March 26, 2025 • 51 mins
Rebecca and Naomi explore how men in progressive spaces often default to patriarchal behaviors when challenged, despite claiming to be allies and feminists.
• Deconstruction requires ongoing work rather than simply changing labels or terminology
• Tim Whitaker and The New Evangelicals controversy reveals common patterns of male entitlement
• Men who claim to be allies often revert to control tactics when their authority is questioned
• The "fake ally playbook" includes expecting women to manage emotional labor without recognition
• Weaponizing women's trauma to discredit their concerns is a common gaslighting technique
• Mediation often functions as image management rather than genuine reconciliation
• Women are socialized to treat men's perspectives as authoritative while questioning their own
• Authentic allies demonstrate humility, share domestic responsibilities, and listen without defensiveness
• Healthy relationships require mutuality and shared power, not dominance and control
• Women need to recognize their needs matter and speaking up is an invitation to authentic relationship
Join us next week as we conclude our financial autonomy series with actionable steps that stay-at-home parents can take to protect themselves financially.
Links
https://www.tnereckoning.com/summary
https://www.instagram.com/p/C4yVfcwPSMl/
https://karljforehand.substack.com/p/getting-out-of-survival-mode/
Thanks for listening! Connect with us via
- Facebook: Uncovered: Life Beyond
- Instagram: @uncoveredlifebeyond
- Email: uncoveredlifebeyond@gmail.com
- Website: https://www.buzzsprout.com/2171591
Subscribe (for free) to Uncovered: Life Beyond on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts so you'll never miss an episode!
What topics at the intersection of education, high-demand religion, career, parenting, and emotional intelligence are of interest to you? Help us plan future episodes by taking this quick listener survey. We appreciate your input very much!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is Rebecca and this is Naomi.
We're 40-something moms andfirst cousins who know what it's
like to veer off the pathassigned to us.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
We've juggled motherhood, marriage, college
and career, as we questioned ourfaith traditions while
exploring new identities andways of seeing the world.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Without any maps for either of us to follow.
We've had to figure things outas we go and appreciate that
detours and dead ends areessential to the path Along the
way, we've uncovered a fewinsights we want to share with
fellow travelers.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
We want to talk about the questions we didn't know
who to ask and the options wedidn't know we had.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
So, whether you're feeling stuck or already shaking
things up, we are here to cheeryou on and assure you that the
best is yet to come.
Welcome to Uncovered LifeBeyond.
Hello everyone, Welcome back toUncovered Life Beyond.
(01:08):
This is Naomi and this isRebecca.
So today we're taking a breakfrom our financial autonomy
series because we decided wewanted to address something
that's been in the news indeconstruction circles.
Rebecca, what have you heardabout the Grace Report, about
(01:31):
the new evangelicals and itsdirector or leader, Tim Whitaker
Boy?
Speaker 2 (01:38):
you know, sometimes this stuff just sounds so
familiar.
It's like we've heard thisstory before.
So what I'm hearing is TimWhitaker.
Several years ago was it like2007 when he started this new
organization?
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Well, it's much more recent than that, I think.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Is it more recent than?
Speaker 1 (02:00):
that yeah, he started deconstructing.
He says in 2016,.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
around the election Okay, so here's the thing we
cannot let these guys who are soearly in deconstruction start
organizations.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Yeah, well, and he started around 2021, I think, is
when New Evangelicals gotstarted and I think it, you know
it was a social media presenceand then in the next, you know,
in the last few years, it'sbecome an organization with a
board.
I think they have a six-figurebudget.
I know they have a six-figurebudget yeah.
(02:36):
And so a lot of the originalvolunteers some of them have
transitioned, like tocontractors, Right.
But you know it's made up, it'sstill very grassroots in that
it's made up of folks who arevery closely tied to the heart,
you know, or the intent, right,the mission of the organization.
(02:57):
It's new enough, it's newenough that it's still.
Because Tim Whitaker has beenat the center of it even though
there's a board.
He has very much been kind ofthe central figure representing
it.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
Well, and just because there's a board doesn't
mean that he isn't in charge.
I've been a part of a boardwhere the administrator
manipulated the board membersand got everyone to just say yes
, Right right.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
Yeah, I agree, I agree, just because there's a
board doesn't guarantee at all,yeah, authentic accountability.
But I think what we're reallyhere to talk about is that it's
not just him, that it's awidespread pattern, like you
mentioned earlier, where theseso-called nice guys claim to be
(03:49):
allies, feminists supportingwomen, but when push comes to
shove, when they're in positionsof power, when there's times of
stress, they still default topatriarchal entitlement.
And it's so normal that when ithappens, I think we often too
often just accept it as, oh,it's just his personality.
(04:11):
But I think what the GraceReport does really well is uses
his own words, and his own words.
His own words in his testimonydrip with patriarchal
entitlement.
So what happened sometime in thelast year or so?
A contractor with theorganization, someone who had
(04:32):
been involved for a long timeand was involved in some of the
projects they're workingur, andthere was road rage and some
really emotional dysregulationand that's kind of like the
(04:54):
inciting incident.
But what's interesting to me isall his expectations that
others can't be late, but hecould be late on things, all
this expectation that everybodyelse's world is supposed to
revolve around his when it comesto working on projects.
That, to me is interesting thatpreceded that incident and then
, after the incident, as shecame to terms with it and wanted
(05:19):
to address it with him, it wasminimized and then she was
marginalized within theorganization and he refused to
address it.
That too, to me, is sointeresting because, while it's
not some egregious sex scandallike we've seen plenty of in
(05:40):
churches, it's still patriarchalentitlement and it's still
about power and control of menover women.
And it's so familiar, too manyof us brush it off.
It's not a big deal.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Well, and I also think it's important that we
talk about it, because there isa lot of this type of thing
happening in the evangelicalcircles and those who consider
themselves more progressive orin the deconstructing world want
to hold themselves above thistype of thing.
(06:17):
But I think you know, just thisweekend someone talked about my
friend.
Gerald actually talked abouthow deconstruction is more of an
end process.
It's an acknowledgement thatyour system of meaning, your
system of understanding theworld is changing.
(06:39):
He used the phrase I'macknowledging that my worldview
is destabilized and when itbecomes destabilized, it's
uncomfortable, it's scary.
It's that space where you don'tknow what to do because you
have more questions than answers.
And I think there's a lot ofpeople, and especially men, who,
(07:02):
because it's so uncomfortable,want to quickly stabilize, but
then when they do that, they'venever changed their internal way
of seeing the world, ofoperating within the world, and
I think it's important that wecall it out wherever it's
happening.
It's not just the conservativesor just the evangelical world
(07:27):
where this happens.
It also happens in other placesand regardless where it happens
, it's important to call it out.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
Absolutely.
Oh, I've seen this kind ofthing in academic, secular
places all the time too, and itseems like what you're talking
about there is like when there'san identity shift, like oh, I'm
no longer evangelical, now I amthis, and I slide right into
the box and into a new box anddon't examine those assumptions.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Yeah, and just change the wording or just change the
words you use to articulate life, maybe, but there's no internal
change.
I remember seeing this happenwith an acquaintance who kind of
was an asshole Christian andthen, boom, the same person was
(08:19):
just an asshole atheist.
Yeah, exactly Nothing reallychanged except some terminology,
and I do think it's somethingthat we are very aware of, and I
think deconstruction is more ofa ongoing process.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
It's a way of life.
It's not a destination.
(08:59):
Agreed, agreed to control,seeking to do the organizing,
seeking to be the head of thething, and yeah, we see this all
the time.
We could name names of folkswho have made that shift, and
Terry Real, a therapist who haswritten some books, like Fierce
Intimacy is one does such awonderful job talking about how
(09:22):
traditional forms of masculinityand femininity impact our
romantic relationships and it'srelevant to other relationships
as well.
But he talks about how trueintimacy requires mutuality, not
dominance.
And yet, when men have beensocialized to see relationships
as hierarchical, right, you'reeither in in control or you feel
(09:44):
powerless.
So they've got to be in controlbecause, in their mind, if
they're not, then they arepowerless.
And I guess maybe I don't knowthe question is do they think
about it long enough to considerwhether they're assuming
everybody else in their orbitshould be powerless?
Then, like, is that whatthey're saying?
You know what I mean, or isthat the framework?
Speaker 2 (10:06):
So I think so much of what they are leaving is often
built on this selfish narrative.
I mean, think about the waymany of us were raised to think
about salvation and thispersonal relationship with God.
It became this selfish thingthat as long as God and I were
(10:27):
tight, it didn't really matterwhat was happening with my other
relationships, because, man,god and I were tight, that was
your- Stake in the ground.
Yes, yeah, that was your anchor,that was the end, all be all
and it was a very selfish.
It became this very selfishthing because it was just about
(10:47):
God and I, and if you're goingto try and leave that but never
acknowledge or recognize howmuch of it was built on selfish
ideology and my guess is thismight be even more problematic
for men because they often arethe ones who tend to benefit
that it might be easier just tochange and never really look at
(11:12):
the selfish motives, the way theego was involved.
Plus, may I be snarky and talkabout the new name or the name?
Speaker 1 (11:20):
the new evangelicals.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
What is?
there that they're trying tosave.
I mean, it reminds me a littlebit of the old order and the new
order Amish, like, really, andguess who are the most
problematic.
