Podcasts about Patricia Hill Collins

WELCOME BACK TO THE MAKE IT PLAIN PODCAST - Thanks for coming back! If you slept on S1 you can return to our earlier episodes (S1 was funded by the Evens Foundation in Europe, themed on Black Studies, featuring Patricia Hill Collins, Kimberlee Crenshaw, David Harewood + more).  This is S2, and we're taking a slightly different tact than S1. We'll still be interviewing official guests in academia, politics, and elsewhere. What's new is that we'll also be talking to interesting people on the ground from organizations on the Black United Front (BUF, a directory of Black orgs across the globe that Make it Plain has begun developing). - In this week's Black World News, Kehinde Andrews makes plain the House Negro nonsense of the coconut trial of Mariah Hassan, a person who was charged with carrying a placard that pictured Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman as coconuts. This isn't up for debate, this is not a criminal offense it's a defense of the Black radical intellectual tradition. Kehinde also makes plain the general election, the ways you can and can't represent as a Black MP, and the myth and propaganda of the Black Vote. Not discounting our influence in marginal seats, the myth of the Black vote is a really bad way of understanding Black political power. Kehinde makes plain a better (local, national, and global) way of understanding politics through a Black mass membership international organization. - In this week's official guest interview, Kehinde Andrews talks with George the Poet (featuring his son in the background hehe) about his new book Track Record. George shares a section of the book that never made it to his book, "The Anti-Afrikan." They also discuss, turning down an MBE (Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) honor, despite it "opening doors" and networking opportunities (but the question is, "which doors?" and"whose doors?").   - George the Poet AKA George Mpanga is a multi-dimensional man with lived experience and a London-born spoken word performer of Ugandan heritage. His innovative brand of musical poetry has won him critical acclaim both as a recording artist and a social commentator. George is also a husband, father, and Cambridge graduate. - BLACK WORLD NEWS LINKS It's not a crime to call a "Coconut" a "Coconut." Professor Kehinde Andrews explains why the terms Coconut, House Negro, Coon, and Uncle Tom are vital expressions of Black political thought that should be celebrated and not policed. Drawing on work in his book 'The Psychosis of Whiteness' this is a handy guide through the use of the words complete with many examples. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZkD-e-b6Iw - GUEST LINKS George the Poet https://www.georgethepoet.com/ George's book: Track Record Delving into the music scene and iconic films from his childhood, as well as crucial political and economic moments in history, this book provides the backstory of where we are today. Honest, thought-provoking, and passionate, Track Record is a ground-breaking memoir by one of the UK's most unique voices.https://afroribooks.co.uk/products/track-record-me-music-and-the-war-on-blackness-by-george-the-poet-published-25th-april-2024 Have You Heard George's Podcast? The award-winning and critically acclaimed podcast from George the Poet delivers a fresh take on inner-city life through a mix of storytelling, music, and fiction. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/p07915kd Downstream: The West is Poor, Africa is Rich w/ George The Poet https://www.tapesearch.com/episode/downstream-the-west-is-poor-africa-is-rich-w-george-the-poet/7SpXBeDiuocHoYSALAQ4NP - MIP LINKS CAP25 - Convention of Afrikan People - Gambia - May 17-19, 2025 On Malcolm X's 100th birthday, the Harambee Organisation of Black Unity is bringing together those in Afrika and the Diaspora who want to fulfill Malcolm's legacy and build a global organization for Black people. This is an open invitation to anyone. https://make-it-plain.org/convention-of-afrikan-people/ BUF - Black United Front Global directory of Black organizations. This will be hosted completely free of charge so if you run a Black organization please email the name, address, website, and contact info to mip@blackunity.org.uk to be listed. Policing terms like House Negro insults Black political thought "Terms like Coconut, House Negro, and Uncle Tom are not, and never were racial slurs. To view them as such is to fall down the rabbit hole of 'reverse racism'."https://make-it-plain.org/2021/02/19/policing-terms-like-house-negro-insults-black-political-thought/ From the growling wolf to the smiling fox "Malcolm already warned us of the dangers of running from the clutches of the wolf into the arms of the smiling fox." https://make-it-plain.org/2020/11/07/from-the-growling-wolf-to-the-smiling-fox/ - Guest: (IG)  (T) Host: @kehindeandrews (IG) @kehinde_andrews (T) Podcast team: @makeitplainorg @weylandmck @inhisownterms @farafinmuso Platform: www.make-it-plain.org (Blog) | www.youtube.com/@MakeItPlain1964 (YT) - If you need any help with your audio visit: https://weylandmck.com/

Rebekah Monroe - Religious Trauma ResearchMy guest today is Rebekah J. Monroe, who identifies as a white queer woman with lineage in the Osage and Cherokee Tribes. Rebekah goes by the pronouns are She/Her/They.Currently, Rebekah is a Clinical Psychology doctoral student, co-founder of the non-profit NARC-RT (which stands for North American Research Collective - Religious Trauma), and Vice Chair on the Reclamation Collective Board of Directors.Rebekah's research interests include sexuality, sex education, cultural hegemony in institutions, health equity, mental health, yoga therapy, and religious trauma with an intersectional Black feminist lens inspired by scholars like Patricia Hill Collins, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and bell hooks.Rebekah sees herself as a translational scholar making space in social sciences for people who are looking for navigation in healing from institutional harm and religious trauma. She envisions herself directing a research community center specializing in holistic care after finishing her graduate studies while working as a clinician part-time.  FIND REBEKAH:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rebekah-joy-monroe/ Co-founder of NARC-RT: www.narc-rt.org Vice Chair of Reclamation Collective Board of Directors Starting 2024: https://www.reclamationcollective.com/ Support this podcast by becoming a Member of the CORT YouTube channel When you Support this podcast by joining our YouTube membership (starting as low as $3/month) you'll get early access to all of our new content, access to badges and special chat emojis, and more. Every dollar helps, so sign up to be a member today by clicking "Join" under the video. Subscribe to the audio-only version here: https://www.divorcing-religion.com/religious-trauma-podcastFollow Janice and the Conference on Religious Trauma on Social Media: Mastodon: JaniceSelbie@mas.toThreads: Wisecounsellor@threads.netTwitter: https://twitter.com/divorcereligionTwitter: https://twitter.com/Wise_counsellorTwitter: https://twitter.com/ComeToCORTFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/DivorcingReligionTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@janiceselbieInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/wisecounsellor/The Divorcing Religion Podcast is for entertainment purposes only. If you need help with your mental health, please consult a qualified, secular, mental health clinician.Podcast by Porthosmedia.netSupport the Show.

PAGES the Reading Group presents Volume XXI: Use Her WordsTap in with us as we celebrate Women's History Month and amplify the voices of six remarkable women identifying authors who have shaped our literary landscape. In this special episode, we tap into powerful passages from the works of Hortense Spillers, Kim TallBear, Toni Morrison, Anika Simpson, Saidiya Hartman, and Patricia Hill Collins.From groundbreaking feminist theory to poignant narratives of resilience and identity, each author's words resonate with profound insight and depth.Join us as we honor the contributions of these visionary writers to literature and feminist discourse. Whether you're a seasoned bibliophile or new to their works, this episode holds a compelling exploration of women's voices that demand to be heard.Tune in to our Women's History Month special and immerse yourself in the perspectives that continue to shape our understanding of the world. Don't miss out on this episode of the PAGES Pod!#WomensHistoryMonth #WomenAuthors #LiteraryInspiration #FeministDiscourse #PagesPodMentioned this Episode:Volume XVI: On TimeVolume XX: Problems with LoveVolume III: Books and their First LinesMama's Baby, Papa's Maybe by Hortense SpillersThe Origin of Others by Toni MorrisonBlack Sexual Politics by Patricia Hill CollinsScenes of Subjection by Saidiya Hartman"Black Philosophy and the Erotic" by Anika SimpsonMaking Kin Not Population ed. by Follow us across our social media channels:Ig- @PagestrgTikTok- @PagesthereadinggroupWebsite- www.Pagestrg.com

How do we know what we know? What does it mean to ‘know' anyways? To unpack these age-old questions, we speak with design anthropologist Adèle Worsley.Adèle Worsley is a wanderlust driven design researcher and strategist guided by innate curiosity of the beliefs and dreams of others. In this conversation, Adèle shares some of her greatest learnings on epistemology – a long journey enabled by the great works of others – some of whose work is highlighted in the resource list below. Listen:* Prof Maggie Walter on Indigenous Statistics: Keynote Address – Professor Maggie Walter - YouTube* The Free Black University on Patricia Hill Collins' 'Black Feminist Thought' - The Free Black University (@freeblackuni) • Instagram photos and videosShort Read:* Pacinthe Mattar, The Walrus - 'Objectivity Is a Privilege Afforded to White Journalists'* Assoc. Prof Candis Callison, The Narwhal - 'Who tells the story of the present?'* Jara Dean-Coffey - 'What's Race Got to Do With It? Equity and Philanthropic Evaluation Practice.'* Dark Matter Laboratories 7GenCities: 7GenCities - Dark Matter (darkmatterlabs.org)Long Read:* Prof Patricia Hill Collins - Black Feminist Thought (1990 / 2022)* Minna Salami - Sensuous Knowledge (2020)* Prof Robin Wall Kimmerer - Braiding Sweetgrass (2013)* Prof Linda Tuhiwai Smith - Decolonizing Methodologies (1999)The Fuzz is hosted by Carolina Montilla and Joel FarissBrand design by Krista ReederProduction by Marco GamboaThe theme music was written by Ido MaimonTo learn more about The Fuzz, please visit our substack: thefuzz.substack.comTo learn more about Gensler, please visit Gensler.comThanks for listening. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thefuzz.substack.com

In this week's Black World News, Kehinde Andrews discusses the theme of Black Employment Month AKA Black History Month "Saluting Our Sisters," the past and present overlooking of Black Women, and the importance of the Black feminist standpoint in understanding the world better. For example, why we mobilize more around the public spectacle of anti-Black violence against predominantly Black men that leads to liberal reforms and why we need to also look at the private violence that predominantly affects Black women, such as deaths in childbirth. Focussing on both will lead to more radical solutions. - In this week's guest interview, Kehinde Andrews talks with Patricia Hill Collins about her new book “Lethal Intersections: Race, Gender, and Violence,” the appropriation of intersectionality and what it is and isn't, navigating her career in academia, the “public intellectual” and what it will take for Black people to be free. Patricia Hill Collins is a distinguished US professor emerita of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park, and the author of numerous award-winning books including her best-known and fundamental title "Black Feminist Thought" (originally published in 1990) and more (see below). She was the first ever elected Black female to be president of the American Sociological Association (ASA). This week Patricia was the winner of the very prestigious Berggruen Philosophy Prize, the first Black person to win this prize.  - Black women four times more likely to die in childbirthhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59248345 More black people jailed in England and Wales proportionally than in US https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/oct/11/black-prison-population-increase-england Feminist Icon Patricia Hill Collins Becomes First Black Winner Of $1 Million Berggruen Prize https://www.essence.com/news/patricia-hill-collins-berggruen-prize/ Black Feminist Thought Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowermenthttps://www.routledge.com/Black-Feminist-Thought-Knowledge-Consciousness-and-the-Politics-of-Empowerment/Collins/p/book/9780415964722 Intersectionality, 2nd Edition (General book) https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=intersectionality-2nd-edition--9781509539673 Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory https://www.dukeupress.edu/intersectionality-as-critical-social-theory Lethal Intersections: Race, Gender, and Violence (Intersectionalities original intent) https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=lethal-intersections-race-gender-and-violence--9781509553150 Marking Time: Art in the Age of Mass Incarceration https://markingtimeart.com/ Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought https://academic.oup.com/socpro/article/33/6/s14/1610242 Set the World on Fire Black Nationalist Women and the Global Struggle for Freedomhttps://www.pennpress.org/9780812224597/set-the-world-on-fire/ Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement A Radical Democratic Vision https://uncpress.org/book/9780807856161/ella-baker-and-the-black-freedom-movement/ The Revolution Has Come Black Power, Gender, and the Black Panther Party in Oaklandhttps://www.dukeupress.edu/the-revolution-has-come - Guest: Patricia Hill Collins Host: @kehindeandrews (IG) @kehinde_andrews (T) Podcast team: @makeitplainorg @weylandmck @inhisownterms @farafinmuso - KEHINDE ANDREWS EVENTS Unmasking Brilliance: Black British Voices in Media w/ 28th October Black British Book Festival, Southbank Centre https://www.southbankcentre.co.uk/whats-on/festivals-series/black-british-book-festival THE PSYCHOSIS OF WHITENESS Buy the Book:https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/316675/the-psychosis-of-whiteness-by-andrews-kehinde/9780241437476

Intersections - Laurie Taylor talks to world-renowned, Black feminist scholar, Patricia Hill Collins, Distinguished Professor Emerita of Sociology at the University of Maryland and author of a new study looking at how violence differentially affects people according to their sex, class, sexuality, nationality, and ethnicity. These invisible workings of overlapping power relations give rise to what she terms 'lethal intersections,' where the risk of death is much greater for some than others. Drawing on a rich tapestry of cases she asks us to think about what counts as violence today and what can be done about it. They're joined by Joyce Jiang, Senior Lecturer in Human Resource Management at the University of York, whose latest research examines abuses against female migrant domestic workers in the UK which include long working hours, harsh working conditions, but also verbal, physical and sexual abuses. Producer: Jayne Egerton

“Injustice it's not rooted in computing. It's been happening for hundreds of years and it's still being imposed through centuries in violence through colonialism.”“Before seeking new design solutions, we look for what is already working at the community level”. This is one of the 10 principles for design justice that Costanza-Chock presents in her keynote, which is essential listening for middle-class gender-normative designers. We might be blind to the burdens imparted on less privileged individuals, but if we think more about the implications our devices, interfaces and systems have on everyone, we can get far. That's the message that Costanza-Chock has for us.There's no one “best” approach to design problems – “I'm not looking for the systems to be less biased”, they say. Because we're living in an historical time where there's a slow sea-change taking place. The Design Justice book from 2020 presents concrete examples of how marginalised peoples are disproportionately burdened by existing systems and technologies. Designers, activists and developers alike can learn from and be inspired by the Design Justice Network to engage in liberating system design. Because the root of the issue is the structural inequality that reproduces this ‘matrix of domination', as Patricia Hill Collins defined it in Black Feminist Thought. There are huge interlocking systems of oppression (from capitalism to white supremacy) and design justice is a concrete framework for beginning to tackle these age-old issues.

We bring the story of black feminism up to the turn of the century with the incisive works of bell hooks and Patricia Hill Collins.

On this episode the 1ME crew talks tots and transformation with Zara Raven of Queenie's Crew! Queenie's Crew engages children in learning about building communities of care without prisons or policing. Every month, members receive an email with an activity that kids can complete to learn more about abolition: they share activities like coloring pages, word searches, word scrambles, mazes, and reflection exercises. Using readings and art projects, the collective supports children in imagining a collective future where we are all free. Coordinator Zara Raven talks about how young people understand abolition, the catharsis and growth the collective has created for parents and caregivers, and much more. Plus, a squad of youth participants read See You Soon, the picture book on which the experiment is based. SHOW NOTES See You Soon read by Queenie's Crew - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAfg9sT1fYw&t=73s The Zine - https://millionexperiments.com/zines/queenies-crew Learn more about Queenie's Crew - https://queeniescrew.com/ Buy See You Soon by Mariame Kaba, illustrated by Bianca Diaz - https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/1891-see-you-soon The Revolution Starts at Home ed. by Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, Ching-In Chen, & Jai Dulani - https://www.akpress.org/revolutionstartsathome.html Queenie's Crew Reading List - https://queeniescrew.com/resources Micah Bazant - https://www.micahbazant.com/ It's All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation by Patricia Hill Collins - https://www.jstor.org/stable/3810699 IN OUR OWN HANDS: ​tools for talking abolition & transformative justice with little ones by Rania El Mugammar - https://www.raniawrites.com/inourhands.html Building Your Abolitionist Toolbox - https://abolitionist.tools/ Keeley Schenwar Memorial Essay Prize - https://truthout.org/articles/keeley-schenwar-memorial-essay-prize/ Erin Miles Cloud - https://www.movementforfamilypower.org/indexa

On this episode the 1ME crew talks tots and transformation with Zara Raven of Queenie's Crew! Queenie's Crew engages children in learning about building communities of care without prisons or policing. Every month, members receive an email with an activity that kids can complete to learn more about abolition: they share activities like coloring pages, word searches, word scrambles, mazes, and reflection exercises. Using readings and art projects, the collective supports children in imagining a collective future where we are all free. Coordinator Zara Raven talks about how young people understand abolition, the catharsis and growth the collective has created for parents and caregivers, and much more. Plus, a squad of youth participants read See You Soon, the picture book on which the experiment is based. SHOW NOTES Learn more about Queenie's Crew - https://queeniescrew.com/ Buy See You Soon by Mariame Kaba, illustrated by Bianca Diaz - https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/1891-see-you-soon The Revolution Starts at Home ed. by Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, Ching-In Chen, & Jai Dulani - https://www.akpress.org/revolutionstartsathome.html Queenie's Crew Reading List - https://queeniescrew.com/resources Micah Bazant - https://www.micahbazant.com/ It's All in the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation by Patricia Hill Collins - https://www.jstor.org/stable/3810699 IN OUR OWN HANDS: ​tools for talking abolition & transformative justice with little ones by Rania El Mugammar - https://www.raniawrites.com/inourhands.html Building Your Abolitionist Toolbox - https://abolitionist.tools/ Keeley Schenwar Memorial Essay Prize - https://truthout.org/articles/keeley-schenwar-memorial-essay-prize/ Erin Miles Cloud - https://www.movementforfamilypower.org/indexa

We're honoring the queen of sociology, Dr. Patricia Hill Collins, on this last week of Women's History Month by going deep into higher level theory via Black Feminist Thought (BFT as we like to call it). We discuss the history of the Frankfurt school of thought and the genesis of Dr. Collins' own 'critical social theory.' Her theory is steeped in American culture, history, and law, as she works to understand the experiences of Black American women. From standpoint epistemology to matrix of domination, we'll break it all down for you so you'll be ready to learn more!

In this episode of the Rebirth of You Podcast you'll discover:Carol's Rebirth moment and the journey that followedSome of the unique and shared challenges women face at midlifeWhy we can't always know in the moment how an event will impact our lifeHow to deconstruct the patterns taught to us by society and cultureWhy it's important to take risks and follow your own path in spite of what others believe you should be doing with your life and live in your confidenceFeatured On the Show:Career Rebel Academy: https://bit.ly/3mZ7Mwm10-Minute Career Jumpstart for high-achieving women: https://bit.ly/10MinCareerJumpstart Author, Bell Hooks,: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_hooksAuthor, Patricia Hill Collins: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Hill_CollinsMovie: The Matrix, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_MatrixAbout Our GuestDr. Carol Parker Walsh is the founder of the Career Rebel AcademyTM for high-achieving women at midlife ready to overcome the self-doubts and limiting beliefs that keep them designing an epic career and life they love. She's an award-winning certified career and personal brand strategist, life and executive coach, a TEDx presenter, author, international keynote and member of Forbes Coaches Council and Newsweek's Expert Forum, and local career expert on AM Northwest Morning Show. Catalyzing transformational growth, confidence, and career/life alignment, Carol leverages her J.D. and Ph.D. and multiple certifications, along with her experience as an attorney, in executive leadership, and psychology and organizational systems to help 6-7 figure successful, driven female professionals and entrepreneurs amplify their visibility and do the meaningful work they're meant to do in the world without sacrificing their years of success, hard work, and income. Email me if you have a question or ideas for the podcast at coaching@duaneleckey.comRate, Review & Follow on Apple PodcastsThank you for listening,DuaneBe sure to follow me:Book a free consult at www.duaneleckey.com/consultWebsite: www.duaneleckey.comInstagram @duaneleckeycoachingFacebook @duaneleckeycoaching

C'est parti pour la Saison 2 de Comme un poisson dans l'eau ! Je suis ravi d'ouvrir cette nouvelle saison avec un entretien en deux parties avec l'écrivaine et sociologue Kaoutar Harchi. Elle a récemment publié dans la revue Ballast un très bel article intitulé "Les animaux avec nous, nous avec les animaux" dans lequel elle propose une approche intersectionnelle de l'animalité qui appelle à voir que l'animalisation concerne non seulement les autres animaux mais aussi des populations humaines, et est notamment un des ressorts du processus de racialisation négative. Elle défend donc l'idée d'un élargissement de l'antispécisme à la prise en compte des liens de co-production du spécisme avec d'autres formes de domination, liens qui peuvent certainement être envisagées de façon féconde par la perspective intersectionnelle. J'espère que vous trouverez cet entretien passionnant, et que vous aurez autant de plaisir à l'écouter que j'en ai eu à l'enregistrer ! ________________________________ Références et sources citées dans l'entretien : - L'article "Les animaux avec nous, nous avec les animaux" de Kaoutar Harchi dans la revue Ballast : https://www.revue-ballast.fr/les-animaux-avec-nous-nous-avec-les-animaux/ - L'écrivain Joseph Andras qui a notamment écrit Ainsi nous leur faisons la guerre - Les penseur et penseuse socialistes Élisée Reclus et Louise Michel - Aphro-ism - Aph Ko et Syl Ko - Le loup et le musulman - Ghassan Hage - Les penseuses des articulations entre spécisme et d'autres oppressions Myriam Bahaffou et Dalila Awada - Les penseuses de l'intersectionnalité : Kimberlé Crenshaw, Patricia Hill Collins, Angela Davis - Episode "Intersectionnalité, j'écris ton nom" du podcast féministe et intersectionnel Quoi de Meuf : https://soundcloud.com/nouvelles-ecoutes/quoi-de-meuf-112-intersectionnalite-jecris-ton-nom - Une écologie décoloniale - Malcom Ferdinand Ressources sur l'islamophobie : - Épisode "L'islamophobie : racisme institutionnel et locomotive du néofascisme" du podcast Minuit dans le siècle sur la plateforme Spectre : https://spectremedia.org/minuit-dans-le-siecle/ - Épisode "Islamophobie : un mot, des maux" du podcast Kiffe ta race de Binge audio : https://www.binge.audio/podcast/kiffetarace/islamophobie-un-mot-des-maux - Épisode "Islamophobie : l'expérience des converti·es comme révélateur" du podcast Contresons sur la plateforme Spectre : https://spectremedia.org/contresons/ ________________________________ SOUTENIR : https://linktr.ee/poissonpodcast Comme un poisson dans l'eau est un podcast indépendant et sans publicité : votre soutien est indispensable pour qu'il puisse continuer à exister. Merci d'avance ! Les comptes Instagram, Twitter, Facebook et Mastodon du podcast sont également à retrouver dans le link tree ! CRÉDITS Comme un poisson dans l'eau est un podcast indépendant créé et animé par Victor Duran-Le Peuch. Charte graphique : Ivan Ocaña Générique : Synthwave Vibe par Meydän Musique : Overthinking par RYYZN

Nickie alluded to and celebrates the works of: Patricia Hill Collins, Adrienne Marie Brown, and Gloria Anzaldua.  She urges you to check out Sonya Renee Taylor and The Ohm Center. Also Mona Chalabi,  Evergreen Data, University Innovation Alliance, and Harvard's Strategic Data Project.  Step Up on the web. On Insta: @stepupwomensnetwork. On TikTok: @stepupwomensnetwork Nickie's Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/nickie-acero-1427768 This episode is brought to you by our friends at Cookies and Carnitas who urge you to check out Mango Pickle. Dig our explorations of working lives? Please show your support at Patreon.Listen to the songs I composed and recorded about my conversations with artists on Season 7.Get in touch on Insta, Twitter, Facebook, or at podcastforaliving [at] gmail. Please hit that follow button and share the pod with your people.As always, special thanks to Liv Hunt for logo design.  Our theme song is Nile's Blues by Kevin MacLeod, licensed under Creative Commons by an Attribution 4.0 License. Be kind and stay healthy. Thank you for listening.  ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

