April 8, 2025 • 28 mins
In this episode, Mary Katharine Ham and Karol Markowicz discuss economic issues surrounding tariffs and the stock market, the nature of recent protests, and the implications of political rhetoric. They also delve into the conversation around women's roles in the workforce, inspired by comments from Megyn Kelly, emphasizing the importance of flexibility and choice in women's careers. Normally is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
#tariffs #protests #MegynKelly #stockmarket #tradedeficit #Americanmanufacturing #political #discourse #womenchoices #economicpolicies #politicalprotests
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hey back.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Normally the show with normal which takes but when the
news gets weird.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
I am Mary Catherine.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Ham and I'm Carol Marco. It's him Mary Catherine. I
think we both had very exciting.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Weekends we did.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It was my birthday, so I got I took a
little trip birthday, thank you. I took a little trip
to New York City and had a sort of a
stereotypically a little bit tourist in New York day Central Park,
champagne at a steakhouse, got my nails done, went to
the comedy cellar.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
It was a great day.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
That sounds amazing that any of that.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I celebrated my husband and I sixteenth anniversary, also in
New York. Actually we didn't see each other, was different days.
I also saw Sebastian Menescalco and Pete Corielli on Friday
night in Florida. Hilarious. I will just say, if they
are touring anywhere near you, it's a must see. I
(00:58):
cried laughing for the whole time.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
I think I saw Sebastian one time years ago, but
I will look out again.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
He's also my celebrity. Like one time I asked on Twitter.
If you who do you think you'd be friends with?
That's a celebrity that you don't know, and him and
his wife are like my I feel like if we
met each other, we'd have a good time.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
You guys would be buds.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Yeah, I think so. Does that sound creepy a little?
Speaker 4 (01:24):
Right?
Speaker 1 (01:25):
I'm here for it. It was yours, Come on, No,
mine used to be.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Actually, I used to think that I would be great
friends with Mindy Kaling, But now she's hanging with Megan
Markle and I just don't think it's a match anymore. Right, Yeah, talented,
but I think she's Yeah, it's just a it's a
bridge I can't cross. So if for that chance, I
probably wouldn't be at the American Riviera with Mindy.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Think of a couple.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
I have to think of a couple friend so that
so that Steve can have a buddy, like maybe maybe
whenever and Powell gets married, we'll see who he pairs
up with.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Well, it's also exciting weekend for America. My goodness, America
had an exciting weekend. The Terriff thing really came to
a head after we recorded our last episode, and of
course we record this twice a week, and we get
a lot of like, why didn't you cover this, and
we're like, because it happened after we recorded, and that's
how it goes. But the stock market had a real
(02:27):
bad day on Friday, and it's not having a great
day today Monday.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
You know.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
I have said on here that I'm cautiously optimistic. I'm
still kind of in the same place on this, But
I don't like the people that are similar to me,
that are like, let's wait and see what happens. I
don't like the dismissiveness, and I don't like the I
just think it's it's it's got a very learned to
code feel to it, like, oh, who cares about the
(02:57):
stock market? Real Americans don't invest in the stock market? Well,
I don't know that that's true. A but also be
a lot of this does have a lasting effect, and
not just for people who invest in the stock market.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Yeah, I agree with you, there's a there's a lot
of the there aren't There's a significant percentage of people
who have investments in the stock market, including those who
had a working class or a government career and have
pensions that are invested in the stock market. So that's
a large part of these sort of crossover union voters
(03:34):
that those dismissing their concerns would be should be careful
about doing that with.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
You know, I I don't feel great about it.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I am always rooting for the policies of the US
and the president, no matter the party, to work out
for us.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
And yet I see a.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Lot of indications that or a lot of confusion about
this one and exactly what we're trying to accomplish.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
And I know we have some clips about it. By
the way, there was a huge.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Dip in stocks and then a huge rise in stocks,
and then a fall off again because of a very
strange thing this morning, which was that someone named Bloomberg
on X watched a clip of an economic advisor of
Trump's on Fox overinterpreted it hit as him saying Trump
(04:26):
was considering a ninety day pause in tariffs, and when
he tweeted that, a bunch of people saw it on
X and it.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Changed the market. The market soared for a few seconds,
and then some one.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Said no, that was fake news, and then the market
sank again.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
So there. It's an interesting just.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
A microcosm of how news works these days, and sometimes
a random dude named Bloomberg not getting the right thing
from an interview on Fox means that the world markets
will change, and also maybe a signal to Trump that like, hey,
if I paused these series, look what happened to the market.
I think my concern is that it looks like he's
(05:07):
trying to solve the problem, not so much of tariffs, right, Like,
there's been news that fifty countries have come to him
and said, hey, we'll do zero tariffs if you guys, like,
let's get this figured out. You know, Taiwan is among them,
Zimbabwe I think was mentioned. You know, there's everybody's coming
to the table. I have no doubt that he wants
(05:28):
to do those deals. Right, But if we wanted zero tariffs,
how does that get us back to American manufacturing? You know,
that's just free trade, which I am in favor of,
but maybe not doing in this fashion, which is pretty disruptive.
So there's that going on. But then there's also people
(05:50):
who are saying, no, we need to fix the trade deficit.
And I don't find the trade deficit inherently to be
a problem. Sometimes it's a problem, but like I always
I've pointed this out since Trump's first term, because he
does not like trade deficits. He feels like we're getting
ripped off if we have a trade deficit.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
I have a.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Trade deficit with Bojangles because I want to do lots
of bits there and it's the best place to buy biscuits.
But they don't need my podcasting skills yet. So we're
in a trade deficit. But that's not inherently problematic because
I can sell my products elsewhere and I'm getting the
thing I need efficiently from Bojangles. Right, So if we're
(06:31):
trying to solve every trade deficit, we're going to be
in trouble. And I don't think that's going to be
a free trade scenario like the ones where Vietnam and
others are coming to the table and saying zero tariffs.
Speaker 5 (06:43):
Right.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
That's the question going forward is who do we want
to be? And I don't see why we want to
be a manufacturing hub. I think that that is just
sort of not necessarily a positive for US. I get
the argument of bringing some manufacturing back to the US,
but a lot of it it benefits us not being here.