The new orders considerthemselves far more saved.
They're kind of much morespiritual, but they tend to be.
I have much better friendswithin, or friendships within,
(11:45):
the old orders than I do in thenew orders, and there's a
certain layer or level ofhumility that is found within
the old orders that you tend notto see in the new orders.
So just because I don't know,I'm a little snarky about the
name, like I feel like that initself is a red flag.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
Yeah, fair Well, and I should say here too, like I
have heard of the NewEvangelicals, the name Tim
Whitaker did not ring any bellsfor me when this report came out
.
The reason that I even lookedat the report was because Tia
Leavings had posted about it andsaid go read it.
And when Tia Leavings says dosomething, you go do it Because
she knows what she's talkingabout.
(12:26):
And I was stunned.
And to me, like the reason Isay that is to say like this is
not about oh, this is someonethat I hate watch from afar.
Let's put it that way.
We all have those hate watchesright on social media, but it's
not the case at all.
What has struck me about it ishow utterly predictable, how
(12:48):
utterly commonplace, all thepatriarchal entitlement that
came through in the report.
That, to me, is what'sinteresting and how and I say
this in the best possible wayhow boringly predictable it is.
But there's a problem with thisand that's, I think, what we
(13:08):
want to call out.
I mean, some of the things thatwere found in the Grace Report
was that, even though he claimedto be sharing leadership, he
was clearly controllingorganizational power and I think
for a lot of reasons, up tothat point it had not made a
major, it hadn't come to a headin the way it did, but those
patterns were there.
(13:29):
He gaslighted, emotionallymanipulated colleagues when he
was called on things andretaliated against the women who
challenged him.
Since the report came out and inpreparing for our conversation
here today, I listened to aninterview with him on another
podcast and in that podcast hetalked about, you know, the
(13:50):
things that he is doingdifferently as a result of
deconstruction, and one of thoseis parenting differently.
And he said he talked about hiswillingness to apologize to his
kids.
When he messes up.
He says all the right things,and yet on that podcast, in
public, he's saying all theright things, and yet what the
report found was, you know,instead of taking responsibility
(14:14):
, he blamed the victims for hisactions.
You were late.
That's why I got upset andcompletely overlooking the fact
that he had given her thematerial she needed to do that
work late and that she had beenup half the night working on
this and and had been.
I mean, it was because she wasworking so hard on the project
that she didn't get that.
(14:36):
She was running late thatmorning, the morning of the road
rage incident.
And then, when she does bringit up and mentions how it was
triggering, the experience istriggering for her because of
things she's experienced in thepast.
Instead of him expressingconcern for the pain that caused
her, he weaponized her traumato discredit her concerns.
(14:57):
And we see this happen all thetime.
If a man is traumatized, wellthen we give him a pass.
If a woman's traumatized, wellthen she's crazy and we don't
need to believe, we don't needto pay attention to her.
And this happens all the timeand we do it.
We are conditioned, we aresocialized to do it and we've
got to become aware of it andwe've got to stop it.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
And I think this is such an important point and this
is something that we canpersonally observe and take.
We can take our clues about whowe follow from watching this
type of action.
There's this person on socialmedia who has built a platform
(15:42):
on sexual purity, sexual honesty, and he built his platform off
of his porn addiction andgetting out of that.
But of course that leads intothen, or his expertise now is
(16:02):
also into how women's sexualityand male sexuality and all this
other stuff of course, and hewas promoting something that was
really kind of yucky, and abunch of women came on and they
were like this is not good, thisis bad, this is triggering,
(16:24):
this is not okay, this isharmful.
And he immediately shut thosewomen down and he even said
because of your past, your wordsdon't matter, or what you're
thinking, believing, seeingdoesn't matter, because you're
responding out of trauma by hisvery own words.
He should not be talking aboutporn then.
(16:45):
Oh my goodness.
But what we do is with men, wetake them and whatever they had
in their past and we give theirpast reason for them to teach us
.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Yeah, it validates them.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
It validates them, and immediately, immediately.
A woman has no power because ofher past.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
She's invalidated because of the past.
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Which is experience?
Yeah, it's just wild.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Guys, this happens so consistently and I think the
biggest way to bring change isto note it, to verbalize it, to
acknowledge it and to see whatyou see.
Otherwise, these leaders justkeep going and they are built
off of followers and if you juststop following them, it's like
(17:37):
it makes a difference, andthat's, I think, where we hold
power, right, right.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
And I'm so glad you brought that the point up about
those narratives that validateor invalidate, because this is
where we can see how this is notjust women versus men.
This is about a patriarchalsystem, because women and men
both reinforce these narratives.
We tend to unthinkinglyreinforce these narratives.
(18:05):
Yeah, naming it and beingconscious of it and seeing what
we see to really push backagainst it.
To really push back against it.
So we've put together a list oftactics that we've observed from
the fake ally playbook, andthese are based on things from
the report, but the reason we'rementioning them is because they
(18:26):
resonate so wildly with ourexperiences of people who claim
to be all progressive feministsin public, but then in private
personal relationships theydefault to patriarchy.
So tactic number one isexpecting women to manage
(18:46):
emotional and organizationallabor without recognition, and
the way this showed up in theNew Evangelicals was how the
contributions of women tended tobe minimized, even women who
were playing a critical role.
While the organization tookcredit for their labor, their
ideas.
He repeatedly ignored strategicadvice from female team leaders
(19:07):
with nonprofit expertise anddismissing their input, but then
giving them jobs that were, youknow, tasks that were well
beneath their skill level.
He expected female colleaguesto handle emotional and conflict
resolution work, while hecontrolled the organization's
public facing content.
So, like you, deal with myoutbursts and then I'll go be
(19:32):
the public face and look good.
Essentially is what we'retalking about.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
Isn't this oldest time?
Speaker 1 (19:38):
Right, right.
And then when he was held tothe things he claimed to believe
right, when he was held toaccount to live by that which he
professed, then he startedwithholding communication from
that individual, reassigningtasks to menial work, kind of
cutting her out of the larger,more significant projects.
(20:03):
And while of course he says, oh, no, no, no, this is not about
retaliation, it's hard to see itas anything else.
And again and again, I mean, welook at churches, we look at
the way workplaces, families,all these places run.
Women are expected to carry theemotional, strategic workload
(20:26):
actually getting the things done, thinking ahead, thinking about
who's going to need what nextweek, and yet at the same time
not giving credit for keepingthe wheels in motion.
And their authority, theirexpertise is just disregarded.
And in fact, did you hear aboutthe Catholic Women's Strike?
No, there is a group of womenwithin Catholic churches and I
(20:50):
know that's a huge categoryright there.
I haven't seen much more thantheir website and heard a little
bit about it, but through theseason of Lent this year they
are withholding their labor fromall these churches where
they're preparing for Easter.
Here is this high point of theliturgical calendar, and they're
(21:11):
saying you're disregarding ourinsight, our input, our labor.
All right, you take it then?
Good.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
I just love it.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
I cannot.
You know, I don't even have asense of the scope.
You know, maybe this is just ahandful of people, but we need
this throughout our society.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
You know, I think sometimes we feel powerless and
then forget that we actually dohold power.
Yes, I think being reallystrategic within that is so
important.
It's both reclaiming your power.
Sometimes it's creatingboundaries, sometimes it's
saying what did you mean by that, I don't understand and making
(21:52):
them explain themselves.
Sometimes it's going on strike.
But I think reclaiming thatpower in ways that kind of
showcase what females bring tothe table is so valuable.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
Right, it's like recognizing.
Oh, this is the part where I amplaying into this game into
this process into the system.
I'm just going to step backAbsolutely and let me say this
is where religious communitiesshine in telling women that is
of the devil.
(22:30):
Well, guess why the devil?
Well, guess why, I mean, theybenefit so much from women
believing that's theirresponsibility, and it's such a
mind you know what?
Yeah, it really is.
So the second tactic we'veidentified is weaponized
(22:50):
gaslighting.
I guess this is kind ofsomething we've been touching on
throughout our conversation.
Where have you seen this kindof thing, rebecca?
Speaker 2 (23:00):
Well, I think it would be fair to say.
I think sometimes terms we useget overused.
I think sometimes terms liketoxic and narcissistic and even
gaslighting get overused andeven gaslighting get overused.
(23:26):
But I do think it is real inthe sense that I think
oftentimes it's easy when womensee things they are dismissed as
overreacting, abusive behavioras the victim's trauma response.
That guy was talking about wholikes to teach about sexual
purity?
But when women come on and say,no, what you're teaching is
harmful, oh, now he's going totell them that it is their
(23:48):
trauma response.
That's gaslighting.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
I think in these situations of weaponized
gaslighting that we're talkingabout, the issue gets focused on
is this right, is this wrong,is this harmful?
Is this not what?
If we just shift it to a lensof care, like whether it's true
or not someone was hurt, can wevalidate that pain instead of
(24:18):
invalidating it?
Can we recognize that ratherthan making it about who is
right?
That's such a shift, and Ithink the way patriarchal
masculinity inculturates men notto care about that.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Well, patriarchy tells us that men care about the
facts.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
The important things, yeah.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
So you have to have a 10-point plan explaining why
what happened was painful andafter you've been harmed, who
has the emotional energy forthat.
So you learn to shut up.