In this episode, Andy gives a helpful sermon on what critical race theory is and what it means for us as Christians attempting to walk in harmony.    Sermon quotes used:   Voices on Critical Race Theory Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic: What do critical race theorists believe? Probably not every member would subscribe to every tenet set out in this book, but many would agree on the following propositions. First, that racism is ordinary, not aberrational...—“normal science,” the usual way society does business, the common, everyday experience of most people of color in this country. Second, most would agree that our system of white-over-color ascendancy serves important purposes, both psychic and material... Because racism advances the interests of both white elites (materially) and working-class people (psychically), large segments of society have little incentive to eradicate it... A third theme of critical race theory, the “social construction” thesis, holds that race and races are products of social thought and relations. Not objective, inherent, or fixed, they correspond to no biological or genetic reality; rather, races are categories that society invents, manipulates, or retires when convenient... A final element concerns the notion of a unique voice of color. Coexisting in somewhat uneasy tension with anti-essentialism, the voice-of-color thesis holds that because of their different histories and experiences with oppression, black, Indian, Asian, and Latino/a writers and thinkers may be able to communicate to their white counterparts matters that the whites are unlikely to know. Minority status, in other words, brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism. (Critical Race Theory - An Introduction. 6-9 Janel George: CRT is not a diversity and inclusion “training” but a practice of interrogating the role of race and racism in society that emerged in the legal academy and spread to other fields of scholarship. (Kimberlé) Crenshaw—who coined the term “CRT”—notes that CRT is not a noun, but a verb. It cannot be confined to a static and narrow definition but is considered to be an evolving and malleable practice. It critiques how the social construction of race and institutionalized racism perpetuate a racial caste system that relegates people of color to the bottom tiers. CRT also recognizes that race intersects with other identities, including sexuality, gender identity, and others. CRT recognizes that racism is not a bygone relic of the past. Instead, it acknowledges that the legacy of slavery, segregation, and the imposition of second- class citizenship on Black Americans and other people of color continue to permeate the social fabric of this nation. (https:// www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race- theory/) Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer on essential elements of Critical Theory: 1. Our identity as individuals is inseparable from our group identity and, in particular, whether we are members of a dominant, ‘oppressor' group or a subordinate, ‘oppressed' group. 2. Oppressor groups subjugate oppressed groups by dictating and maintaining society's norms, traditions, expectations, and ideologies. 3. Our fundamental moral duty as human beings is to work for the liberation of oppressed groups. 4. To these core commitments, critical theorists often add several corollaries: • Subjective, ‘lived experience' is more important than objective evidence and reason in understanding oppression. • Privileged groups promote their own agenda under the guise of objectivity. • Individuals who are part of more than one oppressed group experience ‘intersectionality;' their oppression is qualitatively distinct from the oppression of the separate groups to which they belong. https://freethinkingministries.com/critical-theory-christianity/ Samuel Kronen and Nate Hochman: (CRT's) core claims are that racism, whether overt or systemic, lies at the root of all racial disparities; that race and racism shape our political and personal lives; and that the dominant group in society – in this case whites – have a hidden psychological, political, and economic investment in maintaining their privilege at the expense of minorities. Some other principles include intersectionality, the idea that human beings are composed of a multitude of intersecting group identities, some of which are Andy Farmer 3 of 4 2022.05 Critical Race Theory and Covenant Fellowship Church considered victims and others oppressors; standpoint epistemology, the notion that our racial identity informs our worldview in ways that are less accessible to those of other backgrounds; and differential racialization, the attempt to grapple with the different ways that a group has been “racialized” at different times in history to the benefit of the majority culture. In essence, critical race theorists look at two indisputable facts – that the United States of America was historically racist and that racial gaps between whites and blacks persist – and then seek to unearth the connection between these two realities by deconstructing the complex interplay between privilege, identity, and structural oppression. The question is not whether these facts are related, but how they are related. (https://www.acton.org/religion-liberty/volume-33- number-1/critical-race-theory-un-american) Susan Stryker: “Because members of minority groups are, by definition, less common than members of majority groups, minorities often experience misunderstanding, prejudice, and discrimination. Society tends to be organized in ways that either deliberately or unintentionally favor the majority, and ignorance or misinformation about a less common way of being in the world can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and mischaracterizations. On top of that, society can actually privilege some kinds of people over other kinds of people, with the former benefiting from the exploitation of the latter: settlers benefited from the appropriation of indigenous lands, slaveholders benefited from the labor of the enslaved, men have benefited from the inequality of women. Violence, law, and custom hold these social hierarchies in place.” Transgender History: The Roots of Today's Revolution, 7-8. Susan Stryker. As quoted by Josh Blount, 11/21 Abby Ferber: Intersectional theories argue that race and gender are intertwined, and neither can be fully comprehended on its own. An intersectional approach sees race and gender as interacting and inseparable, and intertwined with other identity categories such as age, sexual identity, class, disability, etc.. Everyone plays a role in the dynamics of privilege and oppression and can work toward creating change in the ways that systems and institutions are organized to perpetuate inequality. It is only by adopting an intersectional approach, which examines the ways in which race, gender, and other systems of inequality interact and intersect, as part of what Patricia Hill Collins calls a matrix of privilege and oppression, that we can fully comprehend and work to develop successful strategies for combating any and all forms of oppression. (Whiteness Studies and the Erasure of Gender, 2007. P. 268, 280) Carl Trueman: Critical theory is today a diverse phenomenon that draws deeply and variously on strands of Marxist thought, psychoanalysis, feminist theory, postcolonialism, poststructuralism, queer theory, and deconstruction. It embraces a variety of such approaches and continues to develop its conceptual vocabulary and its range of political concerns. Yet at the core of the various approaches of critical theorists lies a relatively simple set of convictions: the world is to be divided up between those who have power and those who do not; the dominant Western narrative of truth is really an ideological construct designed to preserve the power structure of the status quo; and the goal of critical theory is therefore to destabilize this power structure by destabilizing the dominant narratives that are used to justify— to “naturalize”—it. (The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self (pp. 225-226)

In this episode, Eric Hsu and Louis Everuss have an introductory conversation about Patricia Hill Collins's work, Black Feminist Thought, which makes a notable contribution to standpoint theory. Through concepts like the' matrix of domination' and the 'interlocking nature of oppression', Collins sensitizes readers to the importance of considering other social variables, in addition to gender. Collins develops a theoretical framework to understand how various forms of oppression intersect and relate to one another in socially consequential ways.Our guest this week is Dr Frances Wyld, Lecturer in Aboriginal Studies in the Justice & Society Academic Unit at the University of South Australia (UniSA).Music and sound effects for this episode come from various sources and is licensed under the Creative Commons 0 License/the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 or is covered by a SFX (Multi-Use) License. Tracks include:https://freesound.org/people/Tuben/sounds/272044/https://freesound.org/people/komit.wav/sounds/402295/https://freesound.org/people/djlprojects/sounds/413641/https://freesound.org/people/Fupicat/sounds/607207/https://freesound.org/people/Walking.With.Microphones/sounds/259316/https://freesound.org/people/bevibeldesign/sounds/350428/https://freesound.org/people/plasterbrain/sounds/273159/https://freesound.org/people/JPMusic82/sounds/415511/The opinions expressed in the Sociology of Everything podcast are that of the hosts and/or guest speakers. They do not reflect the opinions of anyone else at UniSA or the institution at large.The Sociology of Everything podcast | www.sociologypodcast.com

Est-ce qu'il y a des points communs entre l'#espritcritique et le #feminisme ? C'est en partant de ces deux sujets d'intérêts que nous avons réalisé cette collaboration entre ÉPhiScience et Mécréantes.L'épisode au format vidéo sous titré c'est par iciSi le sujet vous intéresse, une grande table ronde sur les savoirs critiques à l'université aura lieu le 2 juillet 2022 de 10h à 20h. C'est organisé par les étudiants de La Sorbonne et c'est à Jussieu Amphi 25 (pas d'inscriptions requises)☕ SOURCES ET LIENS UTILES ☕- Catherine Vidal, Dorothée Benoit-Broeways, 2015, "Sexe, cerveau et pouvoir", Paris, Belin.- Sandra Harding, Charlie Brousseau, Thomas Crespo, Léa Védie, 2021, "Repenser l'épistémologie du positionnement: qu'est-ce que « l'objectivité forte » ?" Philosophie féministe : patriarcat, savoirs, justice (Traduction du texte d'Harding Sandra "Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is "Strong Objectivity?""), URL : https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/h.... - Donna Haraway, 2009, « Savoirs situés : la question de la science dans le féminisme et le privilège de la perspective partielle », dans "Des singes, des cyborgs et des femmes. La réinvention de la nature", Paris, Actes Sud.- Patricia Hill Collins,  2016, "La pensée féministe noire. Savoir, conscience et politique de l'empowerment", Montréal, Editions Remue-Ménage.- Bell Hooks, 2017, "De la marge au centre - théorie féministe", Paris, Cambourakis. ❗ PRÉCISION ❗7:50 : Les scientifiques adhèrent plus ou moins aux idéologies de leurs époques et contribuent à les nourrir, à leur donner un caractère scientifique. Si certaines représentations s'inscrivaient bien dans une idéologie politique, les scientifiques n'avaient en revanche pas toujours conscience de l'impact de leurs théories. De plus, l'exotisation des populations non occidentales était déjà très forte au 16ème siècle. On retrouve notamment ces représentations dans de célèbres écrits comme l'essai « Des cannibales » de Montaigne. En conséquence, ils étaient des héritiers de ces  imaginaires racistes mais aussi parti prenant.

No primeiro episódio de Conversas camaradas, recebemos Nubia Moreira e Thiago Amparo para uma conserva sobre o livro BEM MAIS QUE IDEIAS: a interseccionalidade como teoria social crítica, lançamento da socióloga estadunidense Patricia Hill Collins. Qual o lugar do livro na obra da autora? Como a interseccionalidade pode ser uma ferramenta de transformação da ordem social? Qual a relação entre interseccionalidade e justiça social? Essas e outras questões são debatidas pelos nossos convidados juntamente com Lígia Colares, da equipe de comunicação da editora Boitempo.

This is the first installment in our Black Women Voices IG Live Series, previously recorded 3/14/22 . I hope you enjoy. We apologize for any audio issues in advance! “ ‘People do not throw their geniuses away' and that ‘if they are thrown away, it is our duty as artists, scholars, and witnesses for the future to collect them again for the sake of our children… if necessary, bone by bone'” (Walker 1983,92) in Collins 2009,5) Black Feminist Thought The Black Women Voices: Reclaiming our Knowledge Series was sparked by this Alice Walker quote cited in Patricia Hill Collins' Black Feminist Thought. In this section of the book Collins details how the suppression of Black women's knowledge production is another tool of oppression. The act of suppression via: Exploitation of Black women's labor essential to US capitalism Political dimension of oppression has denied African American women the rights and privileges routinely extended to White males citizens Controlling images applied to Black women's She also details how the identity of being a Black woman creates an intersectional identity where the realities of sexism and racism are inextricably linked, which provides Black women with a very unique and powerful lens on the world, humanity and social injustice. In an act to counter the suppression of Black women voices, Black Women Voices: Reclaiming Our Knowledge is a series TNBC is starting to reclaim the knowledge of Black Women throughout time to both decolonize history and begin to curate our own collective history. Self, community, society Today we will embark on this journey by reclaiming the knowledge of Ms. Lauryn Hill.

These are the stories of leaders of color who carry the legacies of those who built the movement to end gender-based violence. They carry on the fighting spirit of giants who have moved on from this work like Sojourner Truth, Grace Lee Boggs, bell hooks, Ida B. Wells, Audre Lorde, and Yuri Kochiyama. We talk about the ways they have been harmed by this world while trying their hardest to keep their passion for the movement alive. Consider this our love letter to them and to aspiring leaders of color looking for belonging, inspiration, and affirmation.This series is supported by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). [This podcast tile uses modified images of: Alice Walker from The American Library Association, Angela Davis from Columbia GSAPP, Audre Lorde from Esla Dorfman, bell hooks from Alex Lozupone (Tduk), Grace Lee Boggs from Kyle McDonald, Ida B Wells: Public Domain, Patricia Hill Collins from Valter Campanato/Agência Brasil, Sojourner Truth: Public Domain, Yuri Kochiyama from Kochiyama family/UCLA Asian American Studies Center.]

