to run for that specific seat. Don't confuse qualifications and requirements. You are qualified today. Your experience is your expertise. Remember that you are enough and that men are not waiting so it's time for you to step up. The other thing I would tell you to do is really think about your social media presence. Do an inventory, go through every Tweet, every Facebook post, every Instagram video. Take time, be one with your computer because you need to go through everything. Once you've done that it's time to identify, do you need to have a campaign page and a private page?

Kate Black:                            Eventually I think the answer is probably "yes" because the folks that you first talked to when you set up your Facebook account in college, are they the same people you need to communicate your policy platform with and about events and fundraisers for your campaign? Maybe, but maybe not, so think about having a separate profile and public persona for your campaign that's different from your private pages.

Kate Black:                            The last thing I would say is think about the community of people around you and how you can involve them in this new journey. That could look like your sorority, your alumni association, a professional network, your daycare pickup circle. It could look like the softball league down the street that you show up for on every other Saturday but invite those people into your journey. They can be volunteers, they can maybe host fundraisers for you, they could give you money. They also might be some of your staff. Do you know someone who's really great at organizing events? They can maybe be a finance director. Do you know the person down the street who knows everybody's business and where everyone lives? That person might be a field director. They might be there with you knocking on doors because they know who's home when and where.

Kate Black:                            These are a few first steps I would take to running but you've already done the most important thing, which is deciding to put your name on the ballot in the first place.

Lauren Schiller:                  What could we all do to support other women who are running if we ourselves are not?

Kate Black:                            This is a great question. It's one that we get a lot. The final chapter of the book is actually titled, "How Do I Support Other Women?" Voting for them is a great, cost free way to support other women running for office. You can donate your time, your money, your expertise to their campaigns. You can also help her in other ways. June and I like to say that behind every woman candidate is really another woman trying to help her get it all together. If you have a friend or you know a woman who's running, don't wait to be invited to offer help. Just step in. That could look like making sure that there's Diet Coke's in the fridge and coffee in the morning. It could look like picking up the dry cleaning or walking the dog or taking her to get her hair done or you know, inviting her to go out for a walk just to blow off some steam. Whatever it is, don't wait to be invited, just start showing up for her.

Kate Black:                            The last thing is asking her to run. We know it takes women multiple times to ask them to run for them to step up. We need to be recruited intentionally and thoughtfully and so if you know a woman in your life, and I invite you to think really about all the women in your life and consider them. Whether they're domestic worker, sex workers, teachers, bus drivers, cashiers, bank tellers because we still have those, maybe radio hosts. All of the women in your life can run for office and I ask you to consider them and share with them this book.

Lauren Schiller:                  [00:51:02]

Lauren Schiller:                  That was Kate Black, who just published the book, "Represent - The Women's Guide to Running for Office and Changing the World" that she wrote with June Diane Raphael. I've got a link to it on my website at InflectionPointRadio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  Now for some news. When you go into the podcast feed you'll see our episodes broken up into two segments: one for when you have a little more time and one for when you're, well, on the run. Whether it's running for office or running an errand. That way if you want to hear again what Kate Black says are the most important things you can do when running for office or supporting someone who is, it's all right there in a tiny little package. Find Inflection Point episodes in any podcast app or go to InflectionPointRadio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  This episode is dedicated to my friend Stephanie Walton, who stepped up to run for office in Oakland, California and to all the other women who are raising their hands. You can do it and we support you. This is Inflection Point. I'm Lauren Schiller and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  [00:52:21]

Lauren Schiller:                  That's our Inflection Point for today. All of our episodes are on Apple Podcast, RadioPublic, Stitcher, Pandora, NPR One, all the places. Give us a five star review and subscribe to the podcast. Know women leading change we should talk to? Let us know at InflectionPointRadio.org. While you're there, support our production with a tax deductible monthly or one time contribution. When women rise up, we all rise up. Just go to InflectionPointRadio.org. We're on Facebook and Instagram at Inflection Point Radio. Follow us and join the Inflection Point Society, our Facebook group of everyday activists who seek to make extraordinary change through small daily actions. Follow me on Twitter @LASchiller. To find out more about today's guest and to be in the loop with our email newsletter, you know where to go: InflectionPointRadio.org.

Lauren Schiller:                  Inflection Point is produced in partnership with KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco NPRX. Our community manager is Alaura Weaver, our engineer and producer is Eric Wayne. I'm your host, Lauren Schiller. This is Inflection Point and this is how women rise up.

Lauren Schiller:                  [00:53:44]

 



Kate Black

Kate Black