So you learn to shut up.
But then sometimes someoneactually does have the emotional
energy and so it's carefullyplanned.
(25:04):
I remember having so many Istill have so many conversations
that I plan and I think aboutwhat I'm going to say and I try
to have key points and withoutany emotion.
God forbid you bring anyemotion to the conversation.
That is not a safe and caringand equal relationship.
(25:25):
It should be enough to say wait, that kind of hurts, wait that
feels yucky, wait that's painful.
That should be enough.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Yeah, yeah, but also don't you think that oftentimes
invalidating your pain as a wayof not addressing the issue?
Yes, but part of the problem isthat a woman's expression of
need is taken by so many men asan attack, as a full frontal
(25:56):
assault, and it's what's readinto that expression of need,
it's what's read into the storythey tell themselves when you
say, wow, I'm really tiredtonight, and they tell
themselves, oh, she's telling meshe doesn't want me to touch
(26:16):
her tonight.
That was not the point at all.
It was about having a long,hard day.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
Well, they say they like the facts.
The fact is, you're tired.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
That's it, that's it, that's it.
But it's the story that they'retelling themselves, and I think
this is why, also, tacticnumber three retaliation for
speaking out is so real.
So when someone does make theircase, when someone does speak
out, when someone does say, hey,yeah, this really is an issue,
that's when women get calledcrazy, that's when women get
(26:47):
called problematic, that's whenwomen get called Jezebel spirit.
In the real conservativesettings They'd be called
Jezebel spirit, I guess.
Oh, oh, is it that inprogressive spaces, where this
patriarchal dynamic persists,we're called triggered or
traumatized?
That's how we're it's newlanguage.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
It's new language.
It's the same technique.
New language yes.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
And it's once again.
We have a system where peopleare being punished for telling
the truth, for saying what wesee.
We also have tactic number fourevasion of accountability and
resistance to structural change.
And we've already mentioned howTim Whitaker, in this situation
, positioned himself as thefinal decision maker in the
(27:34):
functioning of the organization,even though there was this
public claim of having boardoversight.
In fact, when this concern wasbrought to light, and then he
recommended mediation and hecontrolled the whole mediation
process, he chose a mediator, hedownplayed the relationship
(27:57):
that he'd had with her, theprofessional relationship he'd
had with her, and she wastraumaformed therapist and this
sounded good.
So they had a meeting and, asit happened, this mediator's
second interview on Tim'spodcast dropped the same day as
the mediation.
Of course, it did, and I thinkthat was coincidental.
(28:22):
But when they finished thesession, the mediation session,
the individual came out, and mysense is that she realized there
was a much closer relationshiphere between the two of them and
her spidey senses went up thatshe was not getting a fair
hearing.
Her concerns had been furtherundermined, and part of the
(28:47):
whole agreement too, too, wasthat she was given a gag order.
She wasn't allowed to talk toanyone about this issue, and
even after all this happened,there was still not meaningful
apology or tangible steps takentoward repair, toward repair,
and it's like he was followingthe playbook for how to evade
(29:09):
genuine accountability, how toneutralize challenges to his
authority and to control thenarrative.
It's just so textbook.
Speaker 2 (29:18):
It's so textbook.
Rarely in religious circleshave I seen mediations actually
work.
It is typically a way tominimize the situation.
It is typically a way toreestablish power, and the
(29:39):
mediator knows darn well that ifthey don't align with power,
they'll never be asked to be amediator again.
And I think mediation istypically more about public
image management than it isabout any type of reconciliation
.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
I agree, and I just want to point out the rhetoric
there, because you know, fromthe area of like family law, we
know that you know, when you'vegot a really contentious divorce
and you've got attorneys goingat each other, it can be such a
hot mess.
And I think the hope ofmediation is like hey, can we
just be reasonable people andsit down and work this out?
(30:15):
And I think it's the pretenseof egalitarianism, it's a
pretense that everyone is onequal ground, and you know what
you're saying.
As you're saying that I'm going, you know why mediation isn't
working in those situationsBecause you don't have people on
equal ground and so they'reusing the tools of
egalitarianism for theseincredibly unequal situations.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
And we've got to Well , and by reinforcing it they can
stabilize their situation again.
It doesn't matter what happenedto the person with less power.
It's about stabilizing theirsituation and making them feel
safe again Reinforcing thestatus quo Exactly.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Can you say more about the public image
management and how you see thatplaying out here?
I think that's so true and,again, so common.
Speaker 2 (31:18):
I think many leaders spend a lot of time developing
this public image whileprivately dodging accountability
.
A phrase I've often heard isit's lonely at the top, and this
is why and I think this is whyPoor, sad, rich man I know I
(31:40):
know you burn every bridge toget there.
Yeah, isn't that true?
When you can't be authentic,you don't have relationships,
because no, one trusts you.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Snap, snap, snap, and then guess what?
We get a male lonelinessepidemic.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Yep, and even now there's people on social media
talking about this.
Now there's people on socialmedia talking about this and
they came to find out that bothTim and his wife created burner
accounts and are being horriblyaccusatory to the people who
(32:20):
dare talk about it, and I mean,you guys can just search for it.
It's there.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
Yeah, and we'll put links to like the reckonings.
Yeah, that's a good site.
Yeah, and they can.
Yeah, yeah, it's just a Googlesearch away.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
It's astounding to me how, instead of acknowledging
dude, I got it wrong and I'm sosorry and it's bad and you know
what I need to sit out.
Instead of just simplyacknowledging it, taking
responsibility, they come backfighting.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
Well, but let's also recognize how he has
consistently rejectedopportunity to do that.
Again and again.
She came to him privately, shewent to the board, like for all
that time she kept it within theorganization, all that time he
(33:14):
had an opportunity.
And you know what?
Yesterday I, at my work, I sawa situation where someone who
was in a lower position of powerfelt she'd been spoken to
rudely by someone in authorityand she called it out in a very
(33:35):
matter-of-fact way and hisreaction was I'm so sorry.
I was frustrated and reallystressed because he had things
going on.
He said I'm sorry that it hurtyou.
I don't remember what he said.
What I remember is the tone ofhis voice and then when it came
up again later he repeatedhimself.
(33:56):
It was just like can we putthis in every man's training
manual?
Like I don't know, and you knowwhat happened.
It just the issue went away.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
But also he has Because it was acknowledged.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
It was acknowledged and he's known to be genuine.
He's a genuine person and sothat apology came off as genuine
, because I believe it is, andthe situation is gone.
I mean it's good.
How hard is that?
How hard is?
Speaker 2 (34:29):
that and I think it's interesting.
And again, this is kind of abroad brush, but I think women
instinctively are taught topause, question ourselves.
Yeah, taught to questionourselves, taught to apologize,
taught to reconsider, and Ithink sometimes women have to
(34:49):
learn to quit apologizing,whilst oftentimes it might be a
skill that men need to learn.
Speaker 1 (34:58):
Yes, I agree, and I think part of the problem is
when they see every relationshipthrough the lens of either one
up, one down, and if an apologymeans I'm automatically one down
and powerless, then their fightor flight kicks in and they
will do anything to avoid thataccountability.
And this is a thing that I talkabout with my son whenever I
(35:23):
have, whenever the opportunitycomes up, is to say like, oh
yeah, everybody makes mistakes,everybody messes up.
The important thing is we takeaccountability for it and then
we move on.
Not a big deal, and I right and, and I think seeing shift,
making that shift um brings alot of freedom and it allows
(35:43):
people to connect.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
Well, that's where authenticity is birthed, right?
Right, it's a level playingfield.
You're right, I did mess up.
Yeah, you're right, I did bringpain.
Yeah, whether it was myintention or not, it really
doesn't matter, right?
Speaker 1 (35:57):
Because usually that's not what our I mean.
There are times when intentionis relevant, but there's lots of
times when that's not the point, especially in personal
relationships.
We just want the person who'ssupposed to love us and care
about us to see how we'reimpacted by something.
So we see these patterns againand again and again.
(36:20):
We also see nice guys who knowhow to talk the talk critiquing
patriarchy as it shows up inthese very conservative,
conventional, traditional spaceslike conservative churches.
Why do they keep showing upthis way when they are then in
progressive spaces, supposedlyfeminists, and yet why do they
(36:41):
keep defaulting to thesepatriarchal norms?
Speaker 2 (36:48):
do they keep defaulting to these patriarchal
norms?
Something that I'm realizing isa lot of the harm in patriarchy
is the imbalance of theemotional labor women carry as
compared to men, and even purityculture is in there.
And something I've starteddoing and something I've started
(37:11):
doing and it's fascinating isasking men who are talking the
talk.
So tell me, how has purityculture harmed you?
So I'd love to hear how haspatriarchy harmed you?
I'm finding often and notalways, but often it is the
women who are doing theemotional work, even in
deconstruction.
Oftentimes it's the women thatare talking about how patriarchy
(37:34):
harms both men and women, and Ithink we need to be careful
about doing that work for them,and I think we need to be more
proactive about asking thosequestions.
Be more proactive about askingthose questions Because if a
leader, if someone, cannot tellyou how patriarchy has harmed
them personally, how purityculture has harmed them
(37:54):
personally, they haven'tdeconstructed.