In this episode Stephanie Shelton talks with Kiara Summerville, Erica Campbell, Krystal Flantroy, and Ashley Prowell about their experiences collaborating and co-authoring an article on Black Feminist thought in the field of Qualitative Inquiry. The episode raises important questions about representation, experience, and process in the doing and teaching of qualitative research. A transcript of the conversation follows.  Stephanie Shelton  00:10Right. Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations Podcast Series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group, the American Educational Research Association. I'm Stephanie Shelton, a guest host for this episode on collaboration and co-authorship. And I'm excited to be joined today by my brilliant co-authors of a wonderful article. Krystal Flantroy, Kiara Summerville, Erica Campbell and Ashley Nicole Prowell. And so Kiara, if we could just introduce yourselves maybe an author order. So Kiara, then Erica, then Krystal, then Ashley, and then we'll get started.Kiara Summerville  00:47Hi, everyone. I'm Kiara Summervile. Dr. Kiara Somerville, a recent graduate of the higher education administration program at the University of Alabama. I currently work in the Division of Student Life at the University of Alabama. And so certainly, a scholar practitioner in every sense of the word, and I am excited to be here with you all. Erica Campbell  01:08Hello, everybody. My name is Erica Campbell, and I am a PhD candidate in the higher education administration program at the University of Alabama. And I'm excited because I will be graduating in May, and I will be defending my dissertation this January. So I'm excited to be on the job market looking for faculty positions. And I here I am a scholar practitioners affairs professional, but I want to take that to the faculty route. So I'm excited to be here with you all today.Krystal Flantroy  01:38My name is Krystal Flantroy and I'm currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that I graduate in July. I too, am a scholar practitioner who has found her way back to a classroom teaching position. And so I'm back to teaching high school science, which is something I love and love to do. But we'll see how it all works out in the end.Ashley Prowell  02:02My name is Ashley Prowell, or Dr. Ashley Prowell. And I am also a recent graduate of the social work department, PhD program. I'm also on the job market hoping to enter the professoriate and continue to do research and teaching. So yeah, I'm glad we didn't have to, like run down our research topic, because I'm so tired of writing about it, talking about it with everybody. So Stephanie Shelton  02:37We're here today to talk about your article that was published in the qualitative research journal. And it is titled, Finding ourselves as Black Women in Euro-centric theory: Collaborative biography on learning qualitative inquiry. And so I wanted to start by asking if you could share how this project got started, what, what initiated the ideas that ultimately led to this article.Krystal Flantroy  02:59And as it turns out, this project got started in, it feels like a group chat, right? We were, we would have class and then we would all leave class and talk in the parking lot before we all went to our cars, that led to a group chat of where we got to talk about things that we didn't understand things that we just didn't relate to things that were confusing in the readings of the theory that we were reading in qual three, and it kind of flourished from there.Kiara Summerville  03:28Right? We, as Krystal mentioned, were, you know, talking about frustrations and confusion that went along with it, this qualitative course that we were taking. And, and we thought about it one day, I think we were actually in the classroom after class one day, and had this thought like, well, maybe we should write about this, right? We all have a lot of thoughts about this. And, um, you know about our experience in that classroom and understanding the material and working together to make the make the material make sense to each other, we leaned on each other heavily for that. So we told ourselves, Well, how about we just write about this? Right. And I know, we'll probably get to this in a little bit, but we thought, you know, Dr. Shelton, would be a wonderful person to talk to about these thoughts, and to see if we can get something going.Stephanie Shelton  04:19So that's a perfect transition. Um, so could you talk through how you started the process of co authoring this paper? What did that process look like? Ashley Prowell  04:27I mean, I want to say, I want to say it was just, you know, just it just happened pretty naturally. I mean, like Krystaltal said, it started out in a group chat. And we all had these same, you know, same thoughts about what was going on in the classroom. So, I mean, I don't know if you're talking about like the ordering of authorship and how that happened. But I think just in terms of us all, you know, being engaged in this topic and wanting to instead of just kind of, I guess, complaining about it or griping about it wanting to be productive and, and turn it into something creative and productive for academia. And I feel like, since we've written this paper, like, if you just scroll through academic Twitter, you'll see like, you know, a lot of people are talking about this similar ideas these days, and kind of this incorporation of black thought, or black, you know, ideas into, you know, our readings in the classroom and, and just being more inclusive overall and responsive to other cultures. So I feel like we were definitely at the forefront. I feel like we were at the forefront, maybe we weren't, but, but it definitely feels good. That, you know, we're seeing more people talk about this issue in doctoral programs, and just overall in higher education,Erica Campbell  06:01Right. And I will also add that one of the things that we did, too, because we knew that we had material to write about or to share our personal narratives, and what that looked like in the classroom, also believe that we went to you, Dr. Shelton, to be honest. And we said, you know, we have this idea, just to kind of really just dive in about what our, you know, black feminist thought is, and then also to really think about how we use that with qualitative research and qualitative, philosophical, philosophical understandings. And so you gave us the idea, in terms of the methodology to really just think about how we could use that as an opportunity to kind of collaborate when it comes to our narrative. And I know we'll get to that in a little bit a little bit later, I'm sure. But that's where kind of the idea got the wheels to kind of keep moving, that you know, what this this is qualitative research, what are narratives are, what our experiences are in that classroom, and you kind of gave us a wheel with the methodology with that.Ashley Prowell  07:07And I guess, you know, earlier on, I think we also had the conversation of, you know, or at least I know, I brought this up and shared it with the group, just this idea of choosing a white professor to to, to being engaged with our scholarship or this manuscript that we were writing. And I know, while Dr. Shelton tends to be very open, and, or is very open, and often probably even can relate to a lot of the issues that we we talked about in our paper, are some of them. I think we chose Dr. Shelton, because because of that, that openness. But I do think, you know, we did think about like, what would the paper: How would things look different if we engage with a, an African American or a black? Professor? And I do think there are implications for that? I think it could, would she have been involved in our group chat? Or, you know, how would that have changed things in terms of our findings, and how we engage with the content throughout the course semester? So I think that is something that, you know, we should, I don't know, if you want to talk, share your own thoughts about that. But I know that's something that we brought up earlier on.Krystal Flantroy  08:27But I also think that we were, we were a bit treading lightly as we began, because we also were still in a class with a professor, whose course we were really critiquing for something that we thought was missing, that was something essential. And so it felt like, Are we really gonna write about this? Because the truly enough mean, we've all been taught by her are sitting in her course. And it's like, how do we know Levy, this, this heavy critique of the course that we've been in without feeling weird about it? So that was another thing. Stephanie Shelton  09:03So you've brought up some of these? The next question is really looking at like some of the challenges. And and so I think that these are definitely some that are really important. And I'm glad that, Ashley, you initiated some of these concerns, because very important, and thinking about like collaboratively writing, and then trying to go through this publication process, because I feel like a lot of times for graduate students publication seems like more of like an abstract concept. That's sort of reality. And so what were some of the challenges of the collaborative writing and the publication process when you're working through this article?Kiara Summerville  09:34I don't know that the when we actually started writing together and in sharing our mirrors with each other, that wasn't necessarily tough for me. I think on the front end, we had to learn the methodology. And that was something that we had to kind of sit with because I think even with the methodology and you know, the philosophers and we were attributing citing in our methodology for themselves, white men, right. And so we talked about how, you know, we were critiquing this use of using white philosophers in these courses. But we are in fact using them for this type of work, we talked about how we are turning it on its head, right? To make it work for us, which is really the the nature of the whole paper, the theme of the whole paper making, making, what we were learning in that class, make it make sense to us. So I think learning the methodology at first was something that we had to had to understand, but the actual writing of the narrative seems to come quite naturally. For me, um, ladies, I'm not sure how you all felt about that. Erica Campbell  10:43And I will say that it actually became natural for me, because we had been in that class and really was in that space of really sitting with our thoughts about those white philosophers. In that course, I really felt like, you know, this was my opportunity to really get that off my chest in a writing format, right. But then also, because we were doing it in a collaborative matter, I think what really helped me to was that, okay, I'm not the only person that's talking about this, right. So, you know, often as a black woman, you know, you we feel good in numbers, we feel good having that sisterhood support. And I think knowing that we were collaborating, and right, but also writing our own narratives, at the same time made me feel empowered to just say what I needed to say, and just express myself, because I knew there were other women who would be doing the same thing. And so that really empowered me, it felt very natural for myself.Ashley Prowell  11:39And I think we brought this up in the paper, too, is just this idea of like, earlier on, like, hold on, are we missing something like just trying to think back through before, you know, before you, you know, you write about something or talk about something you want to make sure you have, I think that naturally, like have the facts. Right. So, so just thinking through the course, and, and I guess, also in a way of not to be offensive towards towards the qualitative program that we were taking these courses in, and just just really thinking about, you know, you know, if we, if if there was something that we didn't grasp, or something that we miss throughout the course. And I think like Erica was saying, like other people are, you know, once we realized, collectively that we have these shared thoughts and that other people are also talking about this, I think that helped us feel better about moving forward with with writing about it.Krystal Flantroy  12:41I just wanted to add, when we went to our first like, we we put up conference paper, like, I can't remember which one it is. And, ICQI, right? And so we go and we do our presentation, and we're sitting in this room of people, and like people were enlightened and move by it, and it was like, wait, y'all, I think we got we got some, and like, we left there. We we knew we felt better, like people came up and talk to us after our presentation. I was like, oh, okay, this is it. Alright. So it that I think that part of it, like putting in conference presentations, I think ICQI and AERA, um, you know, made a world of difference, because what it said was, is that scholars in Rome want to hear what we had to say about this particular topic, which may moving the work forward a little bit easier. You weren't as the trepidation wasn't there anymore. It was like, Okay, this is something we can talk about that we need to talk about. Stephanie Shelton  13:48So Erica,and Krystal kind of alluded to this, but I wanted to ask if you had anything else you wanted to add? What were some of the high points are the advantages of collaboratively writing, collaborative collaboratively writing, and a collaborative publishing process? Ashley Prowell  14:03I think, I guess just piggybacking off of what we just talked about was just this idea of, okay. This is something, you know, kind of new for us and that we're, you know, this is our first time writing about something like this, but being able to kind of figure it out through our collaborative narrative and responding to each other and going back and forth. With that process. I think that was something interesting and just kind of kind of figuring it out as we went, you know, I thought that was cool.Krystal Flantroy  14:39I think here said this earlier, and it there's power in numbers, right? And having people to work with and having people to bounce ideas off of and having people that have maybe more experiences or publishing because we were all in different parts of our journey at that point, and so We are, you know, it was it made the experience a lot easier. But it also made it tougher, right? Because you're working with four different people with four or five, five different people with five different schedules,Stephanie Shelton  15:12I think it might be worth you you talking a little bit going back a little bit to the to some of the challenges. If I recall correctly, some of the ways that you all wrote the paper was you initially, you divvied up sections you did the you did the narratives collaboratively throughout, but then you divvied up other sections, but then there had to be a process where the paper became unified. And so I don't know if you want to talk about that or not. But I think that that was definitely a very interesting part of the process, that it can be used for other people to hear about.Erica Campbell  15:44So that's a good point. Um, one thing that we did, so after, like, Kiara, I mentioned earlier, we had to really learn, and, and really understand this methodology, right. So that's always key and important before you, you know, put yourself out there to try and do it. And of course, you know, you either learn through the process, and of course, you learn after the process. I mean, that's part of qualitative research, and what we are, you know, tasked to do, and good researchers. But one thing that we did first is we decided that we would divvy up our narratives. And so one person will write their own personal narratives, each person wrote a personal narrative, right? But then we decided that we would go back, and then respond to each person's narratives. And so in each person's there, there's a might be a thought that Ashley said or thought they crossed or keyed, or said, and then I might interrupt with my communication or a thought of like, yes, like we you said, you were in class. And maybe you didn't understand this, this philosopher, I will respond by saying something like, You know what, I didn't understand that either, right. And so it kind of created not just only our own narratives to be able to get that narrative on paper, but it allowed us to, for lack of a better word, to interrupt each other, and kind of have a conversation back and forth through our written narrative. And so we did that using a Google Drive. And from there is where we use that just to move forward in our analysis. Kiara Summerville  17:22And I think when it came time to piece the paper together, it's not really a challenge, it wasn't a challenge, I don't think we leaned on each other's strengths, to kind of understand, you know, kind of what sections of the paper so for instance, I had had some previous experience with the conceptual framework, right? So it was, you know, easy for me to feel like I could step up and say, Okay, y'all, I feel like I can write this conceptual framework. I, you know, Eric knows, I joke about this a lot, I feel like I do really well with time things with a bow and concluding. So I'm happy to conclude as well. And then, you know, we talked about who was focused on the literature review, and who would focus on, um, you know, our data and creating themes from our narratives. And so that part, you know, it's really nice to lean on each other's strengths. And that way to piece the paper together.Ashley Prowell  18:15Yeah. And I think we were all at different points in our, you know, of course, in our PhD journey, so, you know, especially when it came to authorship, you know, I knew for myself, at least, that I was kind of in the bulk of my dissertation, and then I wouldn't have a ton of time to commit to the final pieces of the manuscripts. So, of course, second to last author. And I think other people may have, you know, chosen their authorship similarly, so, yeah. But, you know, in terms of we tried to be fair, there were there were multiple opportunities that came out of that paper, like, we were saying, conference presentations. So, we, I think we each had opportunities to kind of lead those projects along the way while we were at different points. So for ICQI I was at a easier time in my, in my PhD journey. So I I did get a chance to lead that a little bit. In terms of like, submitting the proposal for ICQI and everything Stephanie Shelton  19:28And I think Krystal did a she did it. You did AERA, you led that proposal. Krystal Flantroy  19:34Yea but it was canceled, thanks to COVID. So there was a lot of work for I won't say for no reason. But yeah, for no reason. Erica Campbell  19:46And I think that speaks to us feeling like you know, we can take this on the road and we can really make this a worthwhile project. So you know, even though AERA was cancelled because the COVID and it was 2020 when we got except it is still helped us to make us feel like you know what this project is worth while. And this is something that we should definitely even though, you know, hell was breaking loose in the country in the world, we feel felt like this. This research still needed to go forward. And I'm glad that we continue to push towards wrapping this paper.Stephanie Shelton  20:24So many grad students are likely to listen to this podcast. And so in channeling a graduate student perspective, which for some of you is current for others of you, it's in the rearview mirror, but not too long ago. And channeling a graduate student perspective, what was the publishing process like? And what do you wish that you known beforehand that you know, now,Krystal Flantroy  20:42I wish I had known that those jokes about reviewer number two, are actually really serious, not just imagined. There's such extremes on what reviewers want out of your paper. And oh, I do remember what I wanted to say the unifying part of the paper, Dr. Shelton really helped with our language, that was whatever I want to say, and helping it all pull together. So it was concise and consistent, even though we all have different words and different styles of writing. But yes, reviewer number two, that is exactly the truth. I, when I looked at our reviews for the paper, it was like one person was like, Okay, here's these few things and somebody else, like, I think you should look at this, this and this from these people, I think you guys missed it. Kiara Summerville  21:28And then not even being able to find some of their suggestions. Like it was really hard because maybe our institution didn't have access to it, and then having to figure out if we were going to include it or not. And if we didn't include it, how to word that in the letter back to the editors, or their reviewers. How to say, you know, thank you, but nothing.Stephanie Shelton  21:53Yeah, my advice for that is just in overall publishing experiences, just like trying to respond to everything and making it seem like, you know, I'm, I'm so grateful for this feedback. And but or however, you know, that's the way to approach it. But you know, trying your best to still address each and every comment as much as possible. But if it's not in line with what you're you're trying to do, or your goal or aims for the for your work, then, you know, saying that, and being honest, honest about that,Erica Campbell  22:32honestly, I think we were really blessed. We had Dr. Shelton, the great Dr. Shelton, on our team. And so because you were on our team, as we thank you all the time, it really helped us walk through that publication process. So I've been a part of some publications in my past experience prior to this research, but really have an understanding of how everything breaks down how you respond to the journal, how you respond to each of their, you know, suggested edits, that was something that was really eye opening for me, because now because we did that, and because she walked us through that process, so that we can understand that I feel more confident. Just just putting in other other manuscripts that other journals, you know, it just made me really see the process from start to finish, and not just kind of a small portion of the process. And so I'm thankful for that. But also it really, if we had to tell graduate students what to do, find a coach, find a mentor, find someone who will help you walk through that process, because that kind of takes a lot of strain and stress off of the manuscript writing and journal process. And so that was very helpful for me, and I'm sure my colleagues will say the same.Ashley Prowell  23:46And I would say to just being on the job market, right now, you I'm starting to realize what a valuable experience this was. And not that either of us were, you know, being aggressive about you know, collaboration, we have to collaborate, I think this for us, thankfully, it happened very, very naturally. And I think that is something to cherish, whether it happens in your PhD Career or later on in your, your, your later on in your career. But you'll find, I think when applying to jobs and kind of thinking through your entire journey, that experiences like this are really are really useful because you will be required to collaborate interdisciplinary. And for me, I'm in the Social Work program, and I think most of my these co authors are these gals here are in education. So I think that's that's a that was a great experience. And I think it's something that just shared Being honest and sharing your thoughts about course experience or things that are going on in your own research, or your own research area of interest, sharing that with others, Dr. Shelton, sharing that with others, and just kind of seeing where that where that takes you rather than, you know, making it a point to, you know, collaborate just just kind of surrounding yourself with people who have shared interests. And I think it'll just happen naturally. Stephanie Shelton  25:31I do want to accentuate because of some of the things that you all have said, I want to make it really clear to anyone who would listen to the podcast that you all did the work, you all respond as the reviewers, you will do the revisions. Because I don't want to give anyone the misguided impression that like I was in charge of anything, or I took over y'all did the work. And so I want to make sure that relative to Eric has note about, you know, find yourself a mentor, I think that's a really great piece of advice for any graduate students, or even early career faculty, but making sure that you find someone who helps you to understand how to do it and helps a highlight you not someone who jumps in and takes credit for what it is that you're planning on doing. Because that, that's that's not what happened. These women, these brilliant scholars did, did this work. This article is theirs,Kiara Summerville  26:24Dr. Shelton, I'm thinking about how you helped us kind of understand the landscape of qualitative research journals and where this might fit best, and timelines. And, you know, I'm thinking along those lines when Erica said, you know, coach and mentor to help us understand, you know, the scope of what we were working with in terms of submitting to a journal, and what that looked like, and keeping us on a timeline or schedule or, you know, if we fell off encouraging us to hop back on that timeline, that was very, very helpful for us.Krystal Flantroy  27:05I do want to speak to the publishing process, and here brought this up, I think that there are a multitude of journals in which you can publish and being able to select a journal that is interested in your topic, and will find your topic relevant, I think that will be a struggle for every graduate student, like cuz, you know, you're supposed to try to shoot for like, top tier journals. But as a graduate student, you're like, Okay, I'm not really sure which journals I should shoot for. And having Dr. Shelton help us with that. And a realistic timeline, right? Like, we wanted to turn our paper around in, you know, six months to a year, not 18 months, depending on the journal as we go back and forth, and back and forth. And so that was something I didn't realize, in the process of writing and publishing, that, like where you publish can determine how often your published, you know, the turn around the editors, what they like, if you're you fit like all of those things matter. And so like the mentoring on that was amazing.Stephanie Shelton  28:11Well, because you're all gifted and talented. You've answered multiple questions that I haven't asked yet. So thanks for being amazing in that way. If you could, if you could rewind time, and do this entire process all over again, what might you do differently?Erica Campbell  28:26You know, I'm one of those people that's like, I have no regrets. And the reason why I have no regrets right now, when it comes to this project is because was my first time doing a collaborative article with majority of my peers and colleagues, and of course, was your assistant, Dr. Shelton, but then also, just because I feel like you don't learn until you just do something. Right. So that's kind of how you learn the good things. Like we were saying, you know, the good things of how to pick a journal article How to really dive into a methodology that you have never done before, how to, you know, just just collaborate and really share the work and and just do that effectively and share your part. I think those are areas that I would have not learned if we didn't do this project overall. So I will say, No regrets. I don't have anything that I would change. I know, we were in the midst of COVID. If we can change the world, we would change COVID happening, because that did affect us finishing our paper, like we wanted to finish it earlier. But because of COVID I think that kind of just shook up our timeline a lot. And so I think that was something that I will say, if we had control over the world, I will make a change to other than that. I really enjoyed this process afterwards. Kiara Summerville  29:47Yeah, I think the pause that we all took when you ask that question, Dr. Shelton is a testament to you know, I don't know that I have any regrets either. You know about the process. And I learned a lot. And even, you know, I wrote another book chapter after this one and Erica's a co author on that book chapter with me. And we use the same method, right. And so to be able to go to our co authors on on this call and just say, you know, we've done this, this is what we learned from this paper that we did, you know, prior to this was helpful, very, very helpful.Ashley Prowell  30:26Yeah, I think it's, I think going into it just knowing like, it's not, it's not going to always be perfect. And, and I know, whether you're working with a group or by yourself and publishing, you know, putting your work out there, it's, it's pretty scary. And as soon as, you know, you get that email saying that your, your paper has been published, you know, for me, I get this, like, deep sense of fear, like, oh, my gosh, people are gonna be reading now. Like, they're gonna think I'm so stupid, but just know, going into it. And knowing that, you can always return to the same issue and improve upon it and build upon it and continue doing the work in that way. I think that's something that graduate students should definitely keep in mind. And it's qualitative research, you know, you it's so flexible, you can, you can do that. SoKrystal Flantroy  31:19I think, um, with Erica, if I were to rewind time, I would probably just change the circumstances under which like our publication kind of happen, but you can't like change worldwide. I mean, she can't really predict a pandemic. But I also think that like, the things that I walk away learning from this is like, you can work with different people in different fields. Because when you're doing that, like you are using all of the knowledge, like all of us are in different fields, right? I'm in education, like for like secondary curriculum and instruction. And then we got Erica here, when higher education actually was in social work. Like, we collectively all felt the same way about the course that we were in. And so it was interdisciplinary. And it wasn't really about one person or another. It's like, this is the project that I would have never thought that I would have that we would have stumbled upon just from a group chat. Right. And so I think the rewind is, is like, if we could just rewind back in time, I probably would love to go back and be actually able to capture some of those conversations that we were having in a parking lot. Remember how you're having these conversations, you're going back and forth, you're talking about these particular articles. And like, I do remember one day I read are going three times I have no idea what's going on. Like, I came because like Y'all, I read it three times I've got it's like words on paper, it didn't make sense. But it's like, for me, the rewind would be to look at that as like data, right? Like if we could go back and just collect, like capture some of those, like intimate moments that were just what we thought were just conversations. And if we could capture that, though, probably the only thing that I would change, like, I want those, that raw interaction that we had, initially.Stephanie Shelton  33:11y'all have answered tons of questions that I've asked, and so what questions might you have for me?Erica Campbell  33:18How did you enjoy this process working with us Dr Shelter? How did you enjoy working with students of yours who, you know, really appreciate and are thankful for your mentorship and coaching in this process. Ashley Prowell  33:32And to sorry, could to piggyback on that to add to that, like, how, like being in in it and kind of disrupting it. So you are a part of the professor within the qualitative department. So being in it, and also kind of helping to disrupt at the same time, if you can talk a little bit about that. Stephanie Shelton  33:52Yeah, I think that's those are both really good questions. So I mean, for me, it was, it was it this is gonna sound really cliche, but I don't mean it that way. It was genuinely an honor. It was very touching to me, that you came to me and asked if I would help you support to help support you and moving forward? The answer was, of course, I will, you know, let's, let's figure out how to do it. But it also was scary. Because to go back to Ashley's point, I'm very aware of the fact that like, I'm a white person, um, and I do not have the perspective that you are describing, I do not, I do not know, the experiences, that that needed to be a core part of this paper. And so, working to be very deliberate about making sure that you were always in charge. That, you know, my role was never to take over, because that was already the problem, right? Like that was already wrong. That that white people were silencing black women that white people were, you know, a pervasive voice in qualitative research and so to not duplicate the very problem that was being critiqued. And then in terms of like your right, the article was Typically about the program that I teach in this article changed the way that I teach and a lot of different ways I became much more deliberate about making sure that the experience is the experiences that you describe, like didn't happen again, if I could help it. Um, and and I use your article in the class, students the semester read your article. But we also we, we've implemented like specific pedagogical frameworks that the students are aware of the students read with me, that are specifically targeted at rejecting the status quo rejecting these these Eurocentric white centric norms. And really taking the field of qualitative research to task about the ways that it's duplicated, the very oppressions that it sometimes pretends to critique. And so this process, it was helpful for me, just because I felt like there was an ordinate amount of trust in me helping to guide this process and mentor you. But it was also it was important for me professionally and scholastically, as well, because it's changed a lot of the way that I think about things because it's, I'm never so arrogant as to believe that I know everything. But it was a very explicit moment where the process that you were going through forced me to also actively interrogate the ways that I was potentially contributing to the very things that were being described. And so making sure that I was disrupting that as much as I was able to as well.Kiara Summerville  36:31And I appreciate Dr. Shelton, you amplifying our voices in your class, you know, I had multiple folks in that class you taught reach out afterwards, we read your paper in class. We even vote in tweeted about it, you know, as being hands on, and he read our paper. So I appreciate you, you including that in in your course, this paper in your course. And I'm using it as a tool to help your your students learn or think critically about the pedagogy in qualitative research and really, you know, any field that those students will will go on to, to work with.Stephanie Shelton  37:16I appreciate you all producing scholarship that that to be something that can make supposedly addressed.Krystal Flantroy  37:23I do you have a question. So you worked with us because we basically, were like, hey, we want to write this paper. Do you think in the future that you could see yourself collaborating with students more like maybe a project if, like how you've included us into your curriculum and to your pedagogy in your course, like maybe having a group project where they do something collaborative, and then they see something coming out of it doing this again, with another set of students possibly.Stephanie Shelton  37:53So I write the students a lot. Anybody who looks at my CV, there's there's a little symbol that I use to designate whenever the students I wrote soon as a lot. But the answer your question is, yes, I actually because this is an AERA Qualitative, Sig podcast. Boden and I are actually involved in an AERA grant project right now, that is a group of qualitative students. And we anticipate there being multiple collaborative writing projects that come out of that. And it's not that I've never done what you all propose doing ever before. But I do think that the process with us helped to refine and reflect on that process, to continue to make sure that what's happening is useful and helpful to graduate students. Because it's really easy, the stakes are different for y'all than they are for faculty, right? Like, I mean, like, Ashley, you talked about the very beginning when you introduce yourself, like I'm on the job market. And, and so the stakes are different, the calculus is different. And so making sure that what's happening is useful to y'all. And not just you being a means to an end for a faculty member. All right, to wind up my my favorite question, as you all know, what else would you like to share with graduate students, faculty or other listeners,Kiara Summerville  39:10I would say, go forward. If you have a project in mind, may use group in mind or just have been pondering on some things, when you're in the classroom or in your graduate student experience or even as a faculty, right? Go forward, you know, try to put it out there, think about how that can really influence higher education and push our field forward. Don't Don't be afraid to step out and try it. Don't be afraid to ask your colleagues if this is something that you think is worthwhile, and to go for it. And then also, like we said earlier, definitely seek out mentorship, seek out coaching, if you don't know how to kind of make those steps. In terms of manuscript writing, don't feel free to ask someone I know. It's like a fear that many of us kind of can, you know can overcome us as we're graduate students and kind of feel like we don't want to bother our faculty members. And we don't really want to ask questions, but feel free to do that, you know, get out of your comfort zone, ask those questions, you know, ask for coaching, ask for mentorship, but you never know what beautiful piece may come from that. So that's some of the advice that I would give. I think,Ashley Prowell  40:19I think in terms of collaboration, just also, you know, I think people tend to be afraid to work in groups, sometimes it just depends on your personality. Some people like would rather work alone, and some people actually enjoy working with groups. But if you're, you know, afraid of that, just being I think for us, it was a little bit easier because we were all friends and but just so being honest about kind of where we were at in our journey and what we had time for and okay, I can take on this and I can't you know, just so just being honest and upfront about that. And I think that tends to help the the process go smoother. Kiara Summerville  41:02In our paper we talk about we side Patricia Hill Collins in one of her 1986 essays, and we talked about how we use our marginality as an excitement to creativity. And so my thoughts for anyone, students, faculty, other listeners is, you know, what the four of us we could have just continued on about our way and maybe continue to complain, maybe, I don't know what we would have done if we wouldn't have done this paper. But we could have just went on finish that class that semester just kept going in our journeys, but we decided, like Ashley said earlier to use our thoughts in a scholarly way and that helped us write get a publication, but it helped us to you know, streamline our thoughts and, and even thinking about this conversation is helping us to give back to qualitative research in the field of education and, um, you know, really, academia, you know, all the things giving back by nature of sharing our experience and feeling like we were not getting in that class and having to use, you know, our marginality as an excitement to creativity to this creative work that we've put out into the world. So that would be my advice to listeners is to think about what he'll Collins said, and I'm using that marginality to, for to be creative with it, and help yourself to also helping others which in a lot of ways is kind of the foundation of black feminist epistemology in the first place, creating a gateway to entryway for all for all folks by nature of you know, our own position as black women.Krystal Flantroy  42:44And I just want to challenge graduate students, faculty, and other people who are listening to be the changemakers, right? Be the people that disrupt the normal pedagogical policies that we see in qualitative inquiry, right? You don't have to cover the people in the book, you can go out and research and dig deep, and try to diversify what it is that you have been doing. And what it is you have been learning about. If you have a thought in your head, it might be a theorist that already said it thought it up and go research that person, go follow that person, go use that person, scholarships and hope propel yourself forward. And so I just want to challenge people to think outside the box and dig deep and help your students to dig deep beyond what's on the surface or beyond what's Eurocentric and what's been normalized for us. SoAshley Prowell  43:44Yeah, I think it's a testament to Collins theory is like disrupting and kind of her outside or within theory, just disrupting and beat navigating the system, but also being able to disrupt it at the same time. So I feel like that's what we did with our paper. I feel like that's what Dr. Shelton was doing by helping us. So. Yeah. Stephanie Shelton  44:10Alright, so Dr. Kiara Somerville, and the future Dr. Erica Campbell, and the future of Dr. Kystal Flantroy and Dr. Ashley Prowell. Thank you very much for joining us today for qualitative conversations. 