(07:07):
And look, you know, I feel like my impulses is
to be anti tariff, and that's why I'm being kind
of cautious here and kind of listening to what the
Trump administration actually wants to do. And I'll say, there
are two kinds of intense Trump supporter, right. There's the
supporter that just likes the guy, trusts him, maybe loves
(07:30):
how crazy he makes. The left is willing to give
him leeway on the more far out ideas like tariffing
the whole world. And then there's the type that loves
Trump because of these kinds of proposals. I think of
Badya Unger Sargan as one person. She basically overlooks everything
she doesn't like about Donald Trump and you know, his
(07:51):
Trump and trump Ism, because he speaks to her values
and aligns with her issues. And of course that makes
me a little nervous because I love her, but she's
pretty far left right exactly, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Well move been to our original issue with Trump?
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Yes, yes, exactly.
Speaker 6 (08:06):
So.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
My friend John Carney, he's finance and economics editor at Breitbart,
He's another person like this. He has been pro tariff
before Donald Trump was a thing. He doesn't fall in
line with Trump. He supports Trump because Trump believes what
he believes. And I have a clip I want to
play from John Carney because I think he's saying some
things I haven't heard other people say.
Speaker 7 (08:27):
Trump just didn't want to inflict that much pain, or
he didn't think he'd get.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Them to come down.
Speaker 7 (08:34):
I mean, I think that I know this is wonky,
but you get this is that, Like it's one thing
to say your tariff is ten, you take it, We're
going to go to ten, and if you want to
come down, we'll both come down. But when they started
adding these non tariff.
Speaker 8 (08:46):
Bearers, like the VAT right, which is what Europe.
Speaker 7 (08:48):
Uses their tax system, I don't know how you place
a number on that, Like, so how does Europe say,
how are you valuing our vat? You guys have fifty
state taxes and you want us to you know, you
subsidize certain and things. You know, so what are we
supposed to do? I think that that's that to me
is kind of the kicker. Is that, Like, do you
(09:10):
think that they have set themselves up for success? I
guess is the best way to do this at getting
another country to say, fine, we can get that number lower.
Speaker 8 (09:17):
I do think they have set themselves up for a
success in this. I think that just doing it mechanically,
I'm like, Okay, here's your tariff, but we're going to
ignore the non tariff barriers. Actually wouldn't have been very productive. Remember, ultimately,
what the goal here is to achieve a more balanced
trade with the rest of the world. We yes, we
(09:38):
don't like the particular non tariff barriers, and we don't
like the tariffs, but those are really means to an
end that countries use to create their giant surpluses that
then the US has been forced to absorb. What we're
saying is we're not going to absorb these surpluses anymore.
We are going to put a terrify on you. If
you start to bring down your tariff barriers and non
(09:59):
teriffic and those result in our trade deficits and trade
surpluses coming closer, then we will lower the reciprocal tariff.
So this is a like I said, it's a proxy
for tariff levels and trade barriers. And the way they
can fix that is by fixing the things that their
(10:20):
country does that create this giant trade imbalance.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
Now, John and I have disagreed plenty on this kind
of thing. During the first Trump administration, I was remodeling
and the price of bathroom tile spike because of the
China tariffs, and Carney got an earfull for me. But
I just want to put a voice out there that
you may still disagree with. And I definitely listen to
him and say, oh, don't I don't agree with this
(10:46):
part or other things that he says, but that just
isn't just raw raw Trump for the sake of it,
and I think that that's important to hear.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
I think my concern about some of that is that
some of the surplus we absorb or willingly and.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
In fact enthusiastically.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Right, so the surplus such that it is, and sometimes
I agree that they're like ethical and trade practice concerns
about like sheen clothes and all the Chinese plastic that
my children are given at every birthday party they go to, right, Like,
I have some concerns about that. But if you take
those cheap goods from people quickly, much like the bathroom tile,
(11:26):
and then they're not available to them any longer, they
will find that they liked having those things, and then
they will be mad at you. I think one of
the issues with this move too is that whatever comes
of it, I think the uncertainty has already caused some
problems and some damage. If you pull your own butt
out of the fire at this point, that's I think
that's better. And if you get some lower teriff rates, great,
(11:48):
maybe that redounds to our benefit. But it's a it's
a real tough sell to tell people that they're feeling
the short term pain for all long term gain. That Again,
I think American workers have are correct in saying, hey,
I'm not sure cheap goods were worth the trade, including
(12:09):
machine clothing. Yeah, worth the trade for losing all these
solid jobs that we had back then. But I think
that a new generation of Americans often doesn't really understand
what that manufacturing, if it returned, would look like. A
lot of it would be automated. Yeah, it's going to
be a long time to get there. So I'm not
sure we're fixing the problem that we're trying to fix,
(12:30):
and I think there's other damages happening along the way.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Yeah, I think that that's exactly right. Somebody made the
comment that the people on the right saying like, oh,
we'll just all go back to the factories, like the
communists who believes that they'll be the poet in the
Marxist collective they don't realize they're going to be like
cleaning bathrooms. And the great Thomas Soul had a very
(12:54):
rare comment on these tariffs. Let's roll that clip.
Speaker 4 (12:57):
It's painful to see a ruinous decision being repeated now
in so far as he's using these terriffs to get
various strategic things settled, and that he's satisfied with that.