Speaker 1 (37:57):
Right, yeah, when someone has grown up their whole
life being told that theirperspective is authoritative,
right, and also the other halfof the population is also told
that their perspective isauthoritative, right.
Women are enculturated tosocialize to treat men's
(38:19):
perspectives as more true thantheir own.
These nice guys don't have todemand that women defer to them,
right, because women have beensocialized to do that
automatically, right, and sothey can.
It's easy, it costs nothing tobe a nice guy when everybody is
(38:39):
already deferring to you andsince they've always identified,
and everybody around them hasidentified them as the good guy,
they have no motivation toquestion that identity.
And so many of us believe we'rein a meritocracy and we just get
to where we are because of howwe've worked or what we've
earned.
And so here they are in thisprivileged status where their
view is seen as authoritative.
And their view is seen asauthoritative just because of
(39:05):
their genitalia.
And then their privilegedstatus is something they think
they've earned, not because theyhave the right genitalia, but
because they've earned it by thesuperior work ethic and their
high moral character.
You've earned it and you don'trealize.
(39:26):
No, actually it's yourpreferred status that has put
you in that place they canignore the way their power is
dependent on the oppression ofothers.
It's so convenient to ignore it.
And yeah, I love that point youmake, because deconstruction
isn't just about changingbeliefs or changing identities.
It's about unlearning theentitlement that made those
(39:46):
beliefs so harmful in the firstplace and owning the role we
played in that system.
Speaker 2 (39:53):
And it's a willingness to be uncomfortable,
it's a willingness to beunstabilized, and it's the art
of humility and even takingownership for the harm done
humility and even takingownership for the harm done
Right.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
And again, this is where there's a common
misconception that by asking mento take accountability for the
way that they have beensocialized, to hold onto this
entitlement is seen as somehowblaming them for all the
problems of the world.
And we're here to say no, thisis a system.
This is not men versus women,this is a system.
We're saying the system'shurting you guys too, and we're
(40:33):
inviting you to take an honestlook at the personal costs to
you and the people around you ofbasing your self-worth on
sitting at the top of the socialheap.
And again, as Terry Real pointsout, many men are feeling torn
between these two versions ofmasculinity, where we have this
traditional patriarchal modelwhich values dominance and
(40:56):
control, cuts men off from theirfull range of emotions, as Bell
Hooks mentions in her famousquote.
And then, at the same time,there's also this more modern
relational model which valuespartnership, emotional
intelligence, egalitarianrelationships, and you got to
have this for genuine humanconnection.
You got to have this for theauthenticity, for the safety
(41:18):
that's required for authenticity, to have that connection.
And we have men who are solonely and you know what.
So many women too, especiallywomen who are partnered, are
longing for this kind ofconnection.
And yet as long as men cling tothe entitlement of that
traditional patriarchal model,they're cutting off themselves
(41:41):
from relationships, and womenare increasingly finding that
they're even more lonely in arelationship than out of it.
This is why 70% of divorces areinitiated by women.
And unlearning dominanceunlearning to be at the top of
the social heap requires activework.
(42:01):
It means recognizing thatrelationships are not about
winning or being controlled.
They are about mutuality andshared power.
And we are inviting men to opentheir eyes to the ways being
top dog has cost them meaningfulemotional connection to the
people closest to them.
So, ultimately, this is ahopeful message.
It doesn't have to be this way.
(42:21):
It doesn't have to be this way.
Speaker 2 (42:23):
I think it's important to point out to the
women who are listening.
I think sometimes this isdifficult because somehow often
we're given the message that ifwe just explain it correctly, we
can bring change.
If we just pray correctly, godcan work.
(42:43):
We want to validate and empowerthe good we see in people and
to a degree, I still sort ofbelieve in all of that.
However, we cannot do the workfor other people and it's not my
job to rehabilitate anybody Notmy job.
(43:06):
I can't continue to do the workthat other people need to do
internally and in many ways Ithink this is why couple therapy
is not effective, becauseoftentimes that therapy doesn't
happen until the woman feelsshe's out of options.
Happen until the woman feelsshe's out of options and she has
(43:27):
done work and then all of asudden, okay, great, let's go to
couples therapy and her workjust continues.
She's still trying toarticulate why things are
problematic.
She is still doing theemotional work.
Oftentimes at least one partnerhasn't done their internal work
(43:47):
yet and then in situations likethat, couples therapy works
like mediation.
Speaker 1 (43:53):
Yes, because the mediator will come in and will
say okay, we're going to treateverybody like equals,
completely ignoring thepatriarchal power relationships
there.
And by ignoring thosetendencies, those patterns of
behavior, they're justreinforcing it, and this is one
(44:16):
of the reasons I'm such a fan ofTerry Real.
Speaker 2 (44:19):
A recent fan His name keeps coming up.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
His name keeps coming up because he brings that
reality, that part of ourupbringing, into his couples
sessions and into his material,the work he does.
He has a bunch of onlinecourses that I've been eyeing,
but again, this is not to saymen are bad.
(44:43):
No, no, this is not to say letme say too, that 70% of women
who are filing for divorce aredoing it after years of doing
everything they can to avoid it.
The narrative out there thateverybody's getting a divorce
because they're just giving upis so much BS.
(45:04):
The reality is, divorce sucks.
Even when it's a good thing,even in the best, even when it's
necessary Divorce, the processof divorce sucks, and divorce is
the life raft when the oceanliner is going down.
It's the point where yourealize liner is going down.
(45:25):
It's the point where yourealize I've got to get out of
here, or my kids, my family,myself, like we are toast.
That's when people file fordivorce.
I firmly believe the vast, vastmajority of the 70% of women,
divorce is the last thing theywant.
It's just how they can survive.
So what are we looking for,then?
(45:48):
If we want to spot performativeallyship or to tell the
difference between someone whois claiming to be a feminist or
actually a feminist, a real ally, if the fake ones can talk the
talk and I think about someonethat a friend of mine used to
date, who could talk all thefeminist theory and just talk
(46:14):
like crazy, and yet wheneverhe'd come over and now, he never
offered to help with the dishes.
She'd make dinner, and he'dnever help to offer the dishes.
So I think that is it, and Ishould say, too, that I've also
dated men who didn't hesitate towash the dishes, and these were
guys.
I'm thinking of one inparticular who had never got,
(46:38):
who hadn't gotten within ahundred yards of feminist theory
, and yet he never hesitated.
After a meal he got up andwashed the dishes, and more than
one man Like.
There's not just one guy outthere.
I have a friend who's marriedto a feminist man.
He also washes the dishes.
She says she hasn't washed adish her whole life, her whole
married life.
(46:58):
Anyway, it's not just aboutwashing dishes, though, either.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
But I think it's the practice of humility.
I think it's the practice ofhumility, I think it's the
practice of listening.
Speaker 1 (47:06):
Mutuality it's the practice.
Speaker 2 (47:08):
Yes, mutuality.
It's understanding that not allthe dishes, not all the laundry
is her responsibility.
It's understanding that I cansee things that need to be done.
I don't need a list.
Yeah, it's about takingaccountability.
It's about sharing power, notjust space, and it certainly
(47:33):
isn't about it is not aboutsupporting feminism only when
it's convenient or beneficial,and I think another one in there
is listening without gettingdefensive.
Speaker 1 (47:45):
I remember and this is from my dating days, talking
with someone once just makingsome kind of.
It was a simple request, itwasn't a big deal, but what
rocked me was his reaction.
It was like, oh okay, and thatwas it.
There was no pushback, therewas no undermining, there was no
invalidating.
(48:05):
And I was like was no pushback,there was no undermining, there
was no invalidating.
Speaker 2 (48:09):
And I was like whoa, breath of fresh air.
Breath of fresh air.
You didn't have to explain, youdidn't have to beg, you didn't
have to have a 10-point listexplaining.
Speaker 1 (48:18):
No, yeah, wow, wow.
I think another part that we aswomen can play in this is just
recognizing that our needsmatter and that when we speak up
for them, we are giving men anopportunity to enter into
authentic relationships, toenter into true intimacy, true
(48:42):
connection.
And, rather than seeing it assomething that is selfish or
immature or self-centered,rather than thinking we need to
sacrifice ourselves, we need tolight ourselves on fire to keep
others from getting a chill, weneed to see speaking up on
behalf of our needs as aninvitation to authentic and
(49:04):
meaningful relationships.
When we think about it that way, it can maybe help take the
sting or the kind ofinternalized resistance to
speaking up again, to speakingup for ourselves.
So in our financial autonomyseries, we've been talking about
how we can secure power, realpower, in our lives, right?
(49:26):
So it's not just talk, not justunlearning toxic beliefs, but
also making it real.
And these relationships areanother way to make that real in
our lives.
And next week we're going to goback to that and close out that
series with actionable stepsthat stay-at-home parents can
(49:48):
take right now to protectthemselves in case of a future
crisis and we never know whatthe future will hold, but we do
know that many stay-at-homeparents are in a very vulnerable
place financially, and, whilewe are not financial experts, we
can consult them, and we'vebeen there to a greater or
(50:11):
lesser extent and we want totalk about some of the ways that
stay-at-home parents can havethe financial autonomy that they
deserve, because independenceisn't just about what we believe
.
It's about how we prepare andhow we set our future selves up
with options.
So we'll see you then.
Speaker 2 (50:41):
Thank you for spending time with us today.