Mike Isaacson: I don't know if my brain is gay, but it definitely fucks. [Theme song] Nazi SS UFOsLizards wearing human clothesHinduism's secret codesThese are nazi lies Race and IQ are in genesWarfare keeps the nation cleanWhiteness is an AIDS vaccineThese are nazi lies Hollow earth, white genocideMuslim's rampant femicideShooting suspects named Sam HydeHiter lived and no Jews died Army, navy, and the copsSecret service, special opsThey protect us, not sweatshopsThese are nazi lies Mike: Welcome back to another episode of The Nazi Lies Podcast. Subscribe to our Patreon to get on The Nazi Lies Podcast Discord where we host our new book club. More at the end of the show. Anyway. with us today is Dr. Rebecca Jordan-Young, a science studies scholar and professor at Barnard College. Her book, Brain Storm: The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences, is a critical exploration of brain organization theory and its conclusions about the differences in so-called male and female brains. Thanks for joining us, Dr. Jordan-Young. Rebecca Jordan-Young: Thanks for having me. Mike: So, I want to begin with the question you ask at the end of your book to kind of foreground our conversation. So at the end of your book you ask, “What good is a science that doesn't tell us anything new?” So before we get into the science of brain gender, how should science be conducted and why? Rebecca: That's a great question. I believe that the best science comes out of curiosity. An example of what that does for you- I mean, scientific curiosity means that you're studying things that are– you're genuinely pursuing questions that you don't already think that you understand. You want to know more and understand it. You're not just trying to prove a point that you already knew, because that's a whole different form of, you know, argumentation and evidence. So I was certainly taught, and I think all scientists are taught this, not everybody follows it, but I was taught that you have to test a specific hypothesis – what you think is true about the world. But every time you have your hypothesis, you have to have something called the null hypothesis. And a null hypothesis is the direct contradiction of your hypothesis. And when you set up a scientific experiment, you need to give both your hypothesis and the null hypothesis an equal chance of being supported by the evidence that you collect. What that means is, you have to be very clear. Ahead of time, you have to actually say, "Okay, here's my null hypothesis. When I'm collecting my data, am I already loading the dice in a way that there's no way I could collect the evidence that that might be true?" So you're obligated to not set yourself up to just already be right all the time, you have to build in the possibility of real surprise and even disappointment. And that's really tricky. You know, there's a lot riding on being correct with your hunches and moving forward. But you have to– Good science means that you build in an equal chance that you're going to get disappointed. I'll just also say that, you know, if everybody doing work in an area shares many of the same assumptions, it can be very hard to come up with a good null hypothesis, and that's something that I think you see in brain organisation theory. So sometimes it takes people coming from outside the usual crowd. It might mean people that aren't all trained by the same people or at the same institutions; it might mean somebody who has some different training than what everybody who's been doing the work does, so you bring in the influence of a different discipline. And that's one reason why diversifying science can be so useful by shaking up assumptions, and then there's a better chance that that's going to happen. Mike: Yeah, and Patricia Hill Collins talks about that in “Learning from the Outsider Within,” I think. Right? Rebecca: Exactly. Mike: So, most of our listeners, and probably most people in general, have never heard of brain organization theory, but in all likelihood they take its conclusions as Science with a capital S. So before we get into the myths of sex differences, what is brain organization theory? Rebecca: Brain organisation theory is an idea that got traction in the middle of the 20th century. And the idea is very simply that there is such a thing as a male brain and a female brain and that, in fact, not just that there is but (and here's the clue to why the science has been problematic) that the theory says there must be such thing as a male brain and a female brain because we're a species that reproduces heterosexually. And if you have male genitalia and female genitalia, you have to have a male brain and a female brain to know how to use them properly to reproduce, and by 'know how to use them properly', that begins to, you know, like mushrooms into this huge explosive set of even quite abstract social behaviours. So the idea, generally, is that this must be the case. And then a lot of the studies are like, "Okay, how is that the case? What specifically is different? How do we know that?" The theory supports some very, very common stereotypes and assumptions, like “women are more oriented to people and not very good with technical systems or mechanics,” that “men are naturally risk takers and women are more cautious,” that “men don't do domestic work because they're naturally less interested in it than women are,” instead of, because of a combination of gender socialisation, gender expectations, and social power. I mean, typically, the people that do repetitive grunt work are the people with less social power. So a lot of the broad patterns that we see in male and female behaviour, brain organisation theory says that is because of something innate and inherent inside of people, inside the different brains of men and women, and not because of history and social power and the great force of multiple cultures over millennia. Mike: Right. The big point I that I took away from the book was that it had to do a lot with prenatal hormones, right? Rebecca: Oh, so sorry. [laughs] I'm sorry. It's been so long since I was like thinking in the nitty-gritty, absolutely. So the way it's supposed to work mechanistically is this. With brain organisation theory, the idea is that same process of hormone exposures that shapes that genitalia, also shapes brains so that they go in two binary, you know, incommensurable directions. So in particular, the idea is that testosterone, if a developing fetus is exposed at key periods in growth to a certain level of testosterone, that they're going to develop a male-typical brain, and they're going to have this whole range of male typical traits. Whereas the idea is that the female or feminine direction of brain development is just the default. It's literally described as the passive development, which from a strictly biological point of view, is an oxymoron. There's no such thing as passive development. So that's the idea. Early hormone exposures make concrete, physical structural changes in the brain and those changes in the brain create permanent patterns of behaviour, of desires, of skills, that either properly belong to males or to females. Mike: Okay. And like I said before, it's kind of treated as just science, there's this not really any-- when it comes to pop culture, there's not really much in the way of questioning its conclusions. So what kind of brain organisation theory do people generally believe? Rebecca: Some of the conclusions are, you know, I said some of this earlier; the notion that-- here's some really big ones that I didn't mention. The idea that women have greater verbal abilities and facility. That the ability to use words and communicate is going to be naturally more developed in women, whereas mathematical and mechanical skills are going to be better in men and boys. The idea that being oriented towards physical prowess is a masculine thing. Even some things that are maybe not held as such broad stereotypes, things like the idea that men are more visual or the idea of sex being something that men and boys naturally want much more whereas women and girls are less driven by our own desires, but are much more receptive and that that's just natural and normal to be less autonomous in our sexuality. Another very clear and deep assumption that's really at the heart of all of this is that heterosexuality is the natural normal proper channel of sexual desire and that if somebody isn't both completely gender typical, fitting expectations and norms of gender, and strictly heterosexual, that something went awry at some point. There was something unusual in brain development. And you can say 'unusual' now, some years ago they would have said 'pathological', but the idea that heterosexuality is the normal path is also very much at the heart of this. Mike: I want to actually get into more of that with the kind of the assumptions that are built into it. What are some of the other assumptions that are kind of peeking around the corner? Rebecca: The assumptions, first of all, I hinted at this when we started and I said that the theory came out of really a conclusion that male and female brains must be different, there must be these two types of brains. And that is attached also to an assumption that gender norms and patterns are both binary, that it's kind of a package deal of sex, meaning the body, gender, meaning the ways that people fit into masculinity and femininity, and sexuality, who people want as partners, how they partner, what their sexual and reproductive lives look like. So this idea also that gender norms and patterns, what counts as masculine or feminine behaviour or traits are universal. They're roughly similar across place and time. So, you know, this flies very much in the face of actual historical evidence, which we could talk about if you want, but that's the assumption. Another assumption is that brains are more or less dimorphic, there's a male type, a female type. If you know somebody's gender, you can predict a lot about their skills, their aptitudes, their preferences. That's also absolutely contrary to the data that we have, but that's one of the big assumptions. A third one, you know, this is not just a theory, it's like a whole area of assumptions. Some of the assumptions are about deep history, like early human evolution. The idea that at the dawn of human history, the typical core social form was a heterosexual nuclear family with a division of labour that looks like Victorian England or 1950s US. You know? [Mike laughs] Again, it's not just fantastical, it's contrary to so much of the always-emerging evidence from the archaeological record about how humans actually lived. So there you go, it's not just a gender binary, but it's heterosexual at its core. And those assumptions are, you know, it's kind of like putting the blinders on and not allowing in evidence from other fields. And by other fields, I mean history, archaeology... so even, as I'm saying, even other fields of science. Mike: Okay, so you've studied all of the over 300 brain organization theory articles spanning the first four decades of its existence before it exploded into popularity and then a sizeable chunk of the studies since then. Rebecca: Right. Mike: Can you tell us what a typical brain organization theory-driven study looks like? Rebecca: Yeah, there are a couple of different forms. The most common forms include, they're kind of two groupings. One is studies that start with some group of people that are known to have unusual hormone exposures during their early development. These are people typically with a range of clinical conditions. Earlier, some of those studies tended to be of people whose mothers were given synthetic steroids during pregnancy before some of the risks of giving steroids during pregnancy were understood, so they had these unusual hormone exposures. But others are people who let's say they have an adrenal condition that causes them to make very high levels of so-called androgens, hormones that create physically masculinizing traits as one example. And so if there is a genetic or chromosomal female, so an XX fetus, that gets very high levels of testosterone in early development with a condition, there's a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, those women and girls with that have been studied just over and over and over again as one group. So again, it's like one whole group. Another subset of those are girls and women whose mothers took Diethylstilbestrol, which is actually a synthetic estrogen, but because hormones in fact are not binary, this synthetic oestrogen has some properties in animal studies where they've decided that actually it's what they would call masculinizing. There have been studies to look at people with early Diethylstilbestrol exposures. A second whole group of study, instead of looking at people who were known to have unusual hormone exposures, there are people who are, we could say atypical-- not fitting stereotypes of sex, gender, sexuality in their adult life-- and looking backwards in time to say, "Can we figure out any way that there's other evidence that these people with unusual gender or unusual sexuality also had unusual prenatal hormone exposures?" So those studies typically take, let's say, gay men and compare to straight men and look at the length of their fingers, you know, to say, "Okay, there is some evidence from animals that suggests that the relative length of one finger versus another is affected by steroids in development. Do these two groups that are different on sexuality also have these physical patterns?" I mean, they've looked at so many different aspects of the body. [laughs] There are brain organization studies that compared straight men and gay men on genital size and development. There have been lots of studies that look at lesbians and straight women and, for example, test them to see, "Do they have a difference in spatial ability across the two groups?" So what you can probably pick up immediately if you're listening to this is that all of these studies, you couldn't really control the variables a whole lot. These are studies that are not tightly controlled experiments, because you can't actually do tightly controlled experiments on this theory in human beings. I hope that gives you some sense. I mean, the studies are kind of all over the place, but I've given you a sense of the two main kinds. Mike: Yeah, I know. There was the case control studies and the– Rebecca: Right. Right. Just to be clear, the case control, those are the studies that basically look at the groups that have what these people would call an unusual outcome. So gay people versus straight people, or trans people versus cisgender people. Those would be case control, where you have this outcome and you look backwards in time to see is there any evidence that they had a different, you know, input early in development? And the other kind of study, we would call a cohort study, where you know that there's one group that has an atypical input, different hormones than is typical early in development, and then you follow them over time and compare them to people who presumably had typical hormones? Mike: Before we continue, you kind of mentioned this. You've been calling what we typically call sex hormones, “steroids.” Can you talk about a little why you don't call them sex hormones? Rebecca: Yeah, thank you for asking that. This is something I've worked on a lot, and I want to give a little, you know, hat tip to a couple of other people. I'm want to give a hat tip to, certainly, Anne Fausto-Sterling and also to Nelly Oudshoorn, who's a Dutch historian. The reason I don't call them sex hormones is that that idea of sex hormones actually was out there way before we knew anything at all about the actual substances, and that idea of sex hormones has really kind of deformed the knowledge that we have about what steroids are and how they operate in the body. So this idea that there's such a thing as male hormones and female hormones, there's so much inaccuracy connected to that. First of all, all of us have the same exact hormones. We have them in different typical ratios, so there are very substantial average differences in what are typically thought of as sex hormones. Average females and average males have different ratios. But it's a real mistake to think, for example, that "Well, estrogen is the female sex hormone." In fact, estrogen is crucial for so many male typical functions as well as for functions that are just human and that have nothing to do with sex and reproduction. The same thing is true of testosterone. Testosterone is crucial for bone density and muscle development. And testosterone and estrogen work together in both of those things. It doesn't make any sense to think of muscle tone as a male typical trait because without functional muscle tone, nobody could stand up, nobody could walk, we couldn't use our hands and arms or legs. So it's like these are species-typical traits that we need these steroids for. And there's a lot of individual variation, a lot of variation within and among males and females on all of them. When we think of them as sex hormones, I think it distorts what we can know about them. I'm going to give you a really good example. One of my favourite examples is in the 1970s, this group at Rockefeller University led by a scientist named Bruce McEwen was studying rats, and they were studying what they thought of as male typical reproductive behaviour. So you know, mounting and so on. But they were also studying physical development, like the development of male genital and reproductive tract. And around that time, they were understanding the way that steroids actually chemically transform in the body. So there's a process called steroidogenesis, where one steroid meets an enzyme and it turns into something else. And they understood that estrogen is produced when testosterone meets this enzyme, aromatase. So you can say that estrogen is a product of testosterone. Well, they wondered what would happen if you blocked that conversion of testosterone to estrogen? How would that affect the physical development and behaviour in these rats? And what they found out was, if they blocked the testosterone from turning into estrogen, many of the male typical traits never appeared. What that means is that many so-called male typical traits actually develop under the direct influence of estrogen. That's just one tiny tip of the iceberg but once you start down that path, then you begin to realise that calling estrogen the female sex hormone, makes no sense whatsoever because they just don't divide in that way. Likewise, I'll stop with this one, but another one of my favourite facts to undermine the idea of sex hormones is when you ask people, "What's the most abundant steroid hormone in women's bodies?" What do you think the usual answer is? Mike: Probably estrogen, right? Rebecca: Right. Do you know what the real answer is? Mike: Not sure, actually. Rebecca: Testosterone. Mike: Really? Rebecca: This confuses people. It throws them for a loop. They think I can't be right, but in fact, it is the truth. It is also true that men on average have way more testosterone than women do. But women actually have more circulating testosterone than we have estrogen. So by what logic would you call estrogen the female sex hormone, right? It's because you already decided ahead of time that the whole thing must be split into some kind of binary system, and it must be understood through the logic of everything getting assigned to male/female. It actually just doesn't work that way. Testosterone and oestrogen are really crucial for all of us. There are big average differences, but it's not helpful to split it up by male and female. So the reason I don't use that language is that it actually actively blocks curiosity. It blocks that thing that I said is crucial for good science, and there are many cases where not being able to absorb that evidence has actually slowed us down in scientific progress. Mike: So back to the book, you talk about symmetry as a necessary condition for scientific veracity. And when we say symmetry, we're talking about the correspondence between what these studies claim and various other things. And so you talk about symmetry at three levels: symmetry between a given study's measurements and the abstract thing it's describing; symmetry between a given study and other studies that are similar; and then symmetry between a given study's use of terminology and how terms are commonly understood. We'll talk about how the studies you researched measured up, but first why are these kinds of symmetries important? Rebecca: Well, think about it this way. I mean, it's really about making sure that you're comparing apples to apples when you're building up the whole scientific field. So let's say that I'm doing a study, and I say that I'm interested in sexual orientation. But then what I do is I go out and I observe all the people on a city street over the course of a week, and I write down the people that look gay to me versus the people that don't. And I watch, you know, what stores they go into. And then I draw assumptions about where the gay people shop and when straight people shop. Anybody could come along and say, "Hey, wait a minute. How do I know that you actually know who's gay and who's not? And on what basis are you judging who's gay or who's not?" Obviously, how I look at people is a very poor measure of something like sexual orientation. That's a really good blunt description of how some of the studies go off the rails on the first measure. And they're not quite that bad, but some of them come pretty darn close when it comes to not really measuring what they say they're measuring. For example, I might say that we're looking at, you know, we're comparing gay men to straight men, but we actually never asked the people that we called straight what their sexual orientation was. All we did was gathered one group of men who we didn't ask but we thought that they looked and seemed "normal" based on some reason-- quote, normal in air quotes there-- and then we compared them to this group of men who we decided were gay. Well, that's a terrible measure. That's why that matters. Another, when I say the studies "the same thing" should be looking at the same kind of outcomes, one of the best examples of that is how studies that make conclusions about how female typical or more stereotypically feminine sexuality develops, really made an incredible flip flop in the middle of when these studies were done on what counted as typical feminine forms of sexuality. One of the most amazing examples is that in the early studies, if a woman reported that she masturbated literally ever, she would be coded as having masculinized sexuality. Or if a woman said, like in an interview– These studies, a lot of them did clinical interviews and then they coded them after the fact. So in a clinical interview if somebody asked about a woman's sexual arousal, and she actually described the way her own body, the way her own genitals felt and responded, that would be coded as masculine. Because the idea at that point was that women's sexuality was much more about romance and love and it was much less directed towards, you know, genital contact and activity. Well fast forward to 20 years later, and if a woman said that she didn't have genital arousal, she would be coded as having undeveloped feminine response. And so she would be taken out of that group. You can't put those studies together and then say they're all measuring the same thing and feminine sexuality. And with the last symmetry principle, a good example of that where the question is: if I say that I'm studying sexual orientation, or I'm studying homosexuality and heterosexuality and how they develop, what I'm looking at should bear some relationship to the way we understand those terms out in common parlance in the world. But some of the studies use these very strange, very selective, very narrow measures of who gets in those groups in a way that just is misleading in the long run. So people might read about a study that says, you know, that gay men have this feminised digit ratio. But then when you go in, and you figure out who they said was gay in those studies, you're like, "Oh, actually, that's really not who we think of when we're talking about that and when people are, you know, say organising for their rights in the world, they're just trying to go about their lives." So there's a lot of responsibility when you're doing this kind of work to make sure that, among other things, to make sure that if you're studying something where the categories have enormous social importance, you should be defining that in a way that has some relevance to the real world. Mike: Yeah. And just like kind of where to draw the line too. I mean, you gave a diagram in your book where you had the Kinsey scale and showed a study basically dividing between straight and gay at every point on the scale. Rebecca: Yeah, exactly. One of the things I say in the book is, you know, Kinsey scale is actually not an answer. It doesn't give you a set of answers. It's a series of questions about, you know, like on a scale of zero to seven or zero to six, how much you are attracted to or have sexual contact or relationships with people of your same sex versus the other sex. And there's no– Kinsey– Kinsey was against the idea of dividing people into binary groups. So he didn't give some kind of cut point where over here, you're gay, over here, you're straight. And different people doing this research have chosen every single place along that line. So in some studies, you have to be 100%, attracted only to people of your own gender or sex and only ever had sex with people of your own gender or sex, or otherwise you don't count as gay. And in some other studies, it's completely the opposite. As long as you've ever had sex or thought about even fantasised about someone of your same sex one time, you will not be counted as straight. You might be counted, even in some of those studies, as homosexual or gay instead of being bisexual. So there's just no standard in there and obviously, if you put all those studies into the same mix, it's incoherent. You can't do that. Mike: Right. And so generally, how do the studies measure up in terms of symmetry? Rebecca: Well, [laughs] from what I've said so far, you should have a pretty good idea. It's a pretty big hot mess. One of the things that I thought of, at one point when writing the book, is people are right, there is a ton of data out there. And there are a ton of so-called positive findings, like they're all these correlations. But if you were to try to actually build a structure out of it, where everything solidly built on something that was a proper foundation to the next thing, you couldn't possibly build a structure, what you get is a giant pile of rubble. You get this big meaningless data pile that actually contradicts itself as much as it supports itself. Mike: So back to those common brain organization theory conclusions people believe, why are those conclusions at least questionable if not flatly wrong? Rebecca: Well, for one thing, they're contradicted by more consistent data that we have from other places. So for example, the idea that girls and women naturally, because of deep evolutionary pressures that have shaped our early hormone exposures and therefore shape our brains in a certain way, that we naturally have poorer mathematic ability than males cannot hold up when you look at the actual mathematical ability of males and females and you look in particular at cross cultural studies that show there are plenty of places or plenty of subgroups where girls and women outperform boys and men on quite a few mathematic measures. If you look at the way that the typical American sex difference in mathematics performance has shrunk basically to nothing over the past 40 years, where it was pretty substantial, but it's changed a lot. Some people still talk about, you know, things like there are certain forms of spatial relations, like this skill called 3D mental rotation and how that's still very different between males and females. Actually, again, that depends on what group you're testing. There are some subgroups where that's absolutely not the case, but there's no reason to think that subgroups of men and women have these different inputs. Another thing is that with like 3D mental rotation, very, very short training on something like a target video game can actually eliminate the sex difference. And if that is the case, then you can't really claim that there is this permanent, underlying, innate sex difference. It's much more plausible that the observed differences that we see come from different experiences in postnatal development. So things like the way young children are handled and touched and the way they're encouraged to move in the world. Things like sports involvement. Things like encouraging games that involve throwing the ball, for example, with boys. There is a lot of evidence both from neuroscience and from cross cultural research that has stronger and more consistent findings than the brain organization findings do. And I could go on with many, many other examples. The second category of data and reason why I would say, aside from just the fact that studies look really messy and they don't actually point in the same direction, we kind of shouldn't expect them to point in the same direction. If you look, as I mentioned before, about history and archaeology, with brain organization theory the idea is like, the sexual drive is innately a masculine thing, and girls and women are receptive to that, but they're not driven by sexual desire, they're driven by a desire for offspring. So this has been a very common Western assumption for a long time. But if you actually back away from that assumption as being just true, and you think, who is that supposed to apply to? And you look at the way norms and belief, whether it's showing up in science or in literature and poetry, for one thing, you'll see that that's always only been the norm for bourgeois white women, you know upper middle class white men. That's the expectation of being asexual, and the idea that somehow working class women, women of color, etc, were sexual in a way that upper class white women weren't. That should clue you in [laughs] that there is something wrong with that theory that it's not about some kind of evolutionary-driven innate process. Then if you just want to stick with like, European mythology, you go back to the early modern period. And the idea was that women were sexually insatiable and that men had a much greater ability to control themselves because of greater rationality. And so it was like the sexually voracious appetite of women was something to look out for. So the point here is, if you actually pay attention to history, pay attention to cross cultural analysis, or just class analysis or look at scientific racism and typical just cultural racism to see where the norms are, how they're limited, who they attached to, who they don't, both the science falls apart and the story falls apart. [laughs] And that's a lot to fall apart. Mike: So returning again to the question you ask at the end of your book, “What good is a science that doesn't teach us anything new?” What direction has research on these topics–prenatal hormones, sex and gender differences, studies of queer populations– What directions has this research gone, and where do you think it still can go? Rebecca: Well, to be honest, there are other people that could answer this question better because I got bored with brain organization theory. And it just it keeps on churning out. There's a lot of reason for that. I think there's a lot of investment in the theory, quite literally monetary investment. People's whole careers, their labs, they've trained people in it, you know? There's a lot of reason to keep doing this. But there's also a lot of social investment in the idea of binary indifference. There's a way in which studies that are moving on in this track haven't kept my close attention. Plus it generates at such a rate, you know, I would have to spend my entire life and career if I wanted to stay on top of that. So all of that's kind of a caveat. At the same time, I do know a few trends. One trend is to try to kind of salvage the theory by complicating it and saying, "Okay, well, maybe it's not just testosterone exposure per se that creates this trait, but it's testosterone exposure under this condition with also either high cortisol or low cortisol or something." I mean, that's often true of other forms of studies that look at the effect of steroid hormones on adult behaviour. And that's kind of where a lot of this research has gone, there isn't as much focus on the prenatal hormone stuff as there used to be for a lot of reasons. But there is still a kind of relentlessness to this. At the same time, there are a lot of really interesting young scientists coming up who are saying, "Okay, brain organization theory is not where it's at. Let's instead start thinking about, you know, what do we actually know?" One more promising direction where some research on hormones and behaviour has gone is-- A great example is the researcher Sarah van Anders, a psychologist up in Canada, who has a really interesting project that is genuinely not binary. She is actually interested in doing a few things. One of the most interesting things is to not assume that traits or people should be all just split up into male and female all the time. She is coming up with more interesting measures of how people describe themselves, how they describe the actions that they do. And then, she's also looking at hormones in a way that is more accurate in terms of what we empirically have seen specific hormones' effects to be. As an example, she is working very hard at breaking down the assumption that testosterone is a masculine molecule. And she's looking at the kinds of effects that testosterone has been associated with, in a way that doesn't attach them to maleness or masculinity at the outset. And one example is, you know, forms of aggression and protection. So if you think about the idea, one of the constant underlying ideas, that males are more aggressive and males across the animal kingdom is this idea: males are more aggressive. But there's also this other piece of empirical evidence that one of the most consistent, if not the most consistent, situation in which you're going to see a strong physical aggressive response, is when the offspring of a female animal is threatened. So in fact, there is this really, really strong pattern of physical aggressive response. And so she's trying to, for example, think about the idea that aggression is all one thing, break it instead into defence and attack. And also that nurturing or parenting is all one thing, like in those cases, at this point, you can't take nurturing or take parenting behaviour and oppose it to aggression, because here they're deeply coupled. So she's doing this really interesting theoretical work that's driving the way that she is, in my opinion, a lot careful with the actual measures that she uses. So that, to me, is one of the most promising directions out there. There are other promising directions but I think that's probably enough. Mike: Well, Dr. Jordan-Young, thank you so much for coming on The Nazi Lies Podcast to talk to us about the science of sex differences. The book again is Brain Storm out from Harvard University Press. Thanks again. Rebecca: Thank you so much. Mike: If you liked what you heard and want to support The Nazi Lies Podcast, consider becoming a Patreon subscriber. Patrons get access to early episodes, access to our Discord, and a shipment of Nazi Lies merch. Join us on Discord for our weekly book club where we read the books of our upcoming guests. Get access to the show's calendar, updates on the topics we're looking to cover, and I dunno, what else do you do on Discord? Come hang out, and who knows? I may even ask your question on the show. [Theme song]

Note: This episode was originally featured in the Fundamental Shift feed on November 24, 2020.Grace and James reflect on the history of Columbus Day and Thanksgiving as we continue our focus on Decolonization.Trying out an Indigenous recipe this season?If you decolonize your table this Thanksgiving, be sure to share it with us on social media using the hashtag #FSPFocus!Whose land am I on???To find out which Indigenous nation once lived on the land you now occupy, check out NativeLand.ca; text your zip code or city/state to (907) 312-5085 or to LandAcknowledgement on Messenger; or download the NativeLand app for iOS or Android to search by location.Recommended Resources from AnaYelsi:1. Anything from Kimberlé Crenshaw and her Theory of Intersectionality for those working to understand multiple forms of oppression and oppressive systems. Begin with her 2016 TED talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality2. Anything from Patricia Hill Collins for the same aforementioned reasons3. Gloria Anzaldúa's Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza for those feeling like they have a foot straddling two worlds4. Robin Wall Kimmerer's Braiding Sweetgrass for those that are in the process of better understanding our relationship to the earth, plants, animals...5. NAIITS - An Indigenous Learning Community for those that are Christian practitionersAlso referenced in this series:Processes of Decolonization (Poka Laenui, aka Hayden F. Burgess)Be sure to subscribe, rate, and review us on Apple Podcasts and/or your preferred podcasting platform! It helps new listeners find us more easily. Also leave comments on our social media pages, email us, text us, and leave us voicemails with your questions and comments. We want to hear from you!Interact with Fundamental Shift on:Web | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube | 704.665.7473Music by '86 Aerostar

We go deep into higher level theory with Black Feminist Thought (BFT as we like to call it) as presented by the one and only Dr. Patricia Hill Collins. We discuss the history of the Frankfurt school of thought and the genesis of Dr. Collins' own 'critical social theory.' Her theory is steeped in American culture, history, and law, as she works to understand the experiences of Black American women. From standpoint epistemology to matrix of domination, we'll break it all down for you so you'll be ready to learn more!

NOTE: This episode originally played in the Fundamental Shift feed on November 17, 2020.It's Colonization Season in America! The U.S. recently observed Indigenous Peoples' Day, a.k.a. Columbus Day, and Thanksgiving is around the corner. This week, special guest AnaYelsi Velasco-Sanchez sits down with James to talk about the importance of Decolonization.Recommended Resources from AnaYelsi:1. Anything from Kimberlé Crenshaw and her Theory of Intersectionality for those working to understand multiple forms of oppression and oppressive systems. Begin with her 2016 TED talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality2. Anything from Patricia Hill Collins for the same aforementioned reasons3. Gloria Anzaldúa's Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza for those feeling like they have a foot straddling two worlds4. Robin Wall Kimmerer's Braiding Sweetgrass for those that are in the process of better understanding our relationship to the earth, plants, animals...5. NAIITS - An Indigenous Learning Community for those that are Christian practitionersAlso referenced in this episode:Processes of Decolonization (Poka Laenui, aka Hayden F. Burgess)Be sure to subscribe, rate, and review us on Apple Podcasts and/or your preferred podcasting platform! It helps new listeners find us more easily. Also leave comments on our social media pages, email us, text us, and leave us voicemails with your questions and comments. We want to hear from you!Interact with Fundamental Shift on:Web | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube | 704.665.7473Music by '86 Aerostar

Eva gets into Adrienne Rich's 1976 book "Of Woman Born" and talks about radical feminist approaches to motherhood. We discuss the narrow definition of Rich's "mother" figure, Black feminist responses to her concepts, and the Texas abortion ban. Plus, a rundown on the censored Judith Butler interview in the Guardian. *Content warning*: This episode contains discussion of abortion, infanticide, and mental health struggle. Cover image painting by Chantal Joffe, 2004 Reading List: Judith Butler Interview with Jules Gleeson https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/sep/07/judith-butler-interview-gender; The portion of the Interview that was deleted by The Guardian https://www.patreon.com/posts/55912898 Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, Adrienne Rich, 1976 https://archive.org/details/ofwomanbornmothe00rich/page/n7/mode/2up From Motherhood to Mothering: The Legacy of Adrienne Rich's Of Woman Born, edited by Andrea O'Reilly, 2004 https://www.scribd.com/document/336903061/Andrea-O-Reilly-From-Motherhood-to-Mothering-Th-BookZZ-org The Meaning of Motherhood in Black Culture and Black Mother-Daughter Relationships, Patricia Hill Collins, 1987 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1300131753?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true Motherhood Reconceived: Feminism and the Legacies of the Sixties, Lauri Umansky, 1996 https://www.google.com/books/edition/Motherhood_Reconceived/_7IUCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0

Eva gets into Adrienne Rich's 1976 book "Of Woman Born" and talks about radical feminist approaches to motherhood. We discuss the narrow definition of Rich's "mother" figure, Black feminist responses to her concepts, and the Texas abortion ban. Plus, a rundown on the censored Judith Butler interview in the Guardian. *Content warning*: This episode contains discussion of abortion, infanticide, and mental health struggle. Cover image painting by Chantal Joffe, 2004 Reading List: Judith Butler Interview with Jules Gleeson https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/sep/07/judith-butler-interview-gender; The portion of the Interview that was deleted by The Guardian https://www.patreon.com/posts/55912898 Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, Adrienne Rich, 1976 https://archive.org/details/ofwomanbornmothe00rich/page/n7/mode/2up From Motherhood to Mothering: The Legacy of Adrienne Rich's Of Woman Born, edited by Andrea O'Reilly, 2004 https://www.scribd.com/document/336903061/Andrea-O-Reilly-From-Motherhood-to-Mothering-Th-BookZZ-org The Meaning of Motherhood in Black Culture and Black Mother-Daughter Relationships, Patricia Hill Collins, 1987 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1300131753?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true Motherhood Reconceived: Feminism and the Legacies of the Sixties, Lauri Umansky, 1996 https://www.google.com/books/edition/Motherhood_Reconceived/_7IUCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0

Essa é versão em podcast da sexta aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo e reproduzido pelo Grifa. Neste encontro, a psicóloga e mestranda em psicologia pela Universidade Federal do Alagoas Evilânia Santos, coordenadora do núcleo da Assembleia Nacional da Articulação de Psicólogas(os) Negras(os) e Pesquisadoras(es), apresenta o pensamento de bell hooks, com mediação de Camilla Dias, produtora de conteúdo no @camillaeseuslivros, mediadora do Leia Mulheres Santo André, e cocriadora do projeto Leituras Decoloniais. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc. Assine a newsletter do Grifa: https://bit.ly/GRIFAnews Apoie o Grifa: https://apoia.se/grifapodcast Segue o PIX: grifapodcast@gmail.com

Pastor Chris continued his comparison of philosophies and movements of our present day with Scripture. In this sermon, we look at a component of Critical Theory called Intersectionality and examine its definitions of wisdom and knowledge. Along the way we also looked at the metanarrative that Intersectionality offers in comparison to the big story of God.