But if he's got set off a worldwide trade war
that has a devastating history, everybody loses because everybody follows suit,
(13:20):
and all that happens is that you get great reduction
and international trade. But if you are the one who's
making the root, then all the other people have no
idea what you're going to do next, and that is
a formula for having people to hang on to their
money until they figure out what you're going to do.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Right. So I'm with Seul. I'm hoping he's using these
tariffs to get very strategic things settled and that Trump
will be satisfied with that. But it is concerning because
people are paused right now and they're waiting to see
what will happen. You know, they are they building a
factory in America? Are they opening factory in Vietnam that
(14:01):
they were planning to. It's that kind of thing that
really makes the markets worried. And again, even if you
don't have money in the markets, it does trickle down
to everybody, and.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
It will affect goods at some point as well.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Behind the markets, there is a bill in the Senate
sponsored by Grassley and I forget who the Democrat companion
is for co sponsoring, that would basically take be Congress
taking back.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Its power to handle these tariffs. There is a.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
Companion ridge they used to like make laws and stuff.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
I know there's a companion bill in the House. Representative
Don Bacon introduced that one. I said over the weekend,
I was like, if so help me, if this man
makes Congress take back its power and do its job,
I'll be like, this is what I voted for. But
I don't think that's the forty chests at hand. Nonetheless,
(14:54):
I like to see a little gumption from the Congress,
and who knows what will happen as that goes forward.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
Because of you, that's anything.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
I am highly suspicious of y'all's emergency powers post COVID, right, Like,
so he's saying this is a trade emergency.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
I don't believe it's a trade emergency.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
I think you're using emergency powers for something you wanted
to do anyway. And I didn't like it in COVID
and I don't like it now. So Congress, you should
get in that game.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Get the game.
Speaker 9 (15:21):
Maybe, you know, I don't know, do the jobs you
were elected to do.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Indeed, we'll be right back on normally. Shall we talk
about the big protests, Carol?
Speaker 9 (15:34):
They were protests. They didn't seem as exciting as the
pink hat protests in twenty sixteen. They didn't seem as motivated.
They seemed less clear, hands off, hands off, that's what
they want.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
With Yeah, it feels very dated because one of the
one of the speeches was like, you know, he thinks
he can put his hands on anything, and I was like,
are we really doing access Hollywood quotes? Right still on that,
it felt dated and it felt sort of tired, perfunctory.
(16:07):
Maybe now there were big crowds like I have no
doubt that there are impassioned Democrats out there and that
the base wants to get out and be mad at
Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
It does feel a little late and a little tired.
I think, as you noted on x Carol.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
The time would have been to get everybody out before
the voting and then to the voting booths.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
That would have been that would have been the way
to do the resistance.
Speaker 9 (16:31):
Yeah, I would just say about that. It's because the
media over the weekend was just so excited about these
protests and it was so like, these protests are, you know,
the most just amazing thing that's ever happened, and they
kept referring to them as powerful. And that's why I
was like, you know, it's even more powerful the nationwide.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Protests the voting, the voting and the voting.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
I think we have one clip from one of these rallies,
and look, I'm just using this as sort of a
symbol this this young man. I'm not meaning to single
him out, but this is just kind of perfect.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Here.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
He has asked about why he's there. He's got a
big sign that says Donald Trump is a fascist?
Speaker 6 (17:11):
So what what makes Trump a fascist?
Speaker 7 (17:19):
What makes Trump a fascist?
Speaker 6 (17:20):
Does does things without? Yeah, talk loud and do all
have my mic on I'm not really going into the
Tibet Sorry, he just doesn't. He just does everything he
wants and you know, not following laws or you know
he was a he's a convicted felon.
Speaker 4 (17:40):
You know.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
That's all I know.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
That's all he knows.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
I there you go.
Speaker 9 (17:45):
I think a lot of these people have no idea
why they're so angry. I get it, I really do
get it.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
I think that they need.
Speaker 9 (17:53):
Something to change channel their anger into, and that's what
these protests are about. I am worried about what I
see is really escalating violent rhetoric. And obviously there's actual
violence happening as well. A pro life reporter was punched
in the face in Harlem on the weekend. There was
some other incidents. A lot of these people are having
(18:15):
signs at say, eighty six forty seven, eighty six means
to end. One of them is standing right alongside Minnesota
Attorney General Keith Ellison with this kind of sign. There's
a lot of keying and defacing Tesla's. All of this
is very worrisome, and I think that I understand that
Democrats are trying to get their base back to being
(18:38):
excited after Democrats have like a twenty six percent approval rating,
and they're trying to get them to focus on how
much they hate Donald Trump, to get that that their
numbers up, but they need to bring down this temperature.
I think things are really heading in a bad direction
with this kind of violent talk.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Yeah, give me a clueless guy any day over the
guy king Tesla's.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
You know, there is a lot of that, and it
will be inevitably downplayed by media, even when it results
in physical attacks as it did on a California campus
against the Turning Point USA gathering and booth and against
Savannah Craven, who's the activists you were talking about doing
man on the street interviews? Who was hurt and significantly
(19:25):
so that will be downplayed as it always is. Speaking
which did you hear that the would be assassin of
Brett Kavanaugh who did not become a household name because
the target was a right leaning conservative jurist instead of
a liberal one. He played guilty last week after that attempt,
(19:46):
But again, not a huge story, Nor is the fact
that people are standing around with eighty six forty seven
signs when he's already been attempted, assassinated twice and the
state of Iran has verified plans to do the same.
That's right, I like real flipping about.
Speaker 9 (20:04):
It, exactly.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
I have a column.
Speaker 9 (20:07):
I think it'll be in This episode comes out Tuesday.
I think it'll be in Tuesday's New York Post, not
confirmed yet. But also there's a new report by this
group called the Network Contagion Research Institute found high numbers
of left leaning people find violence to be acceptable. Over
fifty five percent of left leaning respondents felt there was
some justification for killing President Trump. It's a real powder
(20:31):
keg and I think we need to be way more
worried about it again, these protests. I get it, and
I understand that there's this pent up anger, but we
need to bring down the temperature, and democratic politicians need
to be at the forefront of that. Saying violent rhetoric
is not going to be okay. Yeah, no I'm not either,
(20:53):
but it's my hope. I just say what you want.
Leave the fisticuffs, heart, you know.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Draw the line clearly.
Speaker 9 (21:02):
We're going to take a short break and come right
back with normally. Our last topic is Megan Kelly, who
I think you know. We both stand Megan Kelly, we're
both big fans over here. Made a comment about women
working and how apparently conservative men are not into that idea,
(21:24):
which I've heard from lots of women who are like
where are these men who don't want me to work?
Speaker 1 (21:32):
That's great? Where do I get one of these? Where's
this pool?
Speaker 4 (21:36):
Right?