The resources and materialswe've mentioned are linked in
the show notes and on Facebookat Uncovered Life Beyond.
Speaker 1 (50:51):
What are your thoughts about college and
recovery from high demandreligion?
We know you have your ownquestions and experiences and we
want to talk about the topicsthat matter to you.
Share them with us atuncoveredlifebeyond at gmailcom.
That's uncoveredlifebeyond atgmailcom.
Speaker 2 (51:10):
If you enjoyed today's show and found value in
it, please rate and review it onyour favorite podcast app.
This helps others find the showWhile you're there.
Subscribe to our podcast so younever miss an episode.
Speaker 1 (51:23):
Until next time stay brave, stay bold, stay awkward.
This is Rebecca and this is Naomi.
We're 40-something moms andfirst cousins who know what it's
like to veer off the pathassigned to us.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
We've juggled motherhood, marriage, college
and career, as we questioned ourfaith traditions while
exploring new identities andways of seeing the world.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Without any maps for either of us to follow.
We've had to figure things outas we go and appreciate that
detours and dead ends areessential to the path Along the
way, we've uncovered a fewinsights we want to share with
fellow travelers.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
We want to talk about the questions we didn't know
who to ask and the options wedidn't know we had.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
So, whether you're feeling stuck or already shaking
things up, we are here to cheeryou on and assure you that the
best is yet to come.
Welcome to Uncovered LifeBeyond.
Hello everyone, Welcome back toUncovered Life Beyond.
(01:08):
This is Naomi and this isRebecca.
So today we're taking a breakfrom our financial autonomy
series because we decided wewanted to address something
that's been in the news indeconstruction circles.
Rebecca, what have you heardabout the Grace Report, about
(01:31):
the new evangelicals and itsdirector or leader, Tim Whitaker
Boy?
Speaker 2 (01:38):
you know, sometimes this stuff just sounds so
familiar.
It's like we've heard thisstory before.
So what I'm hearing is TimWhitaker.
Several years ago was it like2007 when he started this new
organization?
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Well, it's much more recent than that, I think.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Is it more recent than?
Speaker 1 (02:00):
that yeah, he started deconstructing.
He says in 2016,.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
around the election Okay, so here's the thing we
cannot let these guys who are soearly in deconstruction start
organizations.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Yeah, well, and he started around 2021, I think, is
when New Evangelicals gotstarted and I think it, you know
it was a social media presenceand then in the next, you know,
in the last few years, it'sbecome an organization with a
board.
I think they have a six-figurebudget.
I know they have a six-figurebudget yeah.
(02:36):
And so a lot of the originalvolunteers some of them have
transitioned, like tocontractors, Right.
But you know it's made up, it'sstill very grassroots in that
it's made up of folks who arevery closely tied to the heart,
you know, or the intent, right,the mission of the organization.
(02:57):
It's new enough, it's newenough that it's still.
Because Tim Whitaker has beenat the center of it even though
there's a board.
He has very much been kind ofthe central figure representing
it.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
Well, and just because there's a board doesn't
mean that he isn't in charge.
I've been a part of a boardwhere the administrator
manipulated the board membersand got everyone to just say yes
, Right right.
Speaker 1 (03:28):
Yeah, I agree, I agree, just because there's a
board doesn't guarantee at all,yeah, authentic accountability.
But I think what we're reallyhere to talk about is that it's
not just him, that it's awidespread pattern, like you
mentioned earlier, where theseso-called nice guys claim to be
(03:49):
allies, feminists supportingwomen, but when push comes to
shove, when they're in positionsof power, when there's times of
stress, they still default topatriarchal entitlement.
And it's so normal that when ithappens, I think we often too
often just accept it as, oh,it's just his personality.
(04:11):
But I think what the GraceReport does really well is uses
his own words, and his own words.
His own words in his testimonydrip with patriarchal
entitlement.
So what happened sometime in thelast year or so?
A contractor with theorganization, someone who had
(04:32):
been involved for a long timeand was involved in some of the
projects they're workingur, andthere was road rage and some
really emotional dysregulationand that's kind of like the
(04:54):
inciting incident.
But what's interesting to me isall his expectations that
others can't be late, but hecould be late on things, all
this expectation that everybodyelse's world is supposed to
revolve around his when it comesto working on projects.
That, to me is interesting thatpreceded that incident and then
, after the incident, as shecame to terms with it and wanted
(05:19):
to address it with him, it wasminimized and then she was
marginalized within theorganization and he refused to
address it.
That too, to me, is sointeresting because, while it's
not some egregious sex scandallike we've seen plenty of in
(05:40):
churches, it's still patriarchalentitlement and it's still
about power and control of menover women.
And it's so familiar, too manyof us brush it off.
It's not a big deal.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Well, and I also think it's important that we
talk about it, because there isa lot of this type of thing
happening in the evangelicalcircles and those who consider
themselves more progressive orin the deconstructing world want
to hold themselves above thistype of thing.
(06:17):
But I think you know, just thisweekend someone talked about my
friend.
Gerald actually talked abouthow deconstruction is more of an
end process.
It's an acknowledgement thatyour system of meaning, your
system of understanding theworld is changing.
(06:39):
He used the phrase I'macknowledging that my worldview
is destabilized and when itbecomes destabilized, it's
uncomfortable, it's scary.
It's that space where you don'tknow what to do because you
have more questions than answers.
And I think there's a lot ofpeople, and especially men, who,
(07:02):
because it's so uncomfortable,want to quickly stabilize, but
then when they do that, they'venever changed their internal way
of seeing the world, ofoperating within the world, and
I think it's important that wecall it out wherever it's
happening.
It's not just the conservativesor just the evangelical world
(07:27):
where this happens.
It also happens in other placesand regardless where it happens
, it's important to call it out.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
Absolutely.
Oh, I've seen this kind ofthing in academic, secular
places all the time too, and itseems like what you're talking
about there is like when there'san identity shift, like oh, I'm
no longer evangelical, now I amthis, and I slide right into
the box and into a new box anddon't examine those assumptions.
Speaker 2 (07:57):
Yeah, and just change the wording or just change the
words you use to articulate life, maybe, but there's no internal
change.
I remember seeing this happenwith an acquaintance who kind of
was an asshole Christian andthen, boom, the same person was
(08:19):
just an asshole atheist.
Yeah, exactly Nothing reallychanged except some terminology,
and I do think it's somethingthat we are very aware of, and I
think deconstruction is more ofa ongoing process.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
It's a way of life.
It's not a destination.
(08:59):
Agreed, agreed to control,seeking to do the organizing,
seeking to be the head of thething, and yeah, we see this all
the time.
We could name names of folkswho have made that shift, and
Terry Real, a therapist who haswritten some books, like Fierce
Intimacy is one does such awonderful job talking about how
(09:22):
traditional forms of masculinityand femininity impact our
romantic relationships and it'srelevant to other relationships
as well.
But he talks about how trueintimacy requires mutuality, not
dominance.
And yet, when men have beensocialized to see relationships
as hierarchical, right, you'reeither in in control or you feel
(09:44):
powerless.
So they've got to be in controlbecause, in their mind, if
they're not, then they arepowerless.
And I guess maybe I don't knowthe question is do they think
about it long enough to considerwhether they're assuming
everybody else in their orbitshould be powerless?
Then, like, is that whatthey're saying?
You know what I mean, or isthat the framework?
Speaker 2 (10:06):
So I think so much of what they are leaving is often
built on this selfish narrative.
I mean, think about the waymany of us were raised to think
about salvation and thispersonal relationship with God.
It became this selfish thingthat as long as God and I were
(10:27):
tight, it didn't really matterwhat was happening with my other
relationships, because, man,god and I were tight, that was
your- Stake in the ground.
Yes, yeah, that was your anchor,that was the end, all be all
and it was a very selfish.
It became this very selfishthing because it was just about
(10:47):
God and I, and if you're goingto try and leave that but never
acknowledge or recognize howmuch of it was built on selfish
ideology and my guess is thismight be even more problematic
for men because they often arethe ones who tend to benefit
that it might be easier just tochange and never really look at
(11:12):
the selfish motives, the way theego was involved.
Plus, may I be snarky and talkabout the new name or the name?
Speaker 1 (11:20):
the new evangelicals.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
What is?
there that they're trying tosave.
I mean, it reminds me a littlebit of the old order and the new
order Amish, like, really, andguess who are the most
problematic.
The new orders considerthemselves far more saved.
They're kind of much morespiritual, but they tend to be.
I have much better friendswithin, or friendships within,
(11:45):
the old orders than I do in thenew orders, and there's a
certain layer or level ofhumility that is found within
the old orders that you tend notto see in the new orders.
So just because I don't know,I'm a little snarky about the
name, like I feel like that initself is a red flag.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
Yeah, fair Well, and I should say here too, like I
have heard of the NewEvangelicals, the name Tim
Whitaker did not ring any bellsfor me when this report came out
.
The reason that I even lookedat the report was because Tia
Leavings had posted about it andsaid go read it.
And when Tia Leavings says dosomething, you go do it Because
she knows what she's talkingabout.
(12:26):
And I was stunned.
And to me, like the reason Isay that is to say like this is
not about oh, this is someonethat I hate watch from afar.
Let's put it that way.
We all have those hate watchesright on social media, but it's
not the case at all.