Essa é versão em podcast da quinta aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo e reproduzido pelo Grifa. Neste encontro, a professora e pesquisadora Núbia Regina Moreira, doutora em Sociologia e professora da Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia, apresenta o pensamento de Patricia Hill Collins, com mediação de Eliane Oliveira, mestra em Ciências Sociais e pesquisadora de Questões Raciais e de Gênero pelo Núcleo de Estudos Interdisciplinares Afro-brasileiros, ciberativista negra e criadora da página Preta e Acadêmica. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc. Assine a newsletter do Grifa pra ficar por dentro de todo o conteúdo produzido: https://bit.ly/GRIFAnews

Essa é versão em podcast da quarta aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo. Neste encontro, a escritora antiproibicionista e antipunitivista Juliana Borges apresenta o pensamento de Michelle Alexander, com mediação da escritora, artista e podcaster do Lado Black Luiza Braga. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc. Assine a newsletter do Grifa pra ficar por dentro de todo o conteúdo produzido: https://bit.ly/GRIFAnews

In episode 27 of Overthink, Ellie and David speak with feminist philosopher and author Dr. Amelia Hruby about fat feminism, intersectionality, alternatives to the male gaze, and her project #selfiesforselflove. Before the interview, Ellie and David discuss their issues with the "body positivity" movement using phenomenology, and suggest why Sonya Renee Taylor's account of radical self-love is a better alternative. The episode closes with a deep dive into the racist history of the thin ideal using the work of Sabrina Strings.Works discussed:Sabrina Strings, Fearing the Black BodyVirgie Tovar, You Have the Right to Remain FatSonya Renee Taylor, The Body is Not an ApologyAlexandra Sastre, "Towards a radical body positive: Reading the online 'body positive movement'"Amelia Hruby, Fifty Feminist MantrasMaurice Merleau-Ponty, The Phenomenology of PerceptionKimberlé Crenshaw, "Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color"Patricia Hill Collins, "Controlling Images"John Berger, Ways of SeeingWebsite | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail |  Dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcast

New parents often worry about attachment to their baby - will I be able to build it? My baby cries a lot - does that mean that we aren't attached? If I put my baby in daycare, will they get attached to the daycare staff rather than to me? Based on the ideas about attachment that have been circulated over the years, these are entirely valid concerns. But it turns out that not only should we not worry about these things, but the the research that these ideas were based in was highly flawed. It's often forgotten that attachment theory was developed in the period after World War II, when policymakers were trying to get women out of the jobs they had held during the war, and back into their 'natural' place in the home. In one of his earliest papers Dr. John Bowlby - the so-called Father of Attachment Theory - described 44 children who had been referred to his clinic for stealing, and compared these with children who had not stolen anything. He reported that the thieves had been separated from their parents during childhood, which led them to have a low sense of self-worth and capacity for empathy. He went on to say that “to deprive a small child of his mother's companionship is as bad as depriving him of vitamins.” But much later in his life, Bowlby revealed that he had conflated a whole lot of kinds of separation into that one category – everything between sleeping in a different room to being abandoned in an orphanage. And in addition to being separated, many of the thieves had also experienced physical or sexual abuse. The fear that spending time apart from your baby will damage them in some way is just not supported by the evidence. What other common beliefs do we hold about attachment relationships that aren't supported by evidence? Well, quite a lot, as it turns out! Listen in for more.     Jump to highlights: (03:30) Download the free Right From The Start Roadmap (06:11) Dr. John Bowlby, who is known as the founder of attachment theory (06:40) A brief overview of attachment theory (08:06) What is attachment theory (09:44) A closer look at the word attachment (12:55) Five aspects out of Freud's psychoanalytic theory (14:32) 44 Juvenile Thieves - One of the major ideas about separation from parents (17:50) What is the word monotrophy (18:49) The four dimensions that distinguish African-American views of motherhood from American views by Dr. Patricia Hill Collins (20:49) Aka Pygmy tribe in Africa (21:37) What is PIC or Parental Investment in the child Questionnaire by Dr. Robert Bradley (24:19) The Strange Situation Procedure developed by Dr. Mary Ainsworth (30:30) White middle class mothers in Baltimore stand for what attachment should look like in families of all types around the world (33:36) Two main cross cultural studies (40:13) The cognitive thinking component of the attachment relationship (47:29) What is Outcomes (01:01:25) Summary   [accordion] [accordion-item title="Click here to read the full transcript"] Jen Lumanlan 00:03 Hi, I'm Jen and I host the Your Parenting Mojo podcast. We all want our children to lead fulfilling lives. But it can be so hard to keep up with the latest scientific research on child development and figure out whether and how to incorporate it into our own approach to parenting. Here at Your Parenting Mojo, I do the work for you by critically examining strategies and tools related to parenting and child development that are grounded in scientific research on principles of respectful parenting. If you'd like to be notified when new episodes are released, and get a FREE Guide called 13 Reasons Why Your Child Won't listen To You and What To Do About Each One, just head on over to your YourParentingMojo.com/SUBSCRIBE. You can also continue the conversation about the show with other listeners in the Your Parenting Mojo Facebook group. I do hope you'll join us.   Jen Lumanlan 00:55 Hello, and welcome to the your parenting Mojo...

Episode 5 of Sarandippity is exploring the toxicity that lies within the strong Black woman trope. We discuss this from a cultural, historical, and institutional background all while looking at the question: if black women are the superheroes of our world, who is going to save black women?   Link to watch on youtube: https://youtu.be/RHK9y7tUVs0 Instagram and Twitter:@Sarandippitypod   Sources: "Strong Black Woman Trope Explained." - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjs_pm8MZk   “Strong Black Women”: African American Women with Disabilities, Intersecting Identities, and Inequality - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0891243218814820   "Black Feminist Thought" by: Patricia Hill Collins   "Racism and Sexism Combine to Shortchange Working Black Women" - https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/news/2019/08/22/473775/racism-sexism-combine-shortchange-working-black-women/   "The Disparities in Healthcare for Black Women" - https://www.endofound.org/the-disparities-in-healthcare-for-black-women   "How Our Health Care System Treats Black Mothers Differently" - https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/podcast/2019/oct/how-our-health-care-system-treats-black-mothers-differently   Music:  chill. by sakura Hz https://soundcloud.com/sakurahertzCreative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported  — CC BY 3.0  Free Download / Stream: http://bit.ly/chill-sakuraHzMusic promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/pF2tXC1pXNo  

Essa é versão em podcast da terceira aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo. Neste encontro, a jornalista, tradutora e poeta Stephanie Borges apresenta a poesia e o pensamento de Audre Lorde e Conceição Evaristo, com mediação da também poeta e tradutora Nina Rizzi. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc. Assine a newsletter do Grifa pra ficar por dentro de todo o conteúdo produzido: https://bit.ly/GRIFAnews

In this special episode, Qualitative Conversations hosts a panel discussion with scholars who weren't able to present at the 2021 AERA conference due to technical difficulties. The particular panel session discussed in this episode was titled Critical Participatory Inquiry as Sabotage and included the following participants: Meagan Call-Cummings, George Mason University; Giovanni Dazzo, George Mason University; Sharrell Hassell-Goodman, PhD candidate in the Higher Education Program with a focus in Women and Gender studies and Social Justice at George Mason University; Alexandra S. Reed, George Mason University; Rodney Hopson, U of Illinois-Urbana Champaign; Melissa Hauber-Özer, George Mason University & Jesuit Worldwide Learning; Elisabeth L. Chan - Northern Virginia Community College & George Mason University. The following is the transcript of the conversation. Rodney 0:24 Good morning. Welcome. I'm Rodney Hopson, a faculty member at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign professor and evaluation in the queries division, Interim Director of Korea, really excited to have some colleagues here today talking about some really critical issues. If you didn't get an opportunity to hear a Ura, I was discussing for the roundtable disruption, interruption and change. It's not enough. What we need is sabotage, critical participatory inquiry as sabotage in and of the Academy. So I'm going to open up by having our colleagues introduce themselves and their key ideas and then come back around with questions of dualism. Melissa 1:16 I'm Melissa Hauber-Özer, as I recently completed my PhD at George Mason University in the international education program. And our first paper in the panel was a collaborative counter storytelling piece that I co authored with Megan, Sharrell and Elizabeth which examine an incident that occurred within our ongoing YPAR project or youth participatory action research project. And this incident, and then our conversations about it after the fact pushed us to consider our power relations within the collective and then especially around race and gender. And then our relationships or interactions with the host institutions within which you're doing this critical, participatory work. Giovanni 2:05 Great. Thanks, Melissa. My name is Giovanni Dazzo. I'm a doctoral candidate in research methodology at George Mason University. My article was titled small acts of sabotage, unraveling expertise to push for restorative forms of inquiry. And in this paper, I've been reflecting on my personal background and how I needed to bring this into my own methodological work. And as a doctoral candidate specializing in critical methodology, I needed to acknowledge my identity as a child of Sicilian immigrants being raised in small rural California town, into a family of farmers and laborers. For example, in farming communities, when we see smoke billowing from an open field of crops, this isn't necessarily a sign of danger, but one of renewal of coordinated and careful sabotage. And when done carefully, this practice called slashing burn or slashing cover has been ecologically sustainable for millennia. So I started to think about qualitative research in this way, what type of lens needs to be cleared, burned and left uncultivated for some time, and reflecting on which methodological processes have been around for so long, that they're worth burning down? So in this paper, I discussed three areas. How often are We inspired by the words of our co researchers and community members, so much so that they should be cited alongside the greats who have 1000s of citations, but where we relegate their words to the finding sections of our papers? Second, I started questioning my parsimonious citation practices. So in some cases, I simply use terms like double consciousness and simply include parentheticals for WEB Dubois, and our usual APA and Chicago styles. But it's almost an eraser divestment of knowledge divorced from the historical, contextual, political and racial. So this small act of sabotage has required me to credit and balance the words of others at the expense of my own. And last, I've begun to explore what I call known methods or those that community members and I already use in our daily lives. So when I talk about these non methods, it's not about erasing our knowledge as researchers, but more about acting in humility to unlearn our methods through the act of recognizing community expertise. So I don't simply dissenter, my experience or romanticized community members traditional knowledge, which is another issue in and of itself, but recent are both acknowledging each as residing in expertise. Thank you, Giovanni. Rodney 4:48 I'm Sharrell 4:49 looking forward to reading your work. Hello, I'm Sharrell Hassell-Goodman. I'm a PhD candidate in the higher education program with a focus in Women and Gender Studies. And social justice. So my paper is a self study as a result of a black feminist critical participatory action research project, in which a group of 22 undergraduate and graduate women of the African diaspora and when I say African diaspora, we represent black African American, African, Afro Caribbean, Afro Cuban and Afro Latina women operate as a research collective. Throughout this manuscript I explored an in darkened feminist epistemological approach to critical participatory action research as an act of sabotage to radically center black women's knowledge as legitimate. I document the ways in which I navigated in negotiated my ethical commitments and obligations to the research collective, through critical events analysis. Along the way, I realized that my voice around knowledge shifted, and my orientation in the classroom was disrupted. I look at three incidents around my experiences in the classroom throughout the article. Using the researcher journal as data and critical events analysis as a framework, I explored the following questions. One, how does a first generation woman of the African diaspora a researcher come to know to what does it mean for black woman's knowledge to be interpreted as legitimate? And three, how is research an act of self sabotage? As a result of this study, I found that in darkened feminist epistemological approach to participatory action research is critical to undo the ratio of black woman's knowledge in the academy, exposing the nature of white supremacy that maintains normative confines within the Academy is to understand the challenges associated with other cultural norms and standards, specifically black women to be seen as legitimate. Elizabeth 7:00 Thank you, Sharrell. My name is Elizabeth Chan. I'm an associate professor at Northern Virginia Community College, and also a PhD candidate in multilingual, multicultural education at George Mason University. And I worked also on the paper together with Cheryl and Melissa and Megan that, Melissa, so very well outlined at the beginning. Sasha 7:28 Thanks, Elizabeth. Hello, my name is Sasha Reid and I am a PhD candidate at George Mason, studying special education and qualitative research methods with special interest in intellectual and developmental disabilities inclusion, and accessible and equitable research opportunities. I'm in the process of completing a three paper dissertation which is aimed at understanding the concept of inclusion at the post secondary level, from young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities through a critical participatory inquiry project. My panel paper was titled sabotaging method the tensions of accepting responsibility. And I'm drawing particularly from paper three, which documents the process of how I've approached navigate, and in reconciling my researcher responsibilities and commitments to my researcher group during the entire traditional research cycle process. So question, design and approach, data collection, data analysis, and deciding on next steps. And I'm really focusing on where and how I'm yielding my position of power to disrupt that traditional cycle, and where I can design or simply leave room for organic participation to occur with participants with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Throughout I'm grappling with the following questions which guide the paper from the era panel? What is recognized as Reacher research in my field, field being special education and disabilities? And how am I now forgetting the difference between a method and a way of inquiry to Who is this research for and three, how is my power and positionality as a person who does not identify as having disability tied up in this tension of responsibility, my responsibility to produce knowledge that's deemed academically significant, as well as my responsibility to meaningfully include a commonly forgotten population in the research arena. Megan 9:52 Thanks, Sasha. My name is Megan Call-Cummings. I'm an assistant professor of research methods at George Mason University where we're all From in one way or another, so I specialize in participatory feminist and critical qualitative methodologies. The paper I wrote for this panel is called sabotaging significance, a call for less research and more organizing. The paper is kind of a description of my journey of sort of critical reflexivity and kind of messy and fluid processes of both and sometimes simultaneous adaptation to and also rejection of the status quo within academia. So over the course of the last seven years, I've sort of shifted professional positions from doctoral student to university faculty member and I've kind of flipped back and forth often between a research trajectory that I would consider to be kind of like edgy and anti racist, but still within the bounds, like the safety bounds of being deemed acceptable. And then research that kind of tries to give the middle finger to academia to you know, my university, even my future tenure committee, right? It's like, whatever I'm going to do what I want. If I get tenure, it is what it is right? So I kind of flip between those two often. So the paper follows this, this messy journey offering vignettes to illustrate the kind of difficult process of really, completely altering the way academia understands and applies the intertwined white supremacist concepts of rigor, validity, trustworthiness and of course, significance. So these concepts and practices, I argue in the paper are applied routinely and often invisibly, as tools of domination and control, as as much that calls itself research. So what I argue in the end, is that what we need, just like Eve tuck has said in this moment is less research and more organizing. And I wonder, you know, how would we measure the significance of such a move? For you? Awesome. Rodney 12:02 Well, let's go back to you. Actually, Megan, because I'm familiar with your work in this panel, seems to be an offshoot of some other work that you've been doing been asking, bringing in other saboteurs and other critical participants in this space. So what led us to this particular work at AERA in this presentation? And tell us a little bit more, Megan 12:24 if you don't mind? Thanks, Rodney. I appreciate that. So, yeah, we were all part of a class last summer, this summer of 2020, I had planned to facilitate a special topics class on decolonizing methodologies, really, because several students, you know, like the ones here and others had kind of come to me and said, this is something that they needed. So I put together a syllabus during the spring semester, I knew it would be online because of COVID. And then you guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was like less than a week before the class actually started, that George Floyd was murdered by police officers and on protests for racial justice erupted across the US and the world. So that not only became I mean, the sense of a backdrop really doesn't do it justice in terms of how it affected that class, it was like this simultaneous experience, we were all living in different ways, because of our different identities and connections to racial injustice, and things like that. And so, so it became these class discussions were like rich and messy and raw with vulnerability and anger and resentment of academia, and are places within the structure that's so often thick with injustice and inequity, but simultaneously have as so many people working for justice and equity. And it was actually one of Giovanni's posts, I think, along with some of Eve Tech's work that we read together, I believe that that suggested the idea of sabotage, right? The idea that what's needed now is, as Giovanni said, burn the place down, or start little fires everywhere, right? What's needed now is is not more research, right is not more research into what's wrong or who the problems are. But it's about organizing. It's about scholars becoming an activist and taking responsibility and ownership of these processes. So we talked a lot about being tired of academia or the way things are in higher ed the status quo. And so that's kind of what led us to the idea of this panel. Rodney 14:33 Yeah, that's, that's, that's quite helpful. Maybe I'll just pick on you Giovanni, as well to talk a bit a bit about both the theoretical frameworks that have inspired this work around subtour mean you don't have resistance. You don't use like resistant or resist or and then mean. Tell us more about what it is for you to bring those. Those frameworks slash and burn from the farming. Italian migrant. Please make the connection. Giovanni 15:01 Yeah, absolutely. I mean, first for me, looking at conceptual and theoretical frameworks I've been using more recently, I have put aside the academic literature, I have spoken with my grandfather, and spoken to my parents. And first and foremost, I have also spoken to community members that I work alongside in Guatemala who are ..., Maya, farmers, laborers, community members. And so when I started to think about theoretical frameworks, and what it means to theorize, I stepped away from the traditional scholars because I felt this needed to be my first small act of sabotage in unraveling. What I was socialized to think was expertise. So as now, as I construct conceptual frameworks or theoretical frameworks for my own dissertation, and various articles, I actually start with the words of community members and cite them alongside the greats, including Paulo Freire, a bell hooks, Martin barro web Dubois. But second, I've been engaging more and more with sociological theory and Communication Studies since I typically conduct applied research and program evaluation on human rights and justice initiatives. So Daren Barney's work on sabotage and the politics of withdraw have been pivotal for me, as it provides this theoretical grounding and critical theory and historical examples of sabotage, and how we don't really talk about sabotage when we engage in Marxist theory, and thinking about sabotage and and this politics of withdraw. I've been engaging a lot with the work of activists and scholar activists who talk about the politics and epistemology of self determination. Everyone from Kwame Nkrumah, Angela Davis, Patricia Hill-Collins. And then following on that, when it comes to these citation practices that I talked about, I argue that the way we cite is similar to what bud Hall and we're just 10 done in their 2017 paper on decolonizing. Knowledge call accumulation is dispossession, a term they credit to the work of geographer David Harvey. So in their example, just as universities stolen accumulated land by native and indigenous peoples to build campuses that would then dispossessed them of the right to then live, earn and learn on that land. We do the same as we race to accumulate as many citations of our own work by citing the work of great individuals that came before us, but forgetting those who inspired us in the communities we work in. So I see this as a form of resistance and refusal. In the words of Tuck and Yang to this parsimonious language, we're often forced to use just another small act of sabotage to the way that academics and citation habits unintentionally or intentionally silence entire populations. And when I think about this idea of known methods, I credit the work of Ignacio Martin barro, who was an El Salvadoran, Jesuit priest, and psychologist. And he called on researchers to de-ideologized everyday experience by working with communities to co construct data through routine practices. So now in our collective, we explore how ... Maya, traditional oral traditions and storytelling, as well as their traditional ceremonies can be integrated. But then also, I've pushed back against my own methodological associate realization and asked, what, how did I collect data before I was a doctoral candidate, when I was in a farming community. And so for Italians, it's often that we take a stroll. And so this is what I've been doing with my co researchers is that we often take us take a stroll, and we talk and they narrate their experiences and their landmarks. And an Italian it's called body on the passage of that. But now I think of that as one of my methods, one of my known methods that I've actually forgotten about, because I've taken so many courses on research methods. So that's really how I've been thinking about these small acts of sabotage. That what if we brought in more of our own every day, when we thought about method, rather than solely recognizing the easy things that we identify where we've carefully constructed ourselves through methodological training? Rodney 19:44 Hmm, let me. I'm not going to unpack that. I want to ask Sharrell to do a little bit of unpacking, actually. And thank you for that, Giovanni, because you've, you've left us with a few things to think about. What's your role I'd like you to to help us think about this balance. This this balance, oftentimes is contradiction in this tension in the academy between and picking up on some more Giovanni says was known methods, methods that exist and trying to engage in some methodological sabotage he makes it sound like we should be in the form of the farmland. But we're we're not always in the farm level we're calling one. We're calling out other others. So how do you? How do you think about this? Sharrell 20:34 Yeah, I think and this, your point really segues nicely to what Giovanni was talking about to lay the groundwork. And I think, you know, I try to think about my epistemological and ontological commitments, and to what into whom my research is answerable, and accountable to thinking about Patel's work, like specifically, I tried to engage in anti racist and D colonial research methods that center those that have been on the margins. And I try to be concerned with the lived experiences of others, and how they are centered in research. I think it's easy to get focused on identifying problems, to justify our research. But really, we have to be careful with these Western paradigms that center deficit perspectives, that focus on fixing people rather than attending to oppressive systems. With all that said, we also need to be mindful of the ways in which white logics and white supremacy is embedded within our research methods, and how we must work to retool and think about our methods and who they're excluding who they're exotifying and how they're dehumanizing people. What assumptions i think is also something that we need to be looking at, we're making when we utilize certain methods, what biases do these methods possess, that we need to account for and interrupt? If we say we are committed to methodological sabotage, I also think that that means that we need to be slow to conduct research. So similar to what Megan was talking about, and really thinking about why am I interested in doing this research? Should I be the one to conduct this research? What is the impact of conducting this research? Who will benefit from this research? You know, also thinking about how power is dispersed within this research? How will this research be disseminated? Right? For example? Is it published in a fancy journal? Or is it available and accessible to community members? And so so those are some of the things that I think about when trying to balance the commitments within the academy and the expectations, while also thinking about ways to sabotage methods and methodology? Rodney 23:04 Helpful. And thank you for the references. Let me ask you, Elizabeth as well to, to to think about that as well. Because one of thinking about John's stance feels working some of the notions that he lifts in terms of rethinking the ethnocentric reproduction of knowledge in our social science and universities. So how is it? And how might we as academics begin to engage in some sabotage in the academy with these largely older, oppressive, patriarchal systems that have been traditional, and have been driven in a euro and American thought for hundreds of years? Elizabeth 23:47 Yes, definitely. Thank you for that question. And kind of when I start out thinking about just the act of sabotage, and even just starting from that word, trying to get other academics on board with the idea of sabotage and thinking about it as a deliberate subversion to the system, that we are intentionally trying to be destructive or obstructive to the system. Right. And I think that's a good point that Cheryl had mentioned is just keeping the distinction there in mind between the difference between person to person versus looking at it and institution or system. And so, I mean, another way to think about sabotage is to think of it as as historically when people use the word sabotage, like some sort of plan or sabotaging your, your employer, right, as we mentioned, a way to kind of hinder the manufacturing right would be an example that workers or the labor movement would get involved in. And thinking about the post secondary education system. And with the rise of neoliberalism within the system, where we as educational experts are increasingly being treated, right like parts of this kind of machine, that we're we're churning out these monocultural body of, of laborers, right for the workforce, and a growing discontent that is felt by academics and educators. But it kind of with that, we also seen a little bit of this growth of apathy, as well, which I think kind of works against that, this feeling that this is the way things are going to be right, or the tides kind of swinging back and forth. And we'll just wait for things to swing back the other way. So in other words, they're thinking still within the system, rather than questioning the system and thinking about how we can start to do some of that deliberate subversion. So I feel like, especially right now, there's a lot of attention, people are paying more attention. Because I feel like it's always a political time, right. And there are always activists who are working and mobilizing and social movements are happening, you know, all the time. But right now people are, are paying more attention. And I think, to sabotage, you have to be willing to risk, right. So you have to be able to risk social, political, financial, other forms of capital. And so for many academics, I feel like that's a sticking point. That's a hurdle And in order to get more academics involved, I think we take advantage of that the fact that people are paying more attention now. And when people feel that motivation, maybe it's anger, or frustration, or around a certain issue, you do get more people on board. But it's not quite enough, because people need to understand why the issue is important. And that includes understanding the long history. And as you you mentioned, thinking of it in terms of ethnocentric understanding, then we know that there's that responsibility for people to do some of that internal work and learn more of that history and why it matters for them personally, and their responsibilities to that issue. And so knowing that history and questioning our own positions within it, and within the systems, then we continually reflect about what powers and privileges we have at doing that individual work. And I think during, at the same time, we start to build these relationships between peoples and between the academics within the community. Together, we can feel more confident in questioning the ideologies that are there and critiquing the institutions and the systems together. But to do that, I think we have to lay out a very clear vision of what the end result is going to look like, what we share in this vision, and to give very clear first steps that feel reasonable and doable. And then as we work together in that way, we, we have to understand that say we are supporting each others not quite enough, right? That especially right now, we hear a lot about I'm in solidarity with you, or I'm in solidarity with your communities. But again, we have to put our capital where our mouth is. And so solidarity is embodied practice, right? It's an embodied action. And it's a relational action, right, where we grow relationships with people in different communities, and that's from Fuji Connie. And so I really draw upon that idea to try to think about how to bring more people within the academic community together around these issues. Rodney 29:46 And that's very, that's profound. Let me let me move to Sasha to hopefully find a way to think through that. So I'm taking a lot from Elizabeth points here sash and one of them around relevance has to do with maybe one of the things you spoke on earlier the relevance of your work. Who's this work for? and responsibilities. Tell us a little bit about yourself your work in the relevance of your work around your topic as well, please. Sasha 30:23 I'm thinking about two points that Elizabeth made one. That The time is now and that we need to take first steps, we need to have a few clear first steps. I do agree with those two points. I do think the time is now. And we cannot ignore the centuries of dangerous and dark histories of research, particularly with individuals in what are deemed marginalized or vulnerable populations. One of which is the community that I work with individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Between between the recent efforts of the last half of a century trying to prevent the mistreatment that was their riddling their past and the socially accepted view, not my view, but the socially accepted view that these individuals will not understand the research or construct knowledge, therefore they have no interest in research or being included, included in the research has resulted in no research, including this group, it's lacking. In addition to that, there's not only a belief that this group will understand or group marginalized groups won't understand it's that there's a distrust of the data. So what they do tell us what we do listen, what we do hear from them. We don't believe in order to triangulate that data, we go somewhere else to trust the source. Oh, the academy and hope and what I'm trying to work on sabotaging is chipping away at that episode femicide, you know, D'Souza to Santos says, killing of knowledge, and particularly for the disability community, we've had centuries of killing knowledge. The research has not only been dirty and painful, it's led to silencing and truly killing of the knowledge production. it perpetuates systemic exclusion in research, and continues this gap gap between individuals with disabilities and knowledge production. I really think that's relevant to my work. And it's particularly dangerous in the fields that I'm in. Because special education and disability research tend to emerge from social sciences, social justice fields, right. And so the research that has been done, maybe seen as benevolent, but in fact was really harmful and contributes to the injustice in the silencing of an entire population. Additionally, to me, this work is really relevant because I like shut off that I approached this through a social construct of disability, not medical, not deficit view. biodiversity, including neuro diversity is natural, it's important, and it's everywhere throughout our world. Be Academy be institutions Higher, higher ed may still be an ivory tower. And I recognize that I am a tenant in that tower and rather rather comfortable. So how can I use my comfy position to push back push back what what the research mode looks like? In particular, for this dissertation? It's it's not following a traditional steps outline in any of our qualitative textbooks. It's it's not hitting all the check mark the checkboxes for a phenomenological study or for a participatory action study. But it is still solid work on my group doesn't fit into some sort of qualitative matrix. And I wonder, can this be okay and I continue to answer yes, it is okay. This is good, solid work. I am engaged, engaging in conversations and dialogue with my research community and I am exercising federates Trust through dialogue. These co researchers are the experts because of their lived experiences. And I want to center the experiences as expertise instead of well, the method wasn't followed through to see if that makes sense. I also enter this research with a background in explicit instruction, like training students. And a lot of these young adults have come from the school system, or the community system where they were trained to sit, listen, obey, copy, blendon, do what they do, do what somebody without a disability does, and giving room and space for doing whatever you want, say what you want, don't give, don't answer the way you think it is, or a test is a small act of sabotage for this particular community. But I I think that can extend to other marginalized groups as well. So really, I think just knowing that I'm a privileged white woman who does not identify as a disability as having a disability. I have a lot of power and then I can shake up what the privileged white male scientists and scholars have laid out for the last 100 hundreds of years. And I'm excited to continue working with my group beyond dissertation and hopefully lay out some new frameworks that can be used to be more inclusive. QR SIG Add 36:26 The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987 to create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today. for members of a era. The annual fee for joining the qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities, ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to update to news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs, please visit the American Educational Research Association website at www dot era dotnet to join the qualitative research SIG today. Rodney 37:19 Thank you, Sasha, that's also work that seems quite important and significant. And I want to dovetail your comments and relevance and issues of responsibility and carving new spaces to Melissa. How might we fear those who critique the saboteurs? What, how do we how do we respond to the status quo, to those who say that this diversity is about deviance or difference is really about deficit. Help us using some of the words that Evan Gordon has written in the paper as well that I'd like to come back to with other colleagues that help us Melissa, what do you what do you think? Melissa 38:26 Well, I would say that it's more important now than ever, to, especially for those of us who identify as as white, we have a responsibility to engage in explicitly anti racist work. Now that these racist systems and structures have been revealed to us we've been we've had these blind spots for centuries, as Sasha has said, especially in relation to people with disabilities that we have these movements going on right now reached the racial justice movement, of course, in the context of which we wrote this paper. And then as we revise the paper, and then it got it accepted for publication, more and more names are being added to the list, victims of police brutality, and now we see a rise in anti Asian hate crimes. And for me, personally, my research is with refugees. And there's been a lot of contention around the issue of forced migration and refugee resettlement in the United States. And here in Turkey, where I live, there's a lot of polarization around Syrian refugees, what their rights should be a long term outlook. So I really believe that this is the time that we need to stand up and push back Actually, this idea of sabotage is that we're working from the inside to dismantle these racist systems and structures. And so what we tried to do in our paper was start with ourselves, especially for Megan And for me as, as white women who have these blind spots, we wanted to engage in a really structured process of reflexivity, in order to kind of sensitize ourselves to how these incidents feel very different for our core researchers of color. The particular incident that we look at in the paper seems relatively simple. On the surface, that white man who works in the university in the facilities, actually he never identified himself basically accosted Elizabeth removing a table during this research event with us. And then, as we dug deeper, we saw how it was really racially charged, looking at it through Elizabeth experience, and through chevelles experience of trying to intervene and find some resolution for this incident. So I wasn't even at the event actually. But for me, it was a really important process of looking at how, how I'm missing the point in these types of interactions, how in my own research with refugee youth and young adults, I might be missing something that's, that's really affecting their experience some structural issues or interpersonal issues. So we took this approach of critical race theory and actually critical whiteness theory to examine these these kind of layers through a critical race praxis from Nam Moto, where we look at the experience and rethink it, and then translate it, looking at the how these racist structures and patterns of white supremacy are operating in our society and our institutions that are supposed to be safe havens for diversity, and then engagement, which is really grappling with the tensions that can happen within our research collectives in our interpersonal relationships, and then trying to center the experiences and knowledges of these communities, marginalized communities, and working towards more equitable curricula, policies, practices. So in my own research, I'm trying to do that with refugee populations. And it's, it's hard, but I feel that this is really our the commitment that we need to make as critical qualitative researchers to engage in hard work. Because we have this privilege, and we need to do more than just position ourselves as allies, we need to break down these structures from within those of us who have privilege have, perhaps more power to work towards change. Rodney 42:46 Well, I'm inspired. I don't know how much time we have and I don't know how much more you all have to say. But I want to thank you all for your appealing to ... of our communities, the self-determination. And not being wedded just to the university's own understanding of knowledge and relevance. Thank your for ... your pushing that notion of that understanding is the pure soul of what this work is about. Thank you as well for your parrhesia for your vulnerability for telling the truth. For not being afraid and coureagous. So as I turn back. I couldn't help but thinking about some things I'm thinking about now. The centenial year of professor Edmond W. Gordon who is celebrating his 100th birthday next month at the Teacher's College in a series of Webnars. But there are a series of activities this whole year. I hope you all can participate in celebrating this giant of a man. He wrote in ed research with fellow colleagues. This notioon called community centered bias, which is quite nice. Communitiy centered bias is this notion whcih he eterms as a tendency to make one's community the center of the universe. and the conceptual frame the frames all thought. He suggest that this androcentral, culturo-centric, ethnocentric chauvinsim known as community centric bias is rampid. And you all simply displayed that in yourconversation. I don't know if you all have anything else to say but I certainly would welcome your thoughts and some dialogue a bit back and forth,a bit more sabotour. Giovanni 42:46 Well i'll go first I I think you know with the work of of Edmund Gordon and and how he really brought forth affirmative, voices in the affirmative, as opposed to always looking at the achievement gap as a as a deficit, but one thing that i've seen as as small acts of sabotage. And really pushing back against this idea that our Community is the Center of the world. You know this is, this is a big thing in even Italian culture in Roman times Rome was was the Center of the world and that's actually something that often comes up in in Italian culture as much as. The nation has has struggled I would say there's still this this idea that Italy, of course, bread, the Renaissance, they had a number of other cultural and philosophical philosophical advancement, but getting into anti fascism and Neo Marxism there was the idea against this this cultural hegemony through the work of Gramsci and. And really in the Italian resistance movements in the Polish resistance movements. Looking back at those they had tiny acts of sabotage, or what the the Polish called small small sabotage your minor sabotage admit it was. They were things as simple as not acknowledging that you spoke German, even if you did or giving people the wrong directions simply so they would go the wrong way. And these are also things that are continued to be done in Italy in Rome. Just to mess with tourists, but I would say, even in my own work, and not only my studies, but my my full time job within government sometimes you have to not speak the same language as people and and recognize that so then it's a type of calling out and calling in to say. I choose to be different, and even though the work of sabotage is meant to be. Under the radar you still have to expose yourself, and I think that's important, I think. That type of authenticity in one's work comes out when. You enable yourself to. To be present to be visible as a Sabbath tour. Sharrell 42:46 I guess I can go. Next I. appreciate those examples, Giovanni because it's even thinking about my work and what i'm interested in doing is. working to site black women right and thinking about black feminist knowledge and it's contributions to the Academy that's often seen as an oversight. So I think about the work of Anna Julia Cooper who brittney Cooper and her work kind of in her work of beyond respectability draws from the work of Anna Julia Cooper. As this comparison approach right so specifically thinking about that as a methodological approach that's committed to seeing. The black female body as a form of possibility and not a burden and centering the black female body. as a means of black social thought, so I think it's about you know thinking about these different approaches and who are we centering. Right and so when we move beyond a deficit approach that seeks to sabotage Western ideas around research. You know, really exists, particularly we think about black feminist work exists outside what we think of as the Western research cannon. And so, how are we thinking about that work to infringe upon conventional notions of social science. and acknowledging the rebel relevance and the importance of centering black woman's knowledge is legitimate, so I think when we think about these acts of sabotage, we are thinking about. You know these ideas of resisting familiar Western paradigms that are oppressive in nature. Even thinking about scholars work like Dr kristin Smith, who creates a campaign calling cite black women in response to the academic candidate frequently you know doesn't recognize the intellectual and you know contributions of black women right, and so I think that's that's something that is really important that we're paying that we're considering we're thinking about these notions of sabotage and what does that actually look like and I appreciate Giovanni your connection. People, you know that we often don't see as intellectual so i'm thinking about black women are folks that were enslaved. And their acts of resistance and what does that look like and how do we take that to to the next level or how do we take that a step further and our own research, so I appreciate your connection Giovanni and just wanted to add my perspective as well. Rodney 42:46 Any final thoughts... You know... here's mine. And i'm just passing the baton. I'll tell you what it looks like. It looks like folk who have and can draw on a history of resistance not others not borrowing others resistance songs. Like I don't need Giovanni's farm songs Italian folk songs I have my own fucking songs in my own history if you don't know yours get yours. It's like Langston Hughes. The song the poem is I Sing America, I am the darker brother they sent me to the kitchen with company comes, but I laugh and eat well and grow strong tomorrow i'll be at the table and and nobody when a company comes. Nobody will dare seat in the evening coaching them there's a there's a form of resistance that's what it sounds like find your own resistance songs live your life.