Speaker 9 (21:37):
But you know, I take everything Megan says pretty seriously.
So let's roll that clip and discuss it.
Speaker 5 (21:42):
Here's what's happening on the right young women. And I
talk to young conservative women all the time about their
lives and their goals and you know, the things that
they want. And what's happening is they can't find men
who are maybe more conservative. Usually they're looking for somebody
who is religious, you know, like a lot of conservative
women tend to be God, God loving conservatives, and they
(22:08):
can't find a lot of young men who want to
marry a working woman. Now, this is an actual problem
that's coming up on the right, and to me, it's
so sad because it's like, how did we get to
the point where we were now telling young conservative, amazing
women that they're not attractive if they also work, if
(22:28):
they choose to, let's say, do what I'm doing and
what you're doing, and like get their voice out there.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
But I'll stick with me.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Just because I think conservatives listening to this will like
the thought of another Megan Kelly voice up and coming. Well,
why wouldn't we want that? Why would we take somebody
who's talented in this field and really wants to make
a difference and have the messaging to her be you're
really not that valuable unless you give it up and
go into the home and only have a family and
(22:56):
only raise a family, and not only resenting her that message,
but young men are actually believing that. They're actually believing it,
especially on the right because like the trad mom has
gotten so popular and it's like, no, if we do that,
we're not going to.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
Have any strong.
Speaker 5 (23:11):
Conservative or right leaning women to provide a role model
for younger conservative women who and there's nothing to apologize
for here, don't necessarily want to spend all their twenties
in their thirties getting married and having kids or can't.
They just weren't able to meet somebody and definitely don't
(23:31):
need to be shamed over it.
Speaker 9 (23:32):
So I agree with her. Obviously we want the next
Magan Kelly, and obviously we want conservative women kind of
doing their thing. But what I would say is a
lot of jobs a are not as flexible as what
we do. I am done most days by three pm.
It's rare the day that I'm not picking up my
kids from school the day, that I'm not there for dinner,
(23:53):
all of that. And look, we live very busy lives,
you and I. I know that, but I also am
able to say my own schedule, as is Making Kelly
in a way that a typical working person is not.
So I get the argument that men want I guess again,
I've shown me this pool because a lot of women
are having childle finding men like this. But I get
(24:15):
the argument that conservative men want the woman that's home
when they get home, that has dinner ready, that is
with the kids. All of that has a kind of
a more home based life. But you can have that
only if you have the Make and Kelly type job.
It's much harder to have that. My job before media
was I was a paralegal. That's not a job that,
(24:37):
first of all, not super fulfilling. Let's start there. I
feel a lot more fulfilled now, but also not flexible
at all. And I worked insanely long hours and I
wouldn't have been able to be there for my kids
every day to pick them up. So I get her argument,
but not every job is like ours, and it's tough.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Yeah, I think this is a pendulum swing problem because
all even conservative men of my age, I've never met
one who was like, I must have a woman who
stays at home. Like that just was not the message
in the eighties and nineties, and the message for us
was girl power. Everybody goes out and gets their job.
(25:19):
I think it leaned too heavily, and this is the
part where the pendulum swings. It leaned too heavily on
like you gotta go get that sweet sea sweet and
do everything that men want, and get everything that men want.
And it didn't consider and you see this in polling
of women of my generation, that message didn't consider that
maybe we don't want the same thing, right, Maybe we
want the flexible schedule. Maybe we want to take five
(25:41):
to seven years off while our kids are at home
before we get them off to school, or even longer,
and then re enter the workforce later. Right, those are
things that women can want instead of the sea sweet life.
Now the pendulum has been swinging back, and I am
willing to believe that with that younger cohort of men,
that there are some religion or manisphered or whatever the
reason is that say, if she wants to work, that
(26:04):
is going to interfere with me wanting to have a
family and form a family in the way that I want.
Being straightforward about that is one thing. Being strong arming
about that is another, because you might have a couple
of years before y'all have kids, and she would like
to do something with those years earn skills that she
can then use later. Right, It strikes me as unfortunate
(26:28):
that in a time when we have many more choices
than we used.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
To have, that.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
Diet the discourse sort of shoves us to the sides again,
and it's.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Like you're either doing this hardcore or you're doing this hardcore,
And I feel like there's a there's a lot of
room in the middle to be able to make choices
that even my mom didn't have available to her, including
this flexibility part that is available more often than it
ever was in the past.
Speaker 9 (26:53):
Absolutely. Also, there's the fact that life is long, and
just because you're a stay at home mom today doesn't
mean you're going to be stay at home to mom
tomorrow or vice versa. I've been a stay at home mom,
I've been a work at home mom, I've been a
work outside the home mom. I've done it all. You know,
life changes, and you shouldn't commit to just I'm going
(27:15):
to be this one thing. Your kids can go off
to school after you've been a stay at home mom
for a few years, and you might find you want
to work outside the house, or you might find they
need you more than ever and you don't. So I
would just say, don't be so rigid about it either way, like,
see where life takes you, and see where your economic
situation takes you. Anything is really possible.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
And then one thing I would say as a caveat
to what I already said because I want is I
do think the thing where women are told like.
Speaker 1 (27:43):
You've got all the time in the world, don't worry
about it.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
You know, you're only twenty seven or what have you, Like,
there is actually a time at which it becomes harder.
And if it's something, if having a family something you
want to prioritize, you should actively prioritiz You should try
to meet somebody who's the right match with that. You
should try to meet someone with your values. You should
date intentionally. You should think about when you're gonna have kids.
(28:08):
So I think that part if you're like sort of
have a goal in mind. But the simple solution is
not just marry someone who's perfect when you're twenty one
and then stay home forever, because like a lot of
people don't meet somebody when they're twenty one.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
I didn't, sure didn't.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Doesn't work out that way, so you gotta I think
Megan's right that, like, let's reflect the fact that a
lot of people make a lot of different choices for
a lot of different reasons, and you can't be stuck
in one track forever.