What has struck me about it ishow utterly predictable, how
(12:48):
utterly commonplace, all thepatriarchal entitlement that
came through in the report.
That, to me, is what'sinteresting and how and I say
this in the best possible wayhow boringly predictable it is.
But there's a problem with thisand that's, I think, what we
(13:08):
want to call out.
I mean, some of the things thatwere found in the Grace Report
was that, even though he claimedto be sharing leadership, he
was clearly controllingorganizational power and I think
for a lot of reasons, up tothat point it had not made a
major, it hadn't come to a headin the way it did, but those
patterns were there.
(13:29):
He gaslighted, emotionallymanipulated colleagues when he
was called on things andretaliated against the women who
challenged him.
Since the report came out and inpreparing for our conversation
here today, I listened to aninterview with him on another
podcast and in that podcast hetalked about, you know, the
(13:50):
things that he is doingdifferently as a result of
deconstruction, and one of thoseis parenting differently.
And he said he talked about hiswillingness to apologize to his
kids.
When he messes up.
He says all the right things,and yet on that podcast, in
public, he's saying all theright things, and yet what the
report found was, you know,instead of taking responsibility
(14:14):
, he blamed the victims for hisactions.
You were late.
That's why I got upset andcompletely overlooking the fact
that he had given her thematerial she needed to do that
work late and that she had beenup half the night working on
this and and had been.
I mean, it was because she wasworking so hard on the project
that she didn't get that.
(14:36):
She was running late thatmorning, the morning of the road
rage incident.
And then, when she does bringit up and mentions how it was
triggering, the experience istriggering for her because of
things she's experienced in thepast.
Instead of him expressingconcern for the pain that caused
her, he weaponized her traumato discredit her concerns.
(14:57):
And we see this happen all thetime.
If a man is traumatized, wellthen we give him a pass.
If a woman's traumatized, wellthen she's crazy and we don't
need to believe, we don't needto pay attention to her.
And this happens all the timeand we do it.
We are conditioned, we aresocialized to do it and we've
got to become aware of it andwe've got to stop it.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
And I think this is such an important point and this
is something that we canpersonally observe and take.
We can take our clues about whowe follow from watching this
type of action.
There's this person on socialmedia who has built a platform
(15:42):
on sexual purity, sexual honesty, and he built his platform off
of his porn addiction andgetting out of that.
But of course that leads intothen, or his expertise now is
(16:02):
also into how women's sexualityand male sexuality and all this
other stuff of course, and hewas promoting something that was
really kind of yucky, and abunch of women came on and they
were like this is not good, thisis bad, this is triggering,
(16:24):
this is not okay, this isharmful.
And he immediately shut thosewomen down and he even said
because of your past, your wordsdon't matter, or what you're
thinking, believing, seeingdoesn't matter, because you're
responding out of trauma by hisvery own words.
He should not be talking aboutporn then.
(16:45):
Oh my goodness.
But what we do is with men, wetake them and whatever they had
in their past and we give theirpast reason for them to teach us
.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Yeah, it validates them.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
It validates them, and immediately, immediately.
A woman has no power because ofher past.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
She's invalidated because of the past.
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
Which is experience?
Yeah, it's just wild.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Guys, this happens so consistently and I think the
biggest way to bring change isto note it, to verbalize it, to
acknowledge it and to see whatyou see.
Otherwise, these leaders justkeep going and they are built
off of followers and if you juststop following them, it's like
(17:37):
it makes a difference, andthat's, I think, where we hold
power, right, right.
Speaker 1 (17:42):
And I'm so glad you brought that the point up about
those narratives that validateor invalidate, because this is
where we can see how this is notjust women versus men.
This is about a patriarchalsystem, because women and men
both reinforce these narratives.
We tend to unthinkinglyreinforce these narratives.
(18:05):
Yeah, naming it and beingconscious of it and seeing what
we see to really push backagainst it.
To really push back against it.
So we've put together a list oftactics that we've observed from
the fake ally playbook, andthese are based on things from
the report, but the reason we'rementioning them is because they
(18:26):
resonate so wildly with ourexperiences of people who claim
to be all progressive feministsin public, but then in private
personal relationships theydefault to patriarchy.
So tactic number one isexpecting women to manage
(18:46):
emotional and organizationallabor without recognition, and
the way this showed up in theNew Evangelicals was how the
contributions of women tended tobe minimized, even women who
were playing a critical role.
While the organization tookcredit for their labor, their
ideas.
He repeatedly ignored strategicadvice from female team leaders
(19:07):
with nonprofit expertise anddismissing their input, but then
giving them jobs that were, youknow, tasks that were well
beneath their skill level.
He expected female colleaguesto handle emotional and conflict
resolution work, while hecontrolled the organization's
public facing content.
So, like you, deal with myoutbursts and then I'll go be
(19:32):
the public face and look good.
Essentially is what we'retalking about.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
Isn't this oldest time?
Speaker 1 (19:38):
Right, right.
And then when he was held tothe things he claimed to believe
right, when he was held toaccount to live by that which he
professed, then he startedwithholding communication from
that individual, reassigningtasks to menial work, kind of
cutting her out of the larger,more significant projects.
(20:03):
And while of course he says, oh, no, no, no, this is not about
retaliation, it's hard to see itas anything else.
And again and again, I mean, welook at churches, we look at
the way workplaces, families,all these places run.
Women are expected to carry theemotional, strategic workload
(20:26):
actually getting the things done, thinking ahead, thinking about
who's going to need what nextweek, and yet at the same time
not giving credit for keepingthe wheels in motion.
And their authority, theirexpertise is just disregarded.
And in fact, did you hear aboutthe Catholic Women's Strike?
No, there is a group of womenwithin Catholic churches and I
(20:50):
know that's a huge categoryright there.
I haven't seen much more thantheir website and heard a little
bit about it, but through theseason of Lent this year they
are withholding their labor fromall these churches where
they're preparing for Easter.
Here is this high point of theliturgical calendar, and they're
(21:11):
saying you're disregarding ourinsight, our input, our labor.
All right, you take it then?
Good.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
I just love it.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
I cannot.
You know, I don't even have asense of the scope.
You know, maybe this is just ahandful of people, but we need
this throughout our society.
Speaker 2 (21:29):
You know, I think sometimes we feel powerless and
then forget that we actually dohold power.
Yes, I think being reallystrategic within that is so
important.
It's both reclaiming your power.
Sometimes it's creatingboundaries, sometimes it's
saying what did you mean by that, I don't understand and making
(21:52):
them explain themselves.
Sometimes it's going on strike.
But I think reclaiming thatpower in ways that kind of
showcase what females bring tothe table is so valuable.
Speaker 1 (22:10):
Right, it's like recognizing.
Oh, this is the part where I amplaying into this game into
this process into the system.
I'm just going to step backAbsolutely and let me say this
is where religious communitiesshine in telling women that is
of the devil.
(22:30):
Well, guess why the devil?
Well, guess why, I mean, theybenefit so much from women
believing that's theirresponsibility, and it's such a
mind you know what?
Yeah, it really is.
So the second tactic we'veidentified is weaponized
(22:50):
gaslighting.
I guess this is kind ofsomething we've been touching on
throughout our conversation.
Where have you seen this kindof thing, rebecca?
Speaker 2 (23:00):
Well, I think it would be fair to say.
I think sometimes terms we useget overused.
I think sometimes terms liketoxic and narcissistic and even
gaslighting get overused andeven gaslighting get overused.
(23:26):
But I do think it is real inthe sense that I think
oftentimes it's easy when womensee things they are dismissed as
overreacting, abusive behavioras the victim's trauma response.
That guy was talking about wholikes to teach about sexual
purity?
But when women come on and say,no, what you're teaching is
harmful, oh, now he's going totell them that it is their
(23:48):
trauma response.
That's gaslighting.
Speaker 1 (23:52):
I think in these situations of weaponized
gaslighting that we're talkingabout, the issue gets focused on
is this right, is this wrong,is this harmful?
Is this not what?
If we just shift it to a lensof care, like whether it's true
or not someone was hurt, can wevalidate that pain instead of
(24:18):
invalidating it?
Can we recognize that ratherthan making it about who is
right?
That's such a shift, and Ithink the way patriarchal
masculinity inculturates men notto care about that.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Well, patriarchy tells us that men care about the
facts.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
The important things, yeah.
Speaker 2 (24:42):
So you have to have a 10-point plan explaining why
what happened was painful andafter you've been harmed, who
has the emotional energy forthat.
So you learn to shut up.
So you learn to shut up.
But then sometimes someoneactually does have the emotional
energy and so it's carefullyplanned.
(25:04):
I remember having so many Istill have so many conversations
that I plan and I think aboutwhat I'm going to say and I try
to have key points and withoutany emotion.
God forbid you bring anyemotion to the conversation.
That is not a safe and caringand equal relationship.
(25:25):
It should be enough to say wait, that kind of hurts, wait that
feels yucky, wait that's painful.
That should be enough.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Yeah, yeah, but also don't you think that oftentimes
invalidating your pain as a wayof not addressing the issue?
Yes, but part of the problem isthat a woman's expression of
need is taken by so many men asan attack, as a full frontal
(25:56):
assault, and it's what's readinto that expression of need,
it's what's read into the storythey tell themselves when you
say, wow, I'm really tiredtonight, and they tell
themselves, oh, she's telling meshe doesn't want me to touch
(26:16):
her tonight.