Essa é versão em podcast da segunda aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo. Neste encontro, a jornalista, pesquisadora e doutora em Ciências da Comunicação Rosane Borges apresenta o pensamento de Sueli Carneiro, com mediação de Carine Nascimento. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc.

Natasha Lennard is a columnist for The Intercept. She has also written for The Nation, The Guardian, Bookforum and the New York Times, among other venues. She currently teaches critical journalism at the New School for Social Research in New York. Her books include Being Numerous: Essays on Non-Fascist Life (https://www.versobooks.com/books/2949-being-numerous), and a co-written anthology of interviews on the question of violence entitled Violence: Humans in Dark Times (http://www.citylights.com/book/?GCOI=87286100350210). In our interview she addresses how she views the role of journalism and critical writing, stressing that communication is “necessary but deeply insufficient” as a means of creating radical structural change. I appreciate the ways that she interrogates the seductive concept of a “marketplace of ideas” and the seemingly unassailable notion of “Free Speech.” Instead, she's invested in ideas of accountability and a public sphere in which we are forced to reckon with how speech acts can “call into being” fascist realities. Rather than calling it “censorship,” Lennard sees a culture of accountability as a matter of intervening to insist on “less oppressive spaces” and emphasizes that a just world would “pivot the center” (in Patricia Hill Collins' words) so that those who are directly affected by hateful material could lead the project of deplatforming fascism. While she acknowledges that Twitter taking away the means of creating what she calls “fascistic lifeworlds” is a progressive step, she also makes it clear that we should not be required to wait for “Silicon Valley Leviathans” to regulate hate, to slowly cave to leftist organizing and resistance. Being Numerous argues for the power of using the term “fascism” to name the authoritarian desires that drive white supremacy; suggesting that it's useful as a means of capturing the violent nature of the forces we oppose, and for calling into being an anti-fascist response. In general, her work is clear about the tensions between materialist politics and social constructivism, drawing from Donna Haraway's notion that the world is made, but not made up. She argues that the struggle of our times is to figure out how to create opposition both “all at once” and slowly and reflectively, as challenging as that inherently is. Rather than offering a simplistically hopeful framing, Lennard asks us to actually engage with the impressively fast rebuilding of a robust left-wing politics after decades of “ideological decimation.”

Episode 5: https://www.hbo.com/lovecraft-country/season-1/5-strange-case Frank Ocean’s “Bad Religion”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMpypbtrcCg Black Feminist Thought, Patricia Hill Collins (2002)“For Colored Girls Who Have Consider Suicide/When the Rainbow is Enuf, Ntozake Shange: https://www.playbill.com/article/in-celebration-of-ntozake-shange-revisit-for-colored-girls-who-have-considered-suicide-when-the-rainbow-is-enuf

Essa é versão em podcast da primeira aula do curso Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro, promovido pela Boitempo. Neste encontro, a historiadora Raquel Barreto apresenta Angela Davis e Lélia Gonzalez, com a mediação de Anne Quiangala, idealizadora do Preta, Nerd & Burning Hell. O curso "Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro" é composto por seis aulas, que cobrem as vidas e as obras de Angela Davis, Lélia Gonzalez, Sueli Carneiro, Audre Lorde, Conceição Evaristo, Michelle Alexander, Patricia Hill Collins e bell hooks, e está disponível gratuitamente e online na TV Boitempo e aqui, no Grifa Podcast, ao longo de seis meses, uma aula por mês. Esse projeto foi viabilizado pela Lei Aldir Blanc.

SA-RA-VÁ Com a ascensão de debates sobre raça, gênero e classe se entrelaçando e muitas das vezes se atravessando, surge a urgência de debater uma nova forma de observar tais temáticas, a interseccionalidade. Este conceito, mais do que uma palavra, está enraizado em movimentos sociais e fruto de intelectuais orgânicas para lidar com as contradições de múltiplas vivências em um mesmo espaço. Para compreender não apenas sua história, mas suas aplicações, desdobramentos e metodologia de entendimento do mundo. Paula Fepher, John Razen e Rafael Chino e Luiza Braga conversam com a socióloga Nubia Regina Moreira a respeito do livro Interseccionalidade, da Patricia Hill Collins e Sirma Bilge. Neste episódio vamos debater sobre o que é Interseccionalidade, qual a sua história, sua contribuição para a práxis política, sobre as reivindicações políticas e como inserir este tema na educação de jovens ativistas.Gostou do episódio? Então aproveite! Durante o Mês de Março a Editora Boitempo estará promovendo uma série de ações para um feminismo para os 99%. Saiba mais sobre o Curso “Introdução ao pensamento feminista negro” e aproveite os descontos de Livros feitos por mulheres com temáticas feministas da editora com 20% a 50% de desconto.   O Lado Black e a Veste Esquerda são produtores parceiros. Digitem o código ladoblack e aproveite 10% de desconto em todo o site. Além do desconto você pode adquirir camisas do Lado Black clique aqui e compre a sua     Comentários, dúvidas, críticas, sugestões, declarações de amor? Pode jogar aqui: contato@ladoblack.com.br   Tocadas no episódio Linn da Quebrada - Bomba Pra Caralho Gabz ft. Baco Exu do Blues - Nada Vai Nos Parar (   SEJA NOSSO PARÇA Padrin | Patreon   Siga gente nas redes Telegram | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram Este podcast é parte da plataforma anti-fascista AYOM. Conheça mais em ayom.media

Episode 5 of Sarandippity is exploring the toxicity that lies within the strong Black woman trope. We discuss this from a cultural, historical, and institutional background all while looking at the question: if black women are the superheroes of our world, who is going to save black women?   Link to watch on youtube: https://youtu.be/RHK9y7tUVs0 Instagram and Twitter:@Sarandippitypod   Sources: "Strong Black Woman Trope Explained." - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjs_pm8MZk   “Strong Black Women”: African American Women with Disabilities, Intersecting Identities, and Inequality - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0891243218814820   "Black Feminist Thought" by: Patricia Hill Collins   "Racism and Sexism Combine to Shortchange Working Black Women" - https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/news/2019/08/22/473775/racism-sexism-combine-shortchange-working-black-women/   "The Disparities in Healthcare for Black Women" - https://www.endofound.org/the-disparities-in-healthcare-for-black-women   "How Our Health Care System Treats Black Mothers Differently" - https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/podcast/2019/oct/how-our-health-care-system-treats-black-mothers-differently   Music:  chill. by sakura Hz https://soundcloud.com/sakurahertzCreative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported  — CC BY 3.0  Free Download / Stream: http://bit.ly/chill-sakuraHzMusic promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/pF2tXC1pXNo

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality's history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

Is intersectionality a critical social theory? What must intersectionality do to be both critical and a social theory? Must social justice be a guiding normative principle? And what does or should social justice mean in intersectional theory? Patricia Hills Collins explores these questions, and many more, in Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory (Duke University Press, 2019). Engaging a wide range of thinkers, activists, and traditions, including Classical American Pragmatism, the Frankfurt School, and Ida B. Well-Barnett, Collins helps us to reconsider how we think of intersectionality’s history in order to shape its future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

Áudio leitura do artigo As faces do cuidado entre éticas, práticas e fluxos globais, publicado no Fios do Tempo, do Ateliê de Humanidades. Leia o artigo no site: https://ateliedehumanidades.com/2021/02/13/fios-do-tempo-as-faces-do-cuidado/ *** As práticas de cuidado são fundamentais para a produção e reprodução da vida humana e não humana; e a ética do cuidado é uma demanda urgente diante das crises de nosso tempo. É por isso que, como preparativo para o curso livre virtual “Teorias do cuidado: uma introdução”, trazemos hoje, no Fios do Tempo, um texto do brilhante jovem sociólogo Lucas Faial Soneghet que apresenta com clareza e competência o campo de estudos e pesquisas sobre o cuidado. Neste breve panorama, podemos conhecer as distintas faces do cuidado, investigadas por autoras como Carol Gilligan, Eva Feder Kittay, Joan Tronto, Patrícia Paperman, Helena Hirata, Annemarie Mol, Patricia Hill Collins, Lélia Gonzalez, Barbara Ehrenreich e Elena Pulcini. Desejo uma ótima leitura, ou escuta! A. M. Fios do Tempo, 13 de fevereiro de 2021

What is Whiteness? Why does it feel like such a scary word? And what does it have to do with the War on Drugs? Dawn-Marie McIntosh joins me for a conversation about power. The United States was built upon the institution of White Supremacy, but the slavery and murder of black folks was eventually replaced by a system of segregation much more insidious than white supremacy. Whiteness is the Jim Crow South in contemporary language. Its the same rules and laws, now internalized so that we no longer need them written down. 