Speaker 9 (28:33):
Yeah, we love you, Megan, You're the best. Thanks for
joining us on Normally. Normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and
you can subscribe anywhere you get your podcasts. Get in
touch with us at normallythepod at gmail dot com. Thanks
for listening, and when things get weird, act normally
Hey back.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Normally the show with normal which takes but when the
news gets weird.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
I am Mary Catherine.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Ham and I'm Carol Marco. It's him Mary Catherine. I
think we both had very exciting.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Weekends we did.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It was my birthday, so I got I took a
little trip birthday, thank you. I took a little trip
to New York City and had a sort of a
stereotypically a little bit tourist in New York day Central Park,
champagne at a steakhouse, got my nails done, went to
the comedy cellar.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
It was a great day.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
That sounds amazing that any of that.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I celebrated my husband and I sixteenth anniversary, also in
New York. Actually we didn't see each other, was different days.
I also saw Sebastian Menescalco and Pete Corielli on Friday
night in Florida. Hilarious. I will just say, if they
are touring anywhere near you, it's a must see. I
(00:58):
cried laughing for the whole time.
Speaker 1 (01:00):
That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
I think I saw Sebastian one time years ago, but
I will look out again.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
He's also my celebrity. Like one time I asked on Twitter.
If you who do you think you'd be friends with?
That's a celebrity that you don't know, and him and
his wife are like my I feel like if we
met each other, we'd have a good time.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
You guys would be buds.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Yeah, I think so. Does that sound creepy a little?
Speaker 4 (01:24):
Right?
Speaker 1 (01:25):
I'm here for it. It was yours, Come on, No,
mine used to be.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Actually, I used to think that I would be great
friends with Mindy Kaling, But now she's hanging with Megan
Markle and I just don't think it's a match anymore. Right, Yeah, talented,
but I think she's Yeah, it's just a it's a
bridge I can't cross. So if for that chance, I
probably wouldn't be at the American Riviera with Mindy.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
Think of a couple.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
I have to think of a couple friend so that
so that Steve can have a buddy, like maybe maybe
whenever and Powell gets married, we'll see who he pairs
up with.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Well, it's also exciting weekend for America. My goodness, America
had an exciting weekend. The Terriff thing really came to
a head after we recorded our last episode, and of
course we record this twice a week, and we get
a lot of like, why didn't you cover this, and
we're like, because it happened after we recorded, and that's
how it goes. But the stock market had a real
(02:27):
bad day on Friday, and it's not having a great
day today Monday.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
You know.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
I have said on here that I'm cautiously optimistic. I'm
still kind of in the same place on this, But
I don't like the people that are similar to me,
that are like, let's wait and see what happens. I
don't like the dismissiveness, and I don't like the I
just think it's it's it's got a very learned to
code feel to it, like, oh, who cares about the
(02:57):
stock market? Real Americans don't invest in the stock market? Well,
I don't know that that's true. A but also be
a lot of this does have a lasting effect, and
not just for people who invest in the stock market.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Yeah, I agree with you, there's a there's a lot
of the there aren't There's a significant percentage of people
who have investments in the stock market, including those who
had a working class or a government career and have
pensions that are invested in the stock market. So that's
a large part of these sort of crossover union voters
(03:34):
that those dismissing their concerns would be should be careful
about doing that with.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
You know, I I don't feel great about it.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I am always rooting for the policies of the US
and the president, no matter the party, to work out
for us.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
And yet I see a.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Lot of indications that or a lot of confusion about
this one and exactly what we're trying to accomplish.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
And I know we have some clips about it. By
the way, there was a huge.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Dip in stocks and then a huge rise in stocks,
and then a fall off again because of a very
strange thing this morning, which was that someone named Bloomberg
on X watched a clip of an economic advisor of
Trump's on Fox overinterpreted it hit as him saying Trump
(04:26):
was considering a ninety day pause in tariffs, and when
he tweeted that, a bunch of people saw it on
X and it.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Changed the market. The market soared for a few seconds,
and then some one.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Said no, that was fake news, and then the market
sank again.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
So there. It's an interesting just.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
A microcosm of how news works these days, and sometimes
a random dude named Bloomberg not getting the right thing
from an interview on Fox means that the world markets
will change, and also maybe a signal to Trump that like, hey,
if I paused these series, look what happened to the market.
I think my concern is that it looks like he's
(05:07):
trying to solve the problem, not so much of tariffs, right, Like,
there's been news that fifty countries have come to him
and said, hey, we'll do zero tariffs if you guys, like,
let's get this figured out. You know, Taiwan is among them,
Zimbabwe I think was mentioned. You know, there's everybody's coming
to the table. I have no doubt that he wants
(05:28):
to do those deals. Right, But if we wanted zero tariffs,
how does that get us back to American manufacturing? You know,
that's just free trade, which I am in favor of,
but maybe not doing in this fashion, which is pretty disruptive.
So there's that going on. But then there's also people
(05:50):
who are saying, no, we need to fix the trade deficit.
And I don't find the trade deficit inherently to be
a problem. Sometimes it's a problem, but like I always
I've pointed this out since Trump's first term, because he
does not like trade deficits. He feels like we're getting
ripped off if we have a trade deficit.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
I have a.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Trade deficit with Bojangles because I want to do lots
of bits there and it's the best place to buy biscuits.
But they don't need my podcasting skills yet. So we're
in a trade deficit. But that's not inherently problematic because
I can sell my products elsewhere and I'm getting the
thing I need efficiently from Bojangles. Right, So if we're
(06:31):
trying to solve every trade deficit, we're going to be
in trouble. And I don't think that's going to be
a free trade scenario like the ones where Vietnam and
others are coming to the table and saying zero tariffs.
Speaker 5 (06:43):
Right.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
That's the question going forward is who do we want
to be? And I don't see why we want to
be a manufacturing hub. I think that that is just
sort of not necessarily a positive for US. I get
the argument of bringing some manufacturing back to the US,
but a lot of it it benefits us not being here.