That was not the point at all.
It was about having a long,hard day.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
Well, they say they like the facts.
The fact is, you're tired.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
That's it, that's it, that's it.
But it's the story that they'retelling themselves, and I think
this is why, also, tacticnumber three retaliation for
speaking out is so real.
So when someone does make theircase, when someone does speak
out, when someone does say, hey,yeah, this really is an issue,
that's when women get calledcrazy, that's when women get
(26:47):
called problematic, that's whenwomen get called Jezebel spirit.
In the real conservativesettings They'd be called
Jezebel spirit, I guess.
Oh, oh, is it that inprogressive spaces, where this
patriarchal dynamic persists,we're called triggered or
traumatized?
That's how we're it's newlanguage.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
It's new language.
It's the same technique.
New language yes.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
And it's once again.
We have a system where peopleare being punished for telling
the truth, for saying what wesee.
We also have tactic number fourevasion of accountability and
resistance to structural change.
And we've already mentioned howTim Whitaker, in this situation
, positioned himself as thefinal decision maker in the
(27:34):
functioning of the organization,even though there was this
public claim of having boardoversight.
In fact, when this concern wasbrought to light, and then he
recommended mediation and hecontrolled the whole mediation
process, he chose a mediator, hedownplayed the relationship
(27:57):
that he'd had with her, theprofessional relationship he'd
had with her, and she wastraumaformed therapist and this
sounded good.
So they had a meeting and, asit happened, this mediator's
second interview on Tim'spodcast dropped the same day as
the mediation.
Of course, it did, and I thinkthat was coincidental.
(28:22):
But when they finished thesession, the mediation session,
the individual came out, and mysense is that she realized there
was a much closer relationshiphere between the two of them and
her spidey senses went up thatshe was not getting a fair
hearing.
Her concerns had been furtherundermined, and part of the
(28:47):
whole agreement too, too, wasthat she was given a gag order.
She wasn't allowed to talk toanyone about this issue, and
even after all this happened,there was still not meaningful
apology or tangible steps takentoward repair, toward repair,
and it's like he was followingthe playbook for how to evade
(29:09):
genuine accountability, how toneutralize challenges to his
authority and to control thenarrative.
It's just so textbook.
Speaker 2 (29:18):
It's so textbook.
Rarely in religious circleshave I seen mediations actually
work.
It is typically a way tominimize the situation.
It is typically a way toreestablish power, and the
(29:39):
mediator knows darn well that ifthey don't align with power,
they'll never be asked to be amediator again.
And I think mediation istypically more about public
image management than it isabout any type of reconciliation
.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
I agree, and I just want to point out the rhetoric
there, because you know, fromthe area of like family law, we
know that you know, when you'vegot a really contentious divorce
and you've got attorneys goingat each other, it can be such a
hot mess.
And I think the hope ofmediation is like hey, can we
just be reasonable people andsit down and work this out?
(30:15):
And I think it's the pretenseof egalitarianism, it's a
pretense that everyone is onequal ground, and you know what
you're saying.
As you're saying that I'm going, you know why mediation isn't
working in those situationsBecause you don't have people on
equal ground and so they'reusing the tools of
egalitarianism for theseincredibly unequal situations.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
And we've got to Well , and by reinforcing it they can
stabilize their situation again.
It doesn't matter what happenedto the person with less power.
It's about stabilizing theirsituation and making them feel
safe again Reinforcing thestatus quo Exactly.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Can you say more about the public image
management and how you see thatplaying out here?
I think that's so true and,again, so common.
Speaker 2 (31:18):
I think many leaders spend a lot of time developing
this public image whileprivately dodging accountability
.
A phrase I've often heard isit's lonely at the top, and this
is why and I think this is whyPoor, sad, rich man I know I
(31:40):
know you burn every bridge toget there.
Yeah, isn't that true?
When you can't be authentic,you don't have relationships,
because no, one trusts you.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
Snap, snap, snap, and then guess what?
We get a male lonelinessepidemic.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Yep, and even now there's people on social media
talking about this.
Now there's people on socialmedia talking about this and
they came to find out that bothTim and his wife created burner
accounts and are being horriblyaccusatory to the people who
(32:20):
dare talk about it, and I mean,you guys can just search for it.
It's there.
Speaker 1 (32:26):
Yeah, and we'll put links to like the reckonings.
Yeah, that's a good site.
Yeah, and they can.
Yeah, yeah, it's just a Googlesearch away.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
It's astounding to me how, instead of acknowledging
dude, I got it wrong and I'm sosorry and it's bad and you know
what I need to sit out.
Instead of just simplyacknowledging it, taking
responsibility, they come backfighting.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
Well, but let's also recognize how he has
consistently rejectedopportunity to do that.
Again and again.
She came to him privately, shewent to the board, like for all
that time she kept it within theorganization, all that time he
(33:14):
had an opportunity.
And you know what?
Yesterday I, at my work, I sawa situation where someone who
was in a lower position of powerfelt she'd been spoken to
rudely by someone in authorityand she called it out in a very
(33:35):
matter-of-fact way and hisreaction was I'm so sorry.
I was frustrated and reallystressed because he had things
going on.
He said I'm sorry that it hurtyou.
I don't remember what he said.
What I remember is the tone ofhis voice and then when it came
up again later he repeatedhimself.
(33:56):
It was just like can we putthis in every man's training
manual?
Like I don't know, and you knowwhat happened.
It just the issue went away.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
But also he has Because it was acknowledged.
Speaker 1 (34:15):
It was acknowledged and he's known to be genuine.
He's a genuine person and sothat apology came off as genuine
, because I believe it is, andthe situation is gone.
I mean it's good.
How hard is that?
How hard is?
Speaker 2 (34:29):
that and I think it's interesting.
And again, this is kind of abroad brush, but I think women
instinctively are taught topause, question ourselves.
Yeah, taught to questionourselves, taught to apologize,
taught to reconsider, and Ithink sometimes women have to
(34:49):
learn to quit apologizing,whilst oftentimes it might be a
skill that men need to learn.
Speaker 1 (34:58):
Yes, I agree, and I think part of the problem is
when they see every relationshipthrough the lens of either one
up, one down, and if an apologymeans I'm automatically one down
and powerless, then their fightor flight kicks in and they
will do anything to avoid thataccountability.
And this is a thing that I talkabout with my son whenever I
(35:23):
have, whenever the opportunitycomes up, is to say like, oh
yeah, everybody makes mistakes,everybody messes up.
The important thing is we takeaccountability for it and then
we move on.
Not a big deal, and I right and, and I think seeing shift,
making that shift um brings alot of freedom and it allows
(35:43):
people to connect.
Speaker 2 (35:45):
Well, that's where authenticity is birthed, right?
Right, it's a level playingfield.
You're right, I did mess up.
Yeah, you're right, I did bringpain.
Yeah, whether it was myintention or not, it really
doesn't matter, right?
Speaker 1 (35:57):
Because usually that's not what our I mean.
There are times when intentionis relevant, but there's lots of
times when that's not the point, especially in personal
relationships.
We just want the person who'ssupposed to love us and care
about us to see how we'reimpacted by something.
So we see these patterns againand again and again.
(36:20):
We also see nice guys who knowhow to talk the talk critiquing
patriarchy as it shows up inthese very conservative,
conventional, traditional spaceslike conservative churches.
Why do they keep showing upthis way when they are then in
progressive spaces, supposedlyfeminists, and yet why do they
(36:41):
keep defaulting to thesepatriarchal norms?
Speaker 2 (36:48):
do they keep defaulting to these patriarchal
norms?
Something that I'm realizing isa lot of the harm in patriarchy
is the imbalance of theemotional labor women carry as
compared to men, and even purityculture is in there.
And something I've starteddoing and something I've started
(37:11):
doing and it's fascinating isasking men who are talking the
talk.
So tell me, how has purityculture harmed you?
So I'd love to hear how haspatriarchy harmed you?
I'm finding often and notalways, but often it is the
women who are doing theemotional work, even in
deconstruction.
Oftentimes it's the women thatare talking about how patriarchy
(37:34):
harms both men and women, and Ithink we need to be careful
about doing that work for them,and I think we need to be more
proactive about asking thosequestions.
Be more proactive about askingthose questions Because if a
leader, if someone, cannot tellyou how patriarchy has harmed
them personally, how purityculture has harmed them
(37:54):
personally, they haven'tdeconstructed.
Speaker 1 (37:57):
Right, yeah, when someone has grown up their whole
life being told that theirperspective is authoritative,
right, and also the other halfof the population is also told
that their perspective isauthoritative, right.
Women are enculturated tosocialize to treat men's
(38:19):
perspectives as more true thantheir own.
These nice guys don't have todemand that women defer to them,
right, because women have beensocialized to do that
automatically, right, and sothey can.
It's easy, it costs nothing tobe a nice guy when everybody is
(38:39):
already deferring to you andsince they've always identified,
and everybody around them hasidentified them as the good guy,
they have no motivation toquestion that identity.
And so many of us believe we'rein a meritocracy and we just get
to where we are because of howwe've worked or what we've
earned.
And so here they are in thisprivileged status where their
view is seen as authoritative.