Grace and James reflect on the history of Columbus Day and Thanksgiving as we continue our focus on Decolonization.Trying out an Indigenous recipe this season?If you decolonize your table this Thanksgiving, be sure to share it with us on social media using the hashtag #FSPFocus!Whose land am I on???To find out which Indigenous nation once lived on the land you now occupy, check out NativeLand.ca; text your zip code or city/state to (907) 312-5085 or to LandAcknowledgement on Messenger; or download the NativeLand app for iOS or Android to search by location.Recommended Resources from AnaYelsi:1. Anything from Kimberlé Crenshaw and her Theory of Intersectionality for those working to understand multiple forms of oppression and oppressive systems. Begin with her 2016 TED talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality2. Anything from Patricia Hill Collins for the same aforementioned reasons3. Gloria Anzaldúa's Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza for those feeling like they have a foot straddling two worlds4. Robin Wall Kimmerer's Braiding Sweetgrass for those that are in the process of better understanding our relationship to the earth, plants, animals...5. NAIITS - An Indigenous Learning Community for those that are Christian practitionersAlso referenced in this series:Processes of Decolonization (Poka Laenui, aka Hayden F. Burgess)BrownEyedAmazon.com (AnaYelsi's main website)Be sure to subscribe, rate, and review us on Apple Podcasts and/or your preferred podcasting platform! It helps new listeners find us more easily. Also leave comments on our social media pages, email us, text us, and leave us voicemails with your questions and comments. We want to hear from you!Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | 704.665.7473

This episode wraps up our 3-part series on critical race theory (CRT) and intersectionality. Brody, Zach Carter, and Zach Mabry sat down and took time to discuss and define the topics of “woke” and “white privilege”. What is happening in the culture today is wrong. Believers, we need to remind ourselves that the Lord will bring justice to every wrong that has been done. God is the one who vindicates wrong and we can trust that. Our job is to tell people the Truth and work to ensure just laws come into place. Christians should be alleviating the material sufferings of those around us. Let’s weep with them, mourn with them, acknowledge that this is sin, and tell the truth about it. It is dangerous for the Christian to be pressing into this ideology of CRT and intersectionality. We already have a mission and a command to take part in the work of building the Kingdom. The things of this world are vapor. The world doesn’t need more people setting low bars. We need something that transcends this world. One day God will make everything right again. The culture is asking the questions, so we need to answer them. The world doesn't know why these things are happening but they can acknowledge that the current order is not right. The Gospel is the answer.If you believe in Heaven then you can wait for God’s good justice to come. It is not our job to pick up the sword and think that we can make it right on this earth. While you wait, meet the material needs that you can and be faithful to proclaim the hope that you have.Bible passagesEphesians 2:6Psalm 24Resources & further studyChrist and Culture Revisited by D. A. CarsonIntersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspective on What Makes A Feminist Theory Successful by Kathy Davis, Feminist Theory 9, no. 1 (2008)Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics by Kimberlé Crenshaw, University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989, no. 1 (1989): 139, http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8.The Complexity of Intersectionality by Leslie McCall, Signs 30, no. 3 (Spring 2005): 1771–1800. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/426800.Intersectionality by Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma BilgeCritical Race Theory: An Introduction by Richard Delgado and Jean StefancicWhose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women’s Lives by Sandra HardingGuest: Zach CarterZach Carter is one of the pastors at Rivertree Church in Huntsville, Alabama. He is a husband to one, lovely wife, and dad to two great kids. He is also pursuing his Ph.D. in American Church History at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he also manages The Commonwealth Project. He has also served as an adjunct professor, teaching worldview and church history at Boyce College.P.S. If you liked this episode, we’d love to&

In this second episode on CRT and intersectionality, Brody, Zach Carter, and Zach Mabry walk through the dangers of using intersectionality as an analytical tool. This theory allows for the most oppressed voice to be heard as a standard for everyone. This puts people playing the role of God and calling the shots. Believers, the Bible is sufficient. We don’t have to go outside of Scripture to find answers to the most important questions. The Word of God gives us what we need. We are called to live in submission to the authority of Scripture and listen to and follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The problem we face is spiritual, and the Gospel of Jesus is our answer. God has created a standard for our source of knowledge and right understanding in the world. We know what we know based on God who revealed Himself to us through: (1) the incarnation of Christ and (2) the Bible, His written Word. We need to remember that the Gospel is the hope and the answer for our world. We need to better understand these issues so we can articulate them with believers and nonbelievers. Christians are called to inform and shed the light on sin. We can’t be afraid to do this. It’s our job to proclaim true redemption. Bible passagesRomans 13Resources & further studyChrist and Culture Revisited by D. A. CarsonIntersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspective on What Makes A Feminist Theory Successful by Kathy Davis, Feminist Theory 9, no. 1 (2008)Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics by Kimberlé Crenshaw, University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989, no. 1 (1989): 139, http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8.The Complexity of Intersectionality by Leslie McCall, Signs 30, no. 3 (Spring 2005): 1771–1800. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/426800.Intersectionality by Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma BilgeCritical Race Theory: An Introduction by Richard Delgado and Jean StefancicWhose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women’s Lives by Sandra HardingGuest: Zach CarterZach Carter is one of the pastors at Rivertree Church in Huntsville, Alabama. He is a husband to one, lovely wife, and dad to two great kids. He is also pursuing his Ph.D. in American Church History at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he also manages The Commonwealth Project. He has also served as an adjunct professor, teaching worldview and church history at Boyce College.P.S. If you liked this episode, we’d love to hear your feedback! Please leave us a review on Apple or

Allie Beth Stuckey interview with Neil Shenvi on Critical Theory.   Neil Shenvi - from a Christian perspective.   James Lindsay - secular academic.   Christopher Rufo - secular cultural researcher whose research prompted the federal ban on teaching critical theory in government institutions and organizations contracted by the government.   Book - secular perspective, “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity—and Why This Harms Everybody” by Helen Pluckrose and James A. Lindsay.   Article: How to Talk to Your Employer about Anti-Racism.   Critical Theory reduces all relationships to power. Who has it and who doesn't. Oppressor vs. oppressed. White people vs BIPOC.   Response: Jesus teaches us to love because he first loved us. And you exercise influence through loving service wrapped in grace and truth.   Matthew 20:25 - Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”   Critical Theory reduces all people to their skin color, or identity group, as their primary identity (the most definitive thing to know about you).   Response: Jesus tells us our primary identity is that we are made in the image of God, of infinite value and unconditionally loved by our Creator.   Galatians 3:26 - So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.   Federal ban on teaching critical theory in government institutions and contracted organizations. Summary: You shall not demean, stereotype or scapegoat people based on their race or sex.   This provision then lists “divisive concepts” that cannot be included in workplace training, including DEI training:   one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex.  the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist.  an individual—by virtue of his or her race or sex—is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.  an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex.  members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex.  an individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex.  an individual—by virtue of his or her race or sex—bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex. any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex. meritocracy or traits, such as a hard work ethic, are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race.   Tenets of Critical Theory: Critical theory emphasizes group identity over individualism. Individual identity is inseparable from group identity as ‘oppressed' or ‘oppressor.'   “My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor… I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will.” – Peggy McIntosh, “White Privilege and Male Privilege,” in Andersen and Collins, Race, Class, and Gender: An Anthology, p. 72.   Critical theory defines oppression as the exercise of hegemonic power—the ability of a group to impose its values, norms and expectations of society. Oppressor groups subjugate oppressed groups through the exercise of hegemonic power.   “Concepts of hegemony enable us to appreciate how dominant groups manipulate symbols and images to construct ‘common sense' and thereby maintain their power.” – Jacob P. K. Gross, “Education and Hegemony: The Influence of Antonio Gramsci” in Beyond Critique: Exploring Critical and Social Theories in Education, p. 57, 65.   Smithsonian Infographic—the National Museum of African American history and culture which is a component of the Smithsonian Institute a federally funded organization    Critical theory dismisses ‘reason' and ‘evidence' as self-serving justifications for oppression. Scientific method, evidence, statistics, etc. are tools of the oppressor.   A quote from Delgado's “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” says, “critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.”   Critical theory sees intersectional ‘lived experience' as an epistemic advantage. ‘Lived experience' is more important than objective evidence in understanding oppression— i.e.,the lower one is on the intersectional hierarchy of the higher one's perspective on truth. To question the oppressed persons lived experience is evidence of racism.   “The idea that objectivity is best reached only through rational thought is a specifically Western and masculine way of thinking – one that we will challenge throughout this book.” – Margaret L. Andersen and Patricia Hill Collins, “Reconstructing Knowledge,” in Anderson and Collins, Race, Class, and Gender, p. 4-5.   Our fundamental moral duty is freeing groups from oppression. Cancel culture or call out culture - make oppression visible. Civil discourse, exchange of ideas, freedom of speech, mutual understanding, etc. is not a value. You don't have an individual voice. You are a mouthpiece for your identity group.    The goal is not to “win” the argument through civil discourse. It is to overpower or silence the argument by any means necessary.   A posture for us from scripture: Romans 12:9-21: Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. Share with the Lord's people who are in need. Practice hospitality.   Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.   Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. On the contrary:   If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.   Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.   Submit Q&A Questions and episode suggestions here.   Watch the podcast video here!

It's Colonization Season in America! The U.S. recently observed Indigenous Peoples' Day, a.k.a. Columbus Day, and Thanksgiving is around the corner. This week, special guest AnaYelsi Velasco-Sanchez sits down with James to talk about the importance of Decolonization.Recommended Resources from AnaYelsi:1. Anything from Kimberlé Crenshaw and her Theory of Intersectionality for those working to understand multiple forms of oppression and oppressive systems. Begin with her 2016 TED talk: https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality2. Anything from Patricia Hill Collins for the same aforementioned reasons3. Gloria Anzaldúa's Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza for those feeling like they have a foot straddling two worlds4. Robin Wall Kimmerer's Braiding Sweetgrass for those that are in the process of better understanding our relationship to the earth, plants, animals...5. NAIITS - An Indigenous Learning Community for those that are Christian practitionersAlso referenced in this episode:Processes of Decolonization (Poka Laenui, aka Hayden F. Burgess)Be sure to subscribe, rate, and review us on Apple Podcasts and/or your preferred podcasting platform! It helps new listeners find us more easily. Also leave comments on our social media pages, email us, text us, and leave us voicemails with your questions and comments. We want to hear from you!Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | 704.665.7473

Language is oppressive. Labels are powerful. Feminism is for Everybody (bell hooks). And the New Jim Crow is no less abusive than the old. In this episode I explain the name, Dr. Junkie, along with a bit of Audre Lorde, Patricia Hill Collins, Michelle Alexander, Ta-Nehisi Coates style feminist thought. 

Dr. Catriona Sandilands and Dr. Sherilyn McGregor share with us the ways in which ecofeminism, and queer ecology, serve to diversify and deepen how we look at the policies and day-to-day practices of environmental politics.

Yé Moun La ! Here's a new special edition titled "The representation of Black single moms in Black sitcoms in the 90's". It's a presentation I did in October 2019 during a workshop hosted by university professfor Lissell Quiroz and phD Student Christelle Gomis during the annual Congress of the Institute of the Americas in Paris. Here I take a look at how Black sitcoms give a subversive representation of Black motherhood by deconstructing the negative stereotypes created since the slavery days. Sources : Thea, ABC, 1993 - 1994 In The House (seasons 1 and 2), NBC, 1995 - 1996 The Parkers, UPN, 1999 - 2004 My main academic sources were : Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought, 1990 Donald Bogle, Primetime Blues: African Americans on Network Television, 2001 Opening and ending credits : Escape Music (Feel it) de Mano D'iShango (feat. Yalisaï) Interlude Yé Krik Yé Krak : "Mèm Biten Menm Bagay" de Meemee Nelzy avec Chyco Simeon Interlude Connexions Caribéennes : "Rien n'arrive sans rien" de Gage Instagram : @karukerament www.karukerament.com

Yé Moun La ! Voici mon hors-série 4. C'est une version longue de la communication que j'ai faite en Octobre 2019 dans un atelier lors du Congrès annuel de l'institut des Amériques. J'y avais été invitée par Lissell Quiroz et Christelle Gomis. Ma communication porte sur la représentation des mères célibataires noires dans les Black sitcoms US des années 90. Visitez karukerament.com Sources : Thea, ABC, 1993 - 1994 In The House (seasons 1 and 2), NBC, 1995 - 1996 The Parkers, UPN, 1999 - 2004 My main academic sources were : Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought, 1990 Donald Bogle, Primetime Blues: African Americans on Network Television, 2001 Générique : Escape Music (Feel it) de Mano D'iShango (feat. Yalisaï)Interlude Yé Krik Yé Krak: "Mèm Biten Menm Bagay" de Meemee Nelzy avec Chyco SimeonInterlude Connexions Caribéennes : "Rien n'arrive sans rien" de Gage Twitter : @KarukeramentInstagram : @Karukerament

This episode is not only an assignment from my Black Feminist Thought class this Fall semester but this episode is also a testament of how I want to continue to inspire education and awareness throughout my community. What is it about Black women that society loves to hate? How can I as a Black woman increase my awareness of my own identity? How are you choosing to educate and engage with your community?Let's continue to Grow & Glow.Connect with me on Instagram & Facebook:https://www.instagram.com/confessionsofagogetterpodcast/https://www.facebook.com/ConfessionsofaGoGetterPodcast/Read more below on Patricia Hill Collins book Black Feminist Thought:http://post45.org/2020/05/hearing-what-black-women-have-been-telling-us-all-along-on-patricia-hill-collinss-black-feminist-thought/

This episode is a co-production with the First Minister's National Advisory Council on Women and Girls, and features Dr Ima Jackson, co-chair of the Council speaking with Engender's Emma Ritch, Maxine Blane, and Alys Mumford. The topic is Intersectional Gender Architecture - all of the structures a state has for advancing women's equality and rights, and what that looks like in Scotland. Access a transcript of this episode here. Find out more about the First Minister's Advisory Council on Women and Girls here or on social media channels @NACWGScot The recommendations from this episode were: Extra Teeth magazine for new writing from Scotland and beyond The Yale Collective on Women of Colour and the Law's open letters to Catharine MacKinnon in 1991 Intersectionality by Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge Intersectionality Matters podcast with Kimberlé Crenshaw   This podcast was produced by Amanda Stanley, for Engender. The jingle was performed by Bossy Love.

Ana Claudia Jaquetto Pereira, Doutora em Ciência Política pelo Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Políticos da UERJ, autora do livro “Intelectuais Negras Brasileiras: horizontes políticos” e Gerente de Projetos da ONU Mulheres Brasil foi a 14ª convidada do Black Talk. Especialista em Raça e Gênero, Ana Claudia é graduada em Relações Internacionais pela Universidade Estadual Paulista, fez seu Mestrado no Instituto Universitário de Pesquisas do Rio de Janeiro, pesquisando a atuação dos movimentos de mulheres junto ao Sistema Interamericano e o Sistema Global de Direitos Humanos. No doutorado, pesquisou o pensamento político das mulheres negras brasileiras, e estudou a interseccionalidade e a teoria crítica da raça na Universidade de Maryland, nos Estados Unidos, sob orientação da Profa. Patricia Hill Collins. Como profissional, foi Assessora Técnica e Parlamentar para a área de Violência e Igualdade Racial, no Centro Feminista de Estudos e Assessoria (CFEMEA),e Oficial de Programa para as áreas de Gênero e Raça e Cooperação Sul-Sul do Fundo de População das Naçoes Unida

Today, Rep. LaKeshia Myers (D-Milwaukee) joins us for a quarantine edition of 'Some Assembly Required', to discuss proposals aimed at addressing the underlying issues that have allowed systemic racism to continue permeating our communities. --- Anti-Racism Resources Podcasts: 1619 (by New York Times), Code Switch (NPR), Intersectionality Matters! hosted by Kimberlé Crenshaw Films & Shows: 13th, Just Mercy, Selma, Fruitvale Station, When They See Us Books: Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness 
by Michelle Alexander, White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo, PhD Organizations to Follow: Urban Triage (Madison), Foundation for Black Women’s Wellness (Madison), Leaders Igniting Transformation - LIT (Milwaukee), Black Leaders Organizing for Communities - BLOC (Milwaukee), NAACP (National), Color Of Change (National), Sister Song (National)

Today, Rep. LaKeshia Myers (D-Milwaukee) joins us for a quarantine edition of 'Some Assembly Required', to discuss proposals aimed at addressing the underlying issues that have allowed systemic racism to continue permeating our communities. --- Anti-Racism Resources Podcasts: 1619 (by New York Times), Code Switch (NPR), Intersectionality Matters! hosted by Kimberlé Crenshaw Films & Shows: 13th, Just Mercy, Selma, Fruitvale Station, When They See Us Books: Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness 
by Michelle Alexander, White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo, PhD Organizations to Follow: Urban Triage (Madison), Foundation for Black Women’s Wellness (Madison), Leaders Igniting Transformation - LIT (Milwaukee), Black Leaders Organizing for Communities - BLOC (Milwaukee), NAACP (National), Color Of Change (National), Sister Song (National)

Imagens de controle e o pensamento de Patricia Hill Collins

I should not be the only voice you listen to - nor am I much more than a young, white tarot reader with a couple of podcasts... someone who is not perfect and always aims to better herself and the world around her... someone who is open to suggestions from others who have different life experience. However, I decided it was best for me to address you all as humans instead of saying nothing at all on this audio platform. THE IMPORTANT PART: places to donate/petitions/etc. https://blacklivesmatters.carrd.co/ | https://www.thebipocproject.org/ | https://www.instagram.com/brute.form/?hl=en has great links | https://www.instagram.com/nowhitesaviors/?hl=en | https://www.instagram.com/laylafsaad/?hl=en | https://www.instagram.com/naacp/?hl=en | Podcasts: About Race, Code Switch, Pod Save the People, Life As We Grow It | Books: Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins, Eloquent Rage: A Black Feminist Discovers Her Superpower by Dr. Brittany Cooper, White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo ...Please understand this is NOT an exhaustive list. I tried to include links to organizations who have curated lists that are exhaustive. As always, do your own research. I also thought I would mention that I am offering three card readings (emailed) free in exchange for your donation to one of the many organizations doing boots on the ground work. Just DM or email me (tarotwithtux@gmail.com or Instagram @tarotwithtux) your receipt.  I am also offering free energy readings for BIPOC humans who are needing some insight from their higher selves, guides or however they identify with the infinite. I am offering as many as I can do (as it is an energetic exchange), but I am comfortable with saying 5 and going from there. Fuck spiritual bypassing and let's build a better tomorrow. Remember...the system isn't broken. It was built in this oppressive way by people that look like me. Honor this tower moment (tarot reference) instead of trying to quell or side step the reasons it came to fruition. Right? Let's do our best. The past patterns have not been our best (understatement of the fucking year). I decided to just reschedule my podcasts I had set to drop this week. Podcasts live forever. Humans don't. If you'd like to talk to me on future episodes about this subject let me know... This podcast would benefit with some direction from a spirit having a black experience on earth in America. Much love to you. EDIT: it's been floated that Deepak Chopra (who I quoted) is not making the same choices I choose to make. I have never purchased any of Deepak's work nor do I plan to. My approach to everyone is take what resonates and leave what doesn't... And I definitely only work with healers I resonate with entirely. Just an important caveat. Remember what I said about grey areas?! | https://secure.actblue.com/donate/ab_mn

SYNOPSIS : Le lendemain de ses 10 ans, le village d’un garçon trans est massacré. Sa soif de vengeance va le mener à un réseau de milliardaires. GENRE : Thriller  THÉMATIQUES : capitalisme, transidentité, patriarcat, matriarcat, vendetta, françafrique SHOUTOUT : Les autrices lues par le personnage principal sont : Amzat Boukari-Yabara, Fania Noël. Patricia Hill Collins et Joao Gabriel. INSPIRATION : Le massacre du village d'Ogossagou au Mali, le samedi 26 mars 2019. SOUtien : patreon.com/jogustin et paypal.me/joguestin PRODUCTION : dearnge society ÉCRITURE, INTERPRÉTATION, MONTAGE : Jo Güstin ILLUSTRATION : Pamla SON INTRO/OUTRO : Aly Gouchène VOIX INTRO/OUTRO : Anaïs "Nana" Pinay  MUSIQUE : "The Quest" de Gwen & Tiana

In this episode we have special guest Fairen Kia who is the curator of Love Thy Belly. We explore what Black Aunties mean to us and we also share our experiences as Black Aunties. We dive into the topic of Other Mothering coined by Dr. Patricia Hill Collins. We go from Aunt Viv to Willona and other popular Black Auntie Icons! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/FemmeDrip/message

Podcast Description “We can’t talk about what’s broken with education and coding education in the bootcamp system without zooming out to look at the larger context of our educational system. Why is it that Trump is like “Oh, I’ve got 2 trillion dollars I’ve just spent on purchasing new weapons that we’re gonna use to kill innocent people and destroy cultural heritage sites” in violation of the Geneva Conventions…but they can’t find a quarter of that to fund all the free pre-K up through higher education that they wold need for everyone would just be able to access whatever education they wanted to have, so they could maximize their potential? That’s bullshit.” Sasha Costanza-Chock (pronouns: they/them or she/her) is a researcher, activist, designer, and media-maker. They are a Faculty Associate at the Berkman-Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, Faculty Affiliate with the MIT Open Documentary Lab, and creator of the MIT Codesign Studio (codesign.mit.edu). Their work focuses on social movements, transformative media organizing, and design justice. Sasha’s first book, Out of the Shadows, Into the Streets: Transmedia Organizing and the Immigrant Rights Movement was published by the MIT Press in 2014. Their new book, Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need will be published by the MIT Press in early 2020. Sasha is a board member of Allied Media Projects (alliedmedia.org) and a Steering Committee member of the Design Justice Network (designjusticenetwork.org). Transcription 00:30  Kim Crayton: Hello everyone, and welcome to today's episode of the #CauseAScene Podcast. My guest today is Sasha Costanza-Chock, and pronouns are: and she/her, they/them. Would you please introduce yourself to the audience? 00:44 Sasha Costanza-Chock: Yeah. Thank you so much for having me on the podcast. I am a fan. My name's Sasha Costanza-Chock. I'm currently an Associate Professor of Civic Media at MIT. But I'm also on the steering committee of the Design Justice Network. So, I hope we get to talk about that a little bit today. And I'm a board member of Allied Media Projects, which is best known for producing the annual Allied Media Conference. And I am a scholar and an activist; I work in the tech space, and I'm working on trying to figure out how we can build a technology ecosystem that is more radically just and inclusive and that will challenge rather than continually reproduce oppression and help us build a world that will be ecologically survivable as well. KC: Alright, you said mouthful of that, Sasha! [Laughs] So, we're gonna start as we always start. Why is it important to cause a scene? And how are you causing a scene? 01:46 SCC: Well, we need to cause a scene; there are so many reasons we need to cause a scene right now. Today. I mean, we're having this conversation at a really dangerous moment. I mean, all moments are dangerous for the last 400 or 500 years, though. But the Banana in Chief right now is trying to ramp up to a new war. Hopefully so that—for him—I think this is about remaining in power. But it's important to cause a scene because we live in a deeply fucked up world where racism, anti-Blackness, misogyny, trans-misogyny, misogynoir, ableism, Islamophobia, settler colonialism, and other axes of historical and ongoing oppression just continue to structure so many—well, all of our lives, really—in different kinds of ways. And we need to figure out, how do we break that? How do we break those systems? How do we challenge the "matrix of domination", as Patricia Hill Collins calls it? And how do we build a more liberatory world? And frankly, we need to figure out how do we survive? How do we build a world that we can survive in instead of act as if there's unlimited ecological and human resources that can just be continually exploited? Because at this rate, you know, we're not gonna have too many more generations of humans allowed to survive on this planet. 03:19

Podcast Description “I’m actually working on a book right now…I’m calling it ‘From Barbecue Beckys to Pink Pussy Hats’ - calling out white women and white feminists, because we white women have got some work to do.” Jessie Daniels, PhD is Professor of Sociology at Hunter College and at The Graduate Center, CUNY (Sociology and Critical Social Psychology). She earned her PhD from University of Texas-Austin, where she worked with Joe R. Feagin, and did a post-doctoral fellowship at University of Cincinnati, where she worked with Patricia Hill Collins. Her main area of interest is in race and digital media technologies. She is an internationally recognized expert on Internet manifestations of racism.  Daniels is the author or editor of five books along with dozens of peer-reviewed articles in journals such as New Media & Society, Gender & Society, American Journal of Public Health, and Women's Studies Quarterly. In the early 2000s, she directed a large, NIH-funded research project involving young men leaving Rikers Island, New York City's largest jail. A paper based on that research won the Sarah Mazelis Paper of the Year Award for 2011. In addition, some of her writing has appeared in The New York Times. Her books include, Cyber Racism (Rowman & Littlefield, 2009) and White Lies (Routledge, 1997). Together, these two books offer an exploration of racism on either side of the digital revolution.  She is currently at work several books, including Tweet Storm: The Rise of the Far-Right, the Mainstreaming of White Supremacy, and How Tech and Media Helped. Her current work continues to examine the themes of race and technology through the emerging field of digital sociology. Digital Sociologies, (co-edited with Karen Gregory and Tressie McMillan Cottom, Policy Press, 2016) is a major contribution to this growing field. In 2014, Contexts Magazine said she was "pioneering digital sociology." Twitter Jessie Daniels Become a #causeascene Podcast sponsor because disruption and innovation are products of individuals who take bold steps in order to shift the collective and challenge the status quo. Learn more > All music for the #causeascene podcast is composed and produced by Chaos, Chao Pack, and Listen on SoundCloud. Listen to more great #causeascene podcasts full podcast list >