(07:07):
And look, you know, I feel like my impulses is
to be anti tariff, and that's why I'm being kind
of cautious here and kind of listening to what the
Trump administration actually wants to do. And I'll say, there
are two kinds of intense Trump supporter, right. There's the
supporter that just likes the guy, trusts him, maybe loves
(07:30):
how crazy he makes. The left is willing to give
him leeway on the more far out ideas like tariffing
the whole world. And then there's the type that loves
Trump because of these kinds of proposals. I think of
Badya Unger Sargan as one person. She basically overlooks everything
she doesn't like about Donald Trump and you know, his
(07:51):
Trump and trump Ism, because he speaks to her values
and aligns with her issues. And of course that makes
me a little nervous because I love her, but she's
pretty far left right exactly, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
Well move been to our original issue with Trump?
Speaker 3 (08:04):
Yes, yes, exactly.
Speaker 6 (08:06):
So.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
My friend John Carney, he's finance and economics editor at Breitbart,
He's another person like this. He has been pro tariff
before Donald Trump was a thing. He doesn't fall in
line with Trump. He supports Trump because Trump believes what
he believes. And I have a clip I want to
play from John Carney because I think he's saying some
things I haven't heard other people say.
Speaker 7 (08:27):
Trump just didn't want to inflict that much pain, or
he didn't think he'd get.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Them to come down.
Speaker 7 (08:34):
I mean, I think that I know this is wonky,
but you get this is that, Like it's one thing
to say your tariff is ten, you take it, We're
going to go to ten, and if you want to
come down, we'll both come down. But when they started
adding these non tariff.
Speaker 8 (08:46):
Bearers, like the VAT right, which is what Europe.
Speaker 7 (08:48):
Uses their tax system, I don't know how you place
a number on that, Like, so how does Europe say,
how are you valuing our vat? You guys have fifty
state taxes and you want us to you know, you
subsidize certain and things. You know, so what are we
supposed to do? I think that that's that to me
is kind of the kicker. Is that, Like, do you
(09:10):
think that they have set themselves up for success? I
guess is the best way to do this at getting
another country to say, fine, we can get that number lower.
Speaker 8 (09:17):
I do think they have set themselves up for a
success in this. I think that just doing it mechanically,
I'm like, Okay, here's your tariff, but we're going to
ignore the non tariff barriers. Actually wouldn't have been very productive. Remember, ultimately,
what the goal here is to achieve a more balanced
trade with the rest of the world. We yes, we
(09:38):
don't like the particular non tariff barriers, and we don't
like the tariffs, but those are really means to an
end that countries use to create their giant surpluses that
then the US has been forced to absorb. What we're
saying is we're not going to absorb these surpluses anymore.
We are going to put a terrify on you. If
you start to bring down your tariff barriers and non
(09:59):
teriffic and those result in our trade deficits and trade
surpluses coming closer, then we will lower the reciprocal tariff.
So this is a like I said, it's a proxy
for tariff levels and trade barriers. And the way they
can fix that is by fixing the things that their
(10:20):
country does that create this giant trade imbalance.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
Now, John and I have disagreed plenty on this kind
of thing. During the first Trump administration, I was remodeling
and the price of bathroom tile spike because of the
China tariffs, and Carney got an earfull for me. But
I just want to put a voice out there that
you may still disagree with. And I definitely listen to
him and say, oh, don't I don't agree with this
(10:46):
part or other things that he says, but that just
isn't just raw raw Trump for the sake of it,
and I think that that's important to hear.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
I think my concern about some of that is that
some of the surplus we absorb or willingly and.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
In fact enthusiastically.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Right, so the surplus such that it is, and sometimes
I agree that they're like ethical and trade practice concerns
about like sheen clothes and all the Chinese plastic that
my children are given at every birthday party they go to, right, Like,
I have some concerns about that. But if you take
those cheap goods from people quickly, much like the bathroom tile,
(11:26):
and then they're not available to them any longer, they
will find that they liked having those things, and then
they will be mad at you. I think one of
the issues with this move too is that whatever comes
of it, I think the uncertainty has already caused some
problems and some damage. If you pull your own butt
out of the fire at this point, that's I think
that's better. And if you get some lower teriff rates, great,
(11:48):
maybe that redounds to our benefit. But it's a it's
a real tough sell to tell people that they're feeling
the short term pain for all long term gain. That Again,
I think American workers have are correct in saying, hey,
I'm not sure cheap goods were worth the trade, including
(12:09):
machine clothing. Yeah, worth the trade for losing all these
solid jobs that we had back then. But I think
that a new generation of Americans often doesn't really understand
what that manufacturing, if it returned, would look like. A
lot of it would be automated. Yeah, it's going to
be a long time to get there. So I'm not
sure we're fixing the problem that we're trying to fix,
(12:30):
and I think there's other damages happening along the way.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
Yeah, I think that that's exactly right. Somebody made the
comment that the people on the right saying like, oh,
we'll just all go back to the factories, like the
communists who believes that they'll be the poet in the
Marxist collective they don't realize they're going to be like
cleaning bathrooms. And the great Thomas Soul had a very
(12:54):
rare comment on these tariffs. Let's roll that clip.
Speaker 4 (12:57):
It's painful to see a ruinous decision being repeated now
in so far as he's using these terriffs to get
various strategic things settled, and that he's satisfied with that.
But if he's got set off a worldwide trade war
that has a devastating history, everybody loses because everybody follows suit,
(13:20):
and all that happens is that you get great reduction
and international trade. But if you are the one who's
making the root, then all the other people have no
idea what you're going to do next, and that is
a formula for having people to hang on to their
money until they figure out what you're going to do.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Right. So I'm with Seul. I'm hoping he's using these
tariffs to get very strategic things settled and that Trump
will be satisfied with that. But it is concerning because
people are paused right now and they're waiting to see
what will happen. You know, they are they building a
factory in America? Are they opening factory in Vietnam that
(14:01):
they were planning to. It's that kind of thing that
really makes the markets worried. And again, even if you
don't have money in the markets, it does trickle down
to everybody, and.