And their view is seen asauthoritative just because of
(39:05):
their genitalia.
And then their privilegedstatus is something they think
they've earned, not because theyhave the right genitalia, but
because they've earned it by thesuperior work ethic and their
high moral character.
You've earned it and you don'trealize.
(39:26):
No, actually it's yourpreferred status that has put
you in that place they canignore the way their power is
dependent on the oppression ofothers.
It's so convenient to ignore it.
And yeah, I love that point youmake, because deconstruction
isn't just about changingbeliefs or changing identities.
It's about unlearning theentitlement that made those
(39:46):
beliefs so harmful in the firstplace and owning the role we
played in that system.
Speaker 2 (39:53):
And it's a willingness to be uncomfortable,
it's a willingness to beunstabilized, and it's the art
of humility and even takingownership for the harm done
humility and even takingownership for the harm done
Right.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
And again, this is where there's a common
misconception that by asking mento take accountability for the
way that they have beensocialized, to hold onto this
entitlement is seen as somehowblaming them for all the
problems of the world.
And we're here to say no, thisis a system.
This is not men versus women,this is a system.
We're saying the system'shurting you guys too, and we're
(40:33):
inviting you to take an honestlook at the personal costs to
you and the people around you ofbasing your self-worth on
sitting at the top of the socialheap.
And again, as Terry Real pointsout, many men are feeling torn
between these two versions ofmasculinity, where we have this
traditional patriarchal modelwhich values dominance and
(40:56):
control, cuts men off from theirfull range of emotions, as Bell
Hooks mentions in her famousquote.
And then, at the same time,there's also this more modern
relational model which valuespartnership, emotional
intelligence, egalitarianrelationships, and you got to
have this for genuine humanconnection.
You got to have this for theauthenticity, for the safety
(41:18):
that's required for authenticity, to have that connection.
And we have men who are solonely and you know what.
So many women too, especiallywomen who are partnered, are
longing for this kind ofconnection.
And yet as long as men cling tothe entitlement of that
traditional patriarchal model,they're cutting off themselves
(41:41):
from relationships, and womenare increasingly finding that
they're even more lonely in arelationship than out of it.
This is why 70% of divorces areinitiated by women.
And unlearning dominanceunlearning to be at the top of
the social heap requires activework.
(42:01):
It means recognizing thatrelationships are not about
winning or being controlled.
They are about mutuality andshared power.
And we are inviting men to opentheir eyes to the ways being
top dog has cost them meaningfulemotional connection to the
people closest to them.
So, ultimately, this is ahopeful message.
It doesn't have to be this way.
(42:21):
It doesn't have to be this way.
Speaker 2 (42:23):
I think it's important to point out to the
women who are listening.
I think sometimes this isdifficult because somehow often
we're given the message that ifwe just explain it correctly, we
can bring change.
If we just pray correctly, godcan work.
(42:43):
We want to validate and empowerthe good we see in people and
to a degree, I still sort ofbelieve in all of that.
However, we cannot do the workfor other people and it's not my
job to rehabilitate anybody Notmy job.
(43:06):
I can't continue to do the workthat other people need to do
internally and in many ways Ithink this is why couple therapy
is not effective, becauseoftentimes that therapy doesn't
happen until the woman feelsshe's out of options.
Happen until the woman feelsshe's out of options and she has
(43:27):
done work and then all of asudden, okay, great, let's go to
couples therapy and her workjust continues.
She's still trying toarticulate why things are
problematic.
She is still doing theemotional work.
Oftentimes at least one partnerhasn't done their internal work
(43:47):
yet and then in situations likethat, couples therapy works
like mediation.
Speaker 1 (43:53):
Yes, because the mediator will come in and will
say okay, we're going to treateverybody like equals,
completely ignoring thepatriarchal power relationships
there.
And by ignoring thosetendencies, those patterns of
behavior, they're justreinforcing it, and this is one
(44:16):
of the reasons I'm such a fan ofTerry Real.
Speaker 2 (44:19):
A recent fan His name keeps coming up.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
His name keeps coming up because he brings that
reality, that part of ourupbringing, into his couples
sessions and into his material,the work he does.
He has a bunch of onlinecourses that I've been eyeing,
but again, this is not to saymen are bad.
(44:43):
No, no, this is not to say letme say too, that 70% of women
who are filing for divorce aredoing it after years of doing
everything they can to avoid it.
The narrative out there thateverybody's getting a divorce
because they're just giving upis so much BS.
(45:04):
The reality is, divorce sucks.
Even when it's a good thing,even in the best, even when it's
necessary Divorce, the processof divorce sucks, and divorce is
the life raft when the oceanliner is going down.
It's the point where yourealize liner is going down.
(45:25):
It's the point where yourealize I've got to get out of
here, or my kids, my family,myself, like we are toast.
That's when people file fordivorce.
I firmly believe the vast, vastmajority of the 70% of women,
divorce is the last thing theywant.
It's just how they can survive.
So what are we looking for,then?
(45:48):
If we want to spot performativeallyship or to tell the
difference between someone whois claiming to be a feminist or
actually a feminist, a real ally, if the fake ones can talk the
talk and I think about someonethat a friend of mine used to
date, who could talk all thefeminist theory and just talk
(46:14):
like crazy, and yet wheneverhe'd come over and now, he never
offered to help with the dishes.
She'd make dinner, and he'dnever help to offer the dishes.
So I think that is it, and Ishould say, too, that I've also
dated men who didn't hesitate towash the dishes, and these were
guys.
I'm thinking of one inparticular who had never got,
(46:38):
who hadn't gotten within ahundred yards of feminist theory
, and yet he never hesitated.
After a meal he got up andwashed the dishes, and more than
one man Like.
There's not just one guy outthere.
I have a friend who's marriedto a feminist man.
He also washes the dishes.
She says she hasn't washed adish her whole life, her whole
married life.
(46:58):
Anyway, it's not just aboutwashing dishes, though, either.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
But I think it's the practice of humility.
I think it's the practice ofhumility, I think it's the
practice of listening.
Speaker 1 (47:06):
Mutuality it's the practice.
Speaker 2 (47:08):
Yes, mutuality.
It's understanding that not allthe dishes, not all the laundry
is her responsibility.
It's understanding that I cansee things that need to be done.
I don't need a list.
Yeah, it's about takingaccountability.
It's about sharing power, notjust space, and it certainly
(47:33):
isn't about it is not aboutsupporting feminism only when
it's convenient or beneficial,and I think another one in there
is listening without gettingdefensive.
Speaker 1 (47:45):
I remember and this is from my dating days, talking
with someone once just makingsome kind of.
It was a simple request, itwasn't a big deal, but what
rocked me was his reaction.
It was like, oh okay, and thatwas it.
There was no pushback, therewas no undermining, there was no
invalidating.
(48:05):
And I was like was no pushback,there was no undermining, there
was no invalidating.
Speaker 2 (48:09):
And I was like whoa, breath of fresh air.
Breath of fresh air.
You didn't have to explain, youdidn't have to beg, you didn't
have to have a 10-point listexplaining.
Speaker 1 (48:18):
No, yeah, wow, wow.
I think another part that we aswomen can play in this is just
recognizing that our needsmatter and that when we speak up
for them, we are giving men anopportunity to enter into
authentic relationships, toenter into true intimacy, true
(48:42):
connection.
And, rather than seeing it assomething that is selfish or
immature or self-centered,rather than thinking we need to
sacrifice ourselves, we need tolight ourselves on fire to keep
others from getting a chill, weneed to see speaking up on
behalf of our needs as aninvitation to authentic and
(49:04):
meaningful relationships.
When we think about it that way, it can maybe help take the
sting or the kind ofinternalized resistance to
speaking up again, to speakingup for ourselves.
So in our financial autonomyseries, we've been talking about
how we can secure power, realpower, in our lives, right?
(49:26):
So it's not just talk, not justunlearning toxic beliefs, but
also making it real.
And these relationships areanother way to make that real in
our lives.
And next week we're going to goback to that and close out that
series with actionable stepsthat stay-at-home parents can
(49:48):
take right now to protectthemselves in case of a future
crisis and we never know whatthe future will hold, but we do
know that many stay-at-homeparents are in a very vulnerable
place financially, and, whilewe are not financial experts, we
can consult them, and we'vebeen there to a greater or
(50:11):
lesser extent and we want totalk about some of the ways that
stay-at-home parents can havethe financial autonomy that they
deserve, because independenceisn't just about what we believe
.
It's about how we prepare andhow we set our future selves up
with options.
So we'll see you then.
Speaker 2 (50:41):
Thank you for spending time with us today.
The resources and materialswe've mentioned are linked in
the show notes and on Facebookat Uncovered Life Beyond.
Speaker 1 (50:51):
What are your thoughts about college and
recovery from high demandreligion?
We know you have your ownquestions and experiences and we
want to talk about the topicsthat matter to you.
Share them with us atuncoveredlifebeyond at gmailcom.
That's uncoveredlifebeyond atgmailcom.
Speaker 2 (51:10):
If you enjoyed today's show and found value in
it, please rate and review it onyour favorite podcast app.
This helps others find the showWhile you're there.
Subscribe to our podcast so younever miss an episode.
Speaker 1 (51:23):
Until next time stay brave, stay bold, stay awkward.
Popular Podcasts
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.