Speaker 1 (14:14):
It will affect goods at some point as well.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Behind the markets, there is a bill in the Senate
sponsored by Grassley and I forget who the Democrat companion
is for co sponsoring, that would basically take be Congress
taking back.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
Its power to handle these tariffs. There is a.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
Companion ridge they used to like make laws and stuff.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
I know there's a companion bill in the House. Representative
Don Bacon introduced that one. I said over the weekend,
I was like, if so help me, if this man
makes Congress take back its power and do its job,
I'll be like, this is what I voted for. But
I don't think that's the forty chests at hand. Nonetheless,
(14:54):
I like to see a little gumption from the Congress,
and who knows what will happen as that goes forward.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
Because of you, that's anything.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
I am highly suspicious of y'all's emergency powers post COVID, right, Like,
so he's saying this is a trade emergency.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
I don't believe it's a trade emergency.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
I think you're using emergency powers for something you wanted
to do anyway. And I didn't like it in COVID
and I don't like it now. So Congress, you should
get in that game.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Get the game.
Speaker 9 (15:21):
Maybe, you know, I don't know, do the jobs you
were elected to do.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Indeed, we'll be right back on normally. Shall we talk
about the big protests, Carol?
Speaker 9 (15:34):
They were protests. They didn't seem as exciting as the
pink hat protests in twenty sixteen. They didn't seem as motivated.
They seemed less clear, hands off, hands off, that's what
they want.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
With Yeah, it feels very dated because one of the
one of the speeches was like, you know, he thinks
he can put his hands on anything, and I was like,
are we really doing access Hollywood quotes? Right still on that,
it felt dated and it felt sort of tired, perfunctory.
(16:07):
Maybe now there were big crowds like I have no
doubt that there are impassioned Democrats out there and that
the base wants to get out and be mad at
Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
It does feel a little late and a little tired.
I think, as you noted on x Carol.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
The time would have been to get everybody out before
the voting and then to the voting booths.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
That would have been that would have been the way
to do the resistance.
Speaker 9 (16:31):
Yeah, I would just say about that. It's because the
media over the weekend was just so excited about these
protests and it was so like, these protests are, you know,
the most just amazing thing that's ever happened, and they
kept referring to them as powerful. And that's why I
was like, you know, it's even more powerful the nationwide.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Protests the voting, the voting and the voting.
Speaker 2 (16:54):
I think we have one clip from one of these rallies,
and look, I'm just using this as sort of a
symbol this this young man. I'm not meaning to single
him out, but this is just kind of perfect.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Here.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
He has asked about why he's there. He's got a
big sign that says Donald Trump is a fascist?
Speaker 6 (17:11):
So what what makes Trump a fascist?
Speaker 7 (17:19):
What makes Trump a fascist?
Speaker 6 (17:20):
Does does things without? Yeah, talk loud and do all
have my mic on I'm not really going into the
Tibet Sorry, he just doesn't. He just does everything he
wants and you know, not following laws or you know
he was a he's a convicted felon.
Speaker 4 (17:40):
You know.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
That's all I know.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
That's all he knows.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
I there you go.
Speaker 9 (17:45):
I think a lot of these people have no idea
why they're so angry. I get it, I really do
get it.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
I think that they need.
Speaker 9 (17:53):
Something to change channel their anger into, and that's what
these protests are about. I am worried about what I
see is really escalating violent rhetoric. And obviously there's actual
violence happening as well. A pro life reporter was punched
in the face in Harlem on the weekend. There was
some other incidents. A lot of these people are having
(18:15):
signs at say, eighty six forty seven, eighty six means
to end. One of them is standing right alongside Minnesota
Attorney General Keith Ellison with this kind of sign. There's
a lot of keying and defacing Tesla's. All of this
is very worrisome, and I think that I understand that
Democrats are trying to get their base back to being
(18:38):
excited after Democrats have like a twenty six percent approval rating,
and they're trying to get them to focus on how
much they hate Donald Trump, to get that that their
numbers up, but they need to bring down this temperature.
I think things are really heading in a bad direction
with this kind of violent talk.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Yeah, give me a clueless guy any day over the
guy king Tesla's.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
You know, there is a lot of that, and it
will be inevitably downplayed by media, even when it results
in physical attacks as it did on a California campus
against the Turning Point USA gathering and booth and against
Savannah Craven, who's the activists you were talking about doing
man on the street interviews? Who was hurt and significantly
(19:25):
so that will be downplayed as it always is. Speaking
which did you hear that the would be assassin of
Brett Kavanaugh who did not become a household name because
the target was a right leaning conservative jurist instead of
a liberal one. He played guilty last week after that attempt,
(19:46):
But again, not a huge story, Nor is the fact
that people are standing around with eighty six forty seven
signs when he's already been attempted, assassinated twice and the
state of Iran has verified plans to do the same.
That's right, I like real flipping about.
Speaker 9 (20:04):
It, exactly.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
I have a column.
Speaker 9 (20:07):
I think it'll be in This episode comes out Tuesday.
I think it'll be in Tuesday's New York Post, not
confirmed yet. But also there's a new report by this
group called the Network Contagion Research Institute found high numbers
of left leaning people find violence to be acceptable. Over
fifty five percent of left leaning respondents felt there was
some justification for killing President Trump. It's a real powder
(20:31):
keg and I think we need to be way more
worried about it again, these protests. I get it, and
I understand that there's this pent up anger, but we
need to bring down the temperature, and democratic politicians need
to be at the forefront of that. Saying violent rhetoric
is not going to be okay. Yeah, no I'm not either,
(20:53):
but it's my hope. I just say what you want.
Leave the fisticuffs, heart, you know.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Draw the line clearly.
Speaker 9 (21:02):
We're going to take a short break and come right
back with normally. Our last topic is Megan Kelly, who
I think you know. We both stand Megan Kelly, we're
both big fans over here. Made a comment about women
working and how apparently conservative men are not into that idea,
(21:24):
which I've heard from lots of women who are like
where are these men who don't want me to work?
Speaker 1 (21:32):
That's great? Where do I get one of these? Where's
this pool?
Speaker 4 (21:36):
Right?
Speaker 9 (21:37):
But you know, I take everything Megan says pretty seriously.
So let's roll that clip and discuss it.
Speaker 5 (21:42):
Here's what's happening on the right young women. And I
talk to young conservative women all the time about their
lives and their goals and you know, the things that
they want. And what's happening is they can't find men
who are maybe more conservative. Usually they're looking for somebody
who is religious, you know, like a lot of conservative
women tend to be God, God loving conservatives, and they
(22:08):
can't find a lot of young men who want to
marry a working woman. Now, this is an actual problem
that's coming up on the right, and to me, it's
so sad because it's like, how did we get to
the point where we were now telling young conservative, amazing
women that they're not attractive if they also work, if
(22:28):
they choose to, let's say, do what I'm doing and
what you're doing, and like get their voice out there.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
But I'll stick with me.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Just because I think conservatives listening to this will like
the thought of another Megan Kelly voice up and coming. Well,
why wouldn't we want that? Why would we take somebody
who's talented in this field and really wants to make
a difference and have the messaging to her be you're
really not that valuable unless you give it up and
go into the home and only have a family and
(22:56):
only raise a family, and not only resenting her that message,
but young men are actually believing that. They're actually believing it,
especially on the right because like the trad mom has
gotten so popular and it's like, no, if we do that,
we're not going to.
Speaker 1 (23:09):
Have any strong.
Speaker 5 (23:11):
Conservative or right leaning women to provide a role model
for younger conservative women who and there's nothing to apologize
for here, don't necessarily want to spend all their twenties
in their thirties getting married and having kids or can't.
They just weren't able to meet somebody and definitely don't
(23:31):
need to be shamed over it.
Speaker 9 (23:32):
So I agree with her. Obviously we want the next
Magan Kelly, and obviously we want conservative women kind of
doing their thing. But what I would say is a
lot of jobs a are not as flexible as what
we do. I am done most days by three pm.
It's rare the day that I'm not picking up my
kids from school the day, that I'm not there for dinner,
(23:53):
all of that. And look, we live very busy lives,
you and I. I know that, but I also am
able to say my own schedule, as is Making Kelly
in a way that a typical working person is not.
So I get the argument that men want I guess again,
I've shown me this pool because a lot of women
are having childle finding men like this. But I get
(24:15):
the argument that conservative men want the woman that's home
when they get home, that has dinner ready, that is
with the kids. All of that has a kind of
a more home based life. But you can have that
only if you have the Make and Kelly type job.
It's much harder to have that. My job before media
was I was a paralegal. That's not a job that,
(24:37):
first of all, not super fulfilling. Let's start there. I
feel a lot more fulfilled now, but also not flexible
at all. And I worked insanely long hours and I
wouldn't have been able to be there for my kids
every day to pick them up. So I get her argument,
but not every job is like ours, and it's tough.
Speaker 2 (24:59):
Yeah, I think this is a pendulum swing problem because
all even conservative men of my age, I've never met
one who was like, I must have a woman who
stays at home. Like that just was not the message
in the eighties and nineties, and the message for us
was girl power. Everybody goes out and gets their job.
(25:19):
I think it leaned too heavily, and this is the
part where the pendulum swings. It leaned too heavily on
like you gotta go get that sweet sea sweet and
do everything that men want, and get everything that men want.
And it didn't consider and you see this in polling
of women of my generation, that message didn't consider that
maybe we don't want the same thing, right, Maybe we
want the flexible schedule. Maybe we want to take five
(25:41):
to seven years off while our kids are at home
before we get them off to school, or even longer,
and then re enter the workforce later. Right, those are
things that women can want instead of the sea sweet life.
Now the pendulum has been swinging back, and I am
willing to believe that with that younger cohort of men,
that there are some religion or manisphered or whatever the
reason is that say, if she wants to work, that
(26:04):
is going to interfere with me wanting to have a
family and form a family in the way that I want.
Being straightforward about that is one thing. Being strong arming
about that is another, because you might have a couple
of years before y'all have kids, and she would like
to do something with those years earn skills that she
can then use later. Right, It strikes me as unfortunate
(26:28):
that in a time when we have many more choices
than we used.
Speaker 4 (26:33):
To have, that.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
Diet the discourse sort of shoves us to the sides again,
and it's.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Like you're either doing this hardcore or you're doing this hardcore,
And I feel like there's a there's a lot of
room in the middle to be able to make choices
that even my mom didn't have available to her, including
this flexibility part that is available more often than it
ever was in the past.
Speaker 9 (26:53):
Absolutely. Also, there's the fact that life is long, and
just because you're a stay at home mom today doesn't
mean you're going to be stay at home to mom
tomorrow or vice versa. I've been a stay at home mom,
I've been a work at home mom, I've been a
work outside the home mom. I've done it all. You know,
life changes, and you shouldn't commit to just I'm going
(27:15):
to be this one thing. Your kids can go off
to school after you've been a stay at home mom
for a few years, and you might find you want
to work outside the house, or you might find they
need you more than ever and you don't. So I
would just say, don't be so rigid about it either way, like,
see where life takes you, and see where your economic
situation takes you. Anything is really possible.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
And then one thing I would say as a caveat
to what I already said because I want is I
do think the thing where women are told like.
Speaker 1 (27:43):
You've got all the time in the world, don't worry
about it.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
You know, you're only twenty seven or what have you, Like,
there is actually a time at which it becomes harder.
And if it's something, if having a family something you
want to prioritize, you should actively prioritiz You should try
to meet somebody who's the right match with that. You
should try to meet someone with your values. You should
date intentionally. You should think about when you're gonna have kids.
(28:08):
So I think that part if you're like sort of
have a goal in mind. But the simple solution is
not just marry someone who's perfect when you're twenty one
and then stay home forever, because like a lot of
people don't meet somebody when they're twenty one.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
I didn't, sure didn't.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Doesn't work out that way, so you gotta I think
Megan's right that, like, let's reflect the fact that a
lot of people make a lot of different choices for
a lot of different reasons, and you can't be stuck
in one track forever.
Speaker 9 (28:33):
Yeah, we love you, Megan, You're the best. Thanks for
joining us on Normally. Normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and
you can subscribe anywhere you get your podcasts. Get in
touch with us at normallythepod at gmail dot com. Thanks
for listening, and when things get weird, act normally
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!