Esta conversa extra agendaM é sobre pesquisa, pesquisa que rende cultura e compartilha conhecimento. A ideia é que fosse ao ar em setembro, durante o Seminário Democracia em Risco, que trouxe à cidade de São Paulo os ícones do feminismo negro, Angela Davis, Patricia Hill Collins e uniu suas vozes a de outras pesquisadoras e pesquisadores. Então, agora, essa conversa virou um extra do podcast e espero que ressoe em vocês, pois esse é um tema que toca fundo em mim e acredito ser de relevância nacional. Para conversar com a gente: Cyntia Calhado, doutora em Comunicação e Semiótica pela PUC-SP e professora de Comunicação e Audiovisual na Universidade Paulista e Rosana Oliveira, doutoranda em Filosofia pela USP, que falam sobre as suas experiências com bolsas de pesquisas na diferentes fases da formação universitária. Já Beatriz Calil, graduada e mestre em Artes Visuais na Unicamp, com Residência artística no Arteles Creative Center, na Finlândia escreveu o livro "Pequeno guia de incríveis artistas mulheres que sempre foram consideradas menos importantes que seus maridos", publicado pela Editora Urutau e nos conta sobre os bastidores do livro e sua formação acadêmica e artística. No último bloco, Jackeline Romio dá o mapa da mina de Angela Davis e Patricia Hill Collins. Jackeline é doutora e mestre em demografia pelo Instituto de Filosofia e Ciência Humanas da UNICAMP e desenvolve pesquisas interdisciplinares sobre a violência e a relação entre as opressões raciais, de gênero, sexo e de classe social; escritora de artigos científicos sobre os temas do feminicídio, epistemologia feminista, mortalidade feminina, saúde, e indicadores sociais da violência contra as mulheres. Infos: @sigaagendam --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/agendam/message

O feminismo negro juntamente com estudos decolonizadores têm colocado as mulheres que há muito escrevem e debatem a questão da mulher negra na sociedade em evidência. Este ano, Angela Davis e Patricia Hill Collins vieram ao Brasil e enalteceram escritoras brasileiras como Lelia Gonzales, Celi Regina Jardim Pinto, Sueli Carneiro, Djamila Ribeiro, Beatriz Nascimento e tantas outras que há muito lutam pela emancipação da mulher negra no cenário nacional. Houve também a vinda de Silvia Federici que polemizou o trabalho da mulher, e é sobre isso que vamos falar neste episódio. Um trabalho que não é valorizado e ainda é algo remanescente do período que muitos corpos foram escravizados. Para este período dos 16 dias pelo fim da violência contra mulheres e meninas, gostaríamos de falar sobre este tema, ainda tão pouco explorado dentro do recorte feminista. Nossas Convidadas Thais Cardoso - Coordenadora geral da Frente Negra de Ciência Política - UnB Luisa Batista- Presidenta da Federação Nacional das Trabalhadoras Domésticas - FENATRAD Caleidoscópio Curso de podcast OAB-DF Podcast Ponto G 41 Podcast Guilhotina 31 FENATRAD no Facebook e Instagram Filme: Que horas ela volta Documentário: Domésticas - Gabriel Mascaro Livro: O tempo do trabalho das empregadas domésticas : tensões entre dominação/exploração e resistência - Betânia Ávila A luta que me fez crescer - Lenira Maria de Carvalho Livro: Eu empregada doméstica - Preta Rara Tese do Professor Joaze Bernardino Costa: Sindicato das Trabalhadoras Domésticas no Brasil - Teorias da descolonização e saberes subalternos Filme: Histórias Cruzadas Nosso agradecimento especial aos padrinhos e madrinhas:  Alice dos Santos Silva, Marcia Costa, Jean Carlos Oliveira Santos, Carolina da Silva Herrera, Barbara Miranda, Aristoteles Homero, Fabris Martins Cruzeiro, Geovane Monteiro Pedrosa, Ligia Lila, Denise Cortês Dantas, Gleyce Marcia Prazeres, Giulia Losnak, Izabel Lima, Beatriz Sabô, Tássia Gimenes, Renata de França Lima, Elisa Cruz, Rodrigo Azevedo e Rafael Cavalcanti. Seu apoio é fundamental para a continuidade do nosso projeto. Saiba mais sobre o Olhares em olharespodcast.com.br Apoie nosso projeto em padrim.com.br/olhares Música utilizada na abertura do Episódio: I dunno by grapes (c) copyright 2008 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (3.0) license. Ft: J Lang, Morusque

This week, let’s talk about some unschooling vocabulary. There are terms I made up, and terms that our community took on and redefined for ourselves. This episode highlights some of those words. I imagine doing updates of this episode as we continue to develop language together. For now, these ten words offer a good opportunity for us to have shared meaning. It’s also an opportunity to question your own definitions and understandings, and pivot wherever the need arises. UnschoolingSelf-Directed EducationDeschoolingSchoolishnessPervasive WhitenessOthermothering (the brilliant Patricia Hill Collins wrote about this)ReparentingLife DesignIntersectionalityLabrishHere’s a resource for further exploring language in relation to parenting, leadership, and of course, liberation: https://radicalselfie.teachable.com/p/ourpatois This episode was recorded live at She Podcasts. Here’s an excerpt with a few snippets from this page about #Shepodcasts:“She Podcasts began in 2014 as a small Facebook group, built so that our women podcaster friends could have a place online to get quick podcasting answers, tips and resources from one another. However, as soon as the group started, it grew enormously. Friends were adding friends and before long it had been built to over 11,000 women in some phase of building and PRODUCING a podcast. In the spirit of further support, a podcast was created to address issues and podcasting current events as they relate to women. Hosted by Elsie Escobar and Jessica Kupferman, the podcast entitled “She Podcasts” now boasts almost 10000 downloads per month. The vision for She Podcasts is to support and nurture as many female-lead podcasts as possible, and to encourage knowledge sharing without excessive promotion.”Dawn J. Fraser was my absolute favorite workshop facilitator. She was present, brilliant, intuitive, and funny. Here’s her bio, straight from her website:“Dawn J. Fraser is a storyteller, educator and and nationally acclaimed speaker based out of New York City. She is the Host of the live show and upcoming podcast ‘Barbershop Stories’, which features storytellers performing true tales in barbershops and salons. Dawn has created programs for college students, educators and entrepreneurs to develop leadership potential through storytelling, and is an Instructor with The Moth and The Story Studio. She was featured amongst some of the nation’s top innovators and change makers as a speaker at TED@NYC and has performed in shows including The Moth Mainstage, Story Collider, RISK and The Unchained Tour. She loves being a twin, a Trinidadian, and tweetable @dawnjfraser.”Lisa Orkin was also amazingly giving during her workshop. Here’s her website, and here’s a blurb I took directly from her site:I have over 25 years of experience in copywriting, scripting, audio production, voice acting, teaching and speaking in both traditional and digital media. And I have also worked in the world of indie filmmaking making as a writer, actor and producer. Making award-winning films with the likes of Adam Mckay, Shira Piven, and Dweezil Zappa. My current podcast is a wild mix of all my creative lives, Project Woo Woo. Where I have very real conversations with imaginary people. And all this in a tutu and checkered Vans.All kindsa awesome from womenfolk, right? Yeh, I know. Inspiring!One of my favorite podcasts: Unmistakable Creative by Srini RaoSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/akilah)

Os últimos dias ao Sul da linha do Equador foram um verdadeiro angu de grilo. É disso tudo que falamos no episódio #9. A participação da incrível Patricia Hill Collins na FLUP, no Rio de Janeiro; o óleo no mar do nordeste e a inércia do governo federal; As várias crises que estouraram no continente, principalmente no Chile e Bolívia, mas Equador, Peru, Paraguai e Argentina também não ficaram de fora. Ainda deu tempo de passar pelo Brexit. Vem! -⁣ ⁣ O que citamos:⁣ - Festival 3i e FLUP (Festa Literária das Periferias) - Livro: "O pensamento feminista negro", de Patricia HIll Collins - Artigo: "Os usos da raiva: mulheres respondendo ao racismo", de Audre Lorde - Livro: "Você pode substituir mulheres negras como objeto de estudo por mulheres negras contando sua própria história", de Giovana Xavier Toda terça no ar! Para comentar, discordar, perguntar, propor assuntos, papear: angudegrilo@gmail.com Sigam a gente no Instagram!⁣ @belareis⁣ @flaviaol

Mothering within Black communities can take many forms. Dr. Patricia Hill-Collins coined the term “other mother” to describe a woman who cares for a child that is not biologically her own. In many Black families, the role of the aunt has fit this function. Sometimes aunts are blood or marriage relatives but many of them are chosen family – mom’s best friend from college or the elderly neighbor down the street who looks after the community’s children. She can serve as a quiet confidant or a gentle authority figure. This week we spoke writer Brandon T. Harden about his Philadelphia Inquirer article, “They may not get a holiday, but ‘aunts’ are the backbone of the black community.” Later in the show we talk with freelance journalist Sonia Weiser about the troubling financial realities of New York City’s Legal Aid attorneys – many of who have to moonlight as rideshare drivers or bartenders to make ends meet – as highlighted in her New York Times piece, “Lawyers by Day, Uber Drivers and Bartenders by Night.” Strange Fruit wouldn't be possible without you! Click here to support the work we do: donate.strangefruitpod.org

This podcast episode features Dr. Derrick Brooms, an associate professor in sociology at the University of Cincinnati. Dr. Brooms was the featured speaker of the Ohio Consortium of Men and Masculinities in Higher Education conference, which was held at BGSU in Fall 2018. He discusses his research on how to better support black male students on college campuses.   Transcript:     Jolie Sheffer:                          Welcome to the BG Ideas Podcast, a collaboration between The Institute for the Study of Culture & Society and the School of Media & Communication at Bowling Green State University. I'm Jolie Sheffer, an Associate Professor of English and American Culture Studies and the Director of ICS. Jolie Sheffer:                          In partnership with the Center for Women and Gender Equity and the Violence Prevention Center, ICS co-sponsored the Ohio Consortium for Men in Masculinities in Higher Education Annual Conference on September 14, 2018. The Conference featured workshops on mentoring, queer masculinties and violence prevention with a very special keynote address by Dr. Derrick Brooms. Jolie Sheffer:                          Today, we are joined by Dr. Brooms, an Associate Professor of Sociology and Faculty Affiliate in Africana Studies at the University of Cincinnati. Dr. Brooms earned his PhD in Sociology from Loyola University of Chicago and his research focuses on how to better support black male students on college campuses. Jolie Sheffer:                          Some of the topics he explores include campus climate, mentoring and student support initiatives. Jolie Sheffer:                          I'm very pleased to welcome Dr. Derrick Brooms to the program as the first speaker of ICS's 2018-2019 speaker series. Thanks for joining me, Derrick. Dr. Brooms:                           Thank you for having me. Jolie Sheffer:                          We're thrilled to have you here to discuss the important research you've been working on. Can you start us off by telling a little bit about what you're currently working on? Dr. Brooms:                           Right now, I'm continuing to work on research that looks at black male experiences in both secondary and higher education. I also have work that looks at black and Latino males and, in particular, their engagement in leadership on campus. Then across both of those projects, I'm really very much interested in sense of self, identity development and the ways in which identity, race, gender and other social identities matter to students' experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           I'm also looking at a project where people make sense memeing, and share about the killing of black men. Just looking at people from the range of Trayvon Martin to the more recent Freddie Gray and others. Just more recently we've had Botham Jean who was shot and killed in his home. Dr. Brooms:                           Part of it is to invite black men to make sense of the ways in which they experience racism, profiling, stereotyping and killing. Jolie Sheffer:                          Well, and it sounds like this project is like much of your other work, which is really foregrounding the knowledge that people of color have of their own lives and bringing that into academic discourse. Jolie Sheffer:                          Can you talk a little more, especially sociology, historically, doesn't have the greatest reputation for foregrounding the first person experiences and has often treated people of color as objects of study. So could you talk about how your work fits into challenging that history of sociology? Dr. Brooms:                           As you mentioned, there is this approach in sociology about the being objective. Ways in which the individual, that experiential knowledge, has in some ways been marginalized within the discipline. But what we know from lived experience and, in particular, some of my learning and lens is sharpened through black feminisms, so the work of Patricia Hill Collins, who really offered us some groundbreaking work on black women's epistomologies. Dr. Brooms:                           So my work is really building out of this kind of framework where, in my training in African and African-American studies and oral traditions and oral histories that were minimized and diminished because they weren't written histories. Part of it is to bring the I, the self, the voice, back into this kind of serious academic study to really have a better understanding of what it is that people are dealing with, experiencing, how they're making meaning and making sense of the things they've experienced in their lives. Dr. Brooms:                           For me, I see my work as really very much multi-disciplinary. So although I'm in sociology, I'm speaking to education, I'm speaking to Africana studies, I'm speaking to other disciplines. Because, as R.G. Lord says, we don't live single-issue lives. Therefore, when we're trying to do the work, we can't look at it in one only specific realm. Jolie Sheffer:                          Speaking of that idea of interdisplinarity, one of ICS's main goals is to foster collaboration across traditional academic disciplinary boundaries. Can you talk a little bit more about the significance of connecting sociology and education and that with the study of race? Dr. Brooms:                           Interestingly, there is a subfield, if you will, in sociology: the sociology of education. The thing that's really kind of fascinating, if we think about them as two separate disciplines, the sociological approach and the questions that we might generate and ask sometimes look a little bit different than the questions that we might ask within an education, even though we're trying to get at the same thing. Dr. Brooms:                           So for me, it's an opportunity to bring something a little bit different to both fields. Doing writing that gets published in education journals, the questions that I'm asking sometimes look different than some of the traditional questions. So trying to bridge that gap, the point is that it's already there in some ways with the subdiscipline. Dr. Brooms:                           But, when you start talking about the censoring race and bringing in an Africana studies or an Africana lens, that's where the work is really at its full thrust in trying to provide some insights on what is it that black men are thinking about their educational experiences? Not only in their current educational realm, but what is it that led them to this particular juncture? Dr. Brooms:                           A lot of what I'm doing is looking at their narratives. And how do they make sense of their experiences? What are the meanings that they extract and draw from those? Those are things that we absolutely need across all three fields, if we include Africana studies in that. Dr. Brooms:                           Because we know that within education, there is the popular discourse that sometimes dominates what it is that we are thinking about and doing in education. Or there's the political, in terms of neoliberalism or other kind of political climates that we're in. Dr. Brooms:                           Then within sociology, I mean, this is a discipline that is constrained by its own past where there were very intentional efforts to exclude. W.E.B. Du Bois, who is the founder of American sociology, when I think about some of his writings and the groundbreaking work that he did, with work such as Souls of Black Folks or Philadelphia Negro, we can name so many other books that he's authored, it was about giving voice to folks who might not have been given the attention and the resources that they need to improve their lives. Dr. Brooms:                           So part of what I see myself is in that long tradition of other people who have come before me and people who are contemporary and people who will come after me, about bringing those voices forward. Jolie Sheffer:                          In an interview with Inside Higher Ed, you stated that we must do more to understand how black students experience schools and how institutions act on them. Can you talk about some of the schools or initiatives that you think have been really innovative and successful, that could be an example for other institutions? To help counteract some of these forces you're talking about? Dr. Brooms:                           There's a lot of work being done by a lot of different institutions, so I'm going to reserve not naming some institutions so it doesn't seem like I'm privileging them over institutions that I don't know. I just don't want to give it as if these are the only ones. Dr. Brooms:                           There's the few institutions who've announced that they won't look at ACT scores anymore. I think that's quite significant because, again, ACT scores are not a reliable predictor of students' success in college. Dr. Brooms:                           We've seen some institutions who have guaranteed funding for students who come from families with a particular income level. So again, that's allowing those institutions to be a bit more accessible for students who might not, and families, who might not have been able to afford it in the past. Dr. Brooms:                           We've seen some institutions make very intentional partnerships with secondary schools, which, again, allows for the students to become aware of institutions and college-going at much earlier levels than maybe if they had not had those partnerships. And we've also seen higher education institutions make really significant partnerships with communities as well. Dr. Brooms:                           So offering things like summer bridge programs or college immersion programs. Doing things where they create volunteer opportunities for college students to go into communities to work with youth from various backgrounds. In that way, helping youth to connect with college-aged individuals, who might be able to offer some perspective and insight on their own experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           Across the landscape of higher education in the United States, various institutions, both public and private, have engaged in this work. In many ways, I think what's fascinating is that this is the work that many of our community colleges have been doing for a long time. So we see that some of our four-year institutions are picking up on some of the ways in which our community colleges and two-year institutions have invested in communities. Dr. Brooms:                           I think that's helping us make some ground in creating opportunities for higher education to be more accessible for students. Because, again, one of the things that we know is that some of our students who come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, sticker shock is real. If I were to go home and tell my parents that this school costs $60,000, they will shut that conversation down: "There's no way you can go because we don't even make $60,000." Dr. Brooms:                           So some of our colleges and universities, if they really want to value diversity and inclusion and think critically about how can we make this possible, then they have to see that their tuition actually is a barrier for some students even applying. There's no way you can them to attend if they're not willing to apply because of the sticker shock. Dr. Brooms:                           Those are some of the things that I've seen across a number of colleges and universities. I think some of what we've seen at the secondary level is really putting a strong emphasis on college readiness, again to varying degrees of success. And that looks a little bit different depending on which state they were in, which school district they were in. That's intended to raise the college-going numbers of students. Dr. Brooms:                           So we've made some pathways and at the same time, there's still much more work needing to be done. Jolie Sheffer:                          Well, and much of your work is about what happens after recruitment, right? Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          So it's a lot of effort is put into getting more students of color or under-represented groups into college, but then what happens once they get there? You work a lot on black male initiative programs. Could you explain to us what they are and how they add to the college experience? How they differ from maybe more familiar academic or even student affairs programs? Dr. Brooms:                           I'll give a general description. But we do know that, one thing I want to say up front, is that black male initiatives, they vary. They don't all look the same. These initiatives are geared towards enhancing and improving black men's college retention and graduation. So that when we look at when we look at the data across four-year institutions over a six-year period, black male graduation's about 34%. Dr. Brooms:                           That's a number that is easy for folks to say we've got to improve that number. Of course, that's the number nationwide and we know that there is some institutions who do much better. At the same time, we know that there's some institutions who do not do as well. Dr. Brooms:                           The way that these are structure in general, they usually have a staff member, at least one. In some cases, they have multiple staff members who are responsible for coordinating all facets of the program, which includes academic components and social components. Dr. Brooms:                           They are geared towards students who are currently registered students at that institution. Sometimes they even have kind of an alumni base, as well, so some students who've might've matriculated through the college or university. Dr. Brooms:                           Many of them have both an academic and a social component to it, so again, if we're talking about increasing retention and graduation, we've got to have an academic focus. But I think there's a realization that we also need to offer support for the holistic realms of who students are. Dr. Brooms:                           So that social component becomes really important, whereas opportunities to bond with their black male peers or other male peers of color, opportunities to partner with other organizations on campus, whether these be fraternities and sororities, student government, health and wellbeing and things of that nature. Dr. Brooms:                           Some of these black male initiative programs include some form of an outing of sorts. So they might attend the Black Male Summit, say, at the University of Akron here in Ohio. Some of them may go to the Black Male Retreat at the Ohio State University. So depending on what region they're in, what state they're in, there may be kind of a larger beyond-the-institution experience that they want to immerse their students in. Dr. Brooms:                           Some of that and many of these BMIs have a leadership component as well. For me, that's really important where we're empowering students through tangible skills that they can apply to other parts of their student experience, but then even once they leave the institution. Jolie Sheffer:                          In the past, you've said that you encourage college administrators to focus on inclusion instead of a diversity plan. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          And that colleges need to establish and intently pursue inclusion and equity plans. Can you talk about the difference that you see between a diversity plan and one focused on inclusion and equity? Dr. Brooms:                           Yeah. For the most part, when we think about diversity it's really about the demographics. We're going to look at demographics in a way to say and state that we're diverse because we had this number of students from racial and ethnic backgrounds. We might have this number of students from LGBTQ identities. So we can splice that diversity in a lot of different ways. Dr. Brooms:                           But that's really at the numerical and demographic bases. One of the things that I argue is that recruiting students and bringing them to campus to say we're diverse doesn't help students navigate and garner success at that institution. Dr. Brooms:                           So that brings to the point that you raise, and that is in what ways do our students feel like they belong? In what ways do they feel like they're valued and do they matter? In what ways do they feel like not only who they are, but the people that they are connected to are included in the experiences that they have on campus, both from an academic standpoint and from a social standpoint? Dr. Brooms:                           So academically, this work is important because what students want to know is I can see myself in these classrooms in the things that I'm reading, in the things that I'm studying. Or there's space for me to write about myself and my background and my community in some of the writing assignments that I'm required to do. That plays a big role in how students make sense of and feel satisfied about their collegiate experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           By the same token, that's also true in some of the programming that we do, whether it's student-centered, whether it's inviting speakers to campus. What are the messages and what are the things that are being said that are of value about the college experience? Then we have to think about the ways that students translate that to okay, how does this message resonate with me and who I am? Dr. Brooms:                           So inclusion and diversity, I think we can have a conversation about the schematics of those words. But at the heart of it is this notion of equity. At the heart of it is students feel like they belong and they're valued, not just in rhetoric but in the everyday work that people do on campus. Jolie Sheffer:                          You're doing great work and very important work for black men in higher education institutions. As you say, helping them navigate through a system that at best may be benignly neglectful and at times actually hostile to them. What happens to these students once they graduate from college? That's the success measure, right? Jolie Sheffer:                          What happens after that and they're looking to enter the workforce? What are the kinds of challenges they face? Are they similar ones? Are they different one? And how do these programs try and help students navigate that set of hurdles? Dr. Brooms:                           Another component of some black male initiative programs are their professionalization experiences. This is where an alumni base can play a really important part, where you've had some students who were engaged in a black male initiative, they graduated, they've gone off and begun a professional career. Then they come back and they share with students their experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           That really is incredibly important, because what it does for those current students, or many of them at least, is it provides a model and a roadmap. That wait a minute; this person was at this institution. They navigated similar experiences. They made it through and then they're out with a job that they seem to be happy with or engaged in work or in graduate school or whatever that might be. Dr. Brooms:                           So the professionalization is important. Some of this is really even beyond alums. Bringing in speakers who are in the community. They may be people who run or direct or coordinate a community-based organization. Some of them may be entrepreneurs, some of them may be small business owners, some of them may be from national chains and other businesses. Dr. Brooms:                           Having these kind of conversations that are tailored to black males, not necessarily that there's new or different information being told, but they can ask the questions that want to ask and feel like it's valid because I'm in a room with people who value my opinion and my experiences. I think that's incredibly important. Dr. Brooms:                           At the same time, as I mentioned, the leadership experiences are critical because that allows them to enhance their skillset. So you can think of things: cross-cultural communication, time management, working in a team setting. Dr. Brooms:                           All of those are things that many of our employers are looking for. I mean, they ask explicitly. They might ask in the application. They might ask recommenders, "Can you speak to this person's ability to work in a team, in a group?" Dr. Brooms:                           So when we are able to offer the students those types of experiences, I would argue that they are transferrable skills that they can take from those experience and apply it within a work setting. That becomes not only very attractive to employers, but also enhances the sense of self and sense of confidence that some of our students will walk into that job with. Feeling like, "Well, I've had some similar type of experiences and I believe I can accomplish the work that's set out before me." Jolie Sheffer:                          Well, so much of what you're talking about really is a reminder that in colleges and really in K-12 education too, that we're not just teaching subject matter expertise. Dr. Brooms:                           Yes. Jolie Sheffer:                          We're actually teaching people how to understand and navigate the world. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          But at the college level, that drops out of the official curriculum. Dr. Brooms:                           Yeah. Jolie Sheffer:                          Even though it is stuff we expect those students, if they're to be successful, to understand and be able to activate. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          What you're suggesting is that, especially when you're talking first generation potentially college students, that is not stuff that is necessarily already known and understood. Dr. Brooms:                           Absolutely. So to even begin the point that you make, makes me go back to W.E.B. Du Bois and one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Du Bois is that, "Education must not simply teach work. It must also teach life." So are we preparing young people to be successful in the lives that they choose beyond the educational realm? Dr. Brooms:                           One of the things that we know is that our students come from various backgrounds. Some of them have experiences that align well with what they're being asked to do in higher education. And some of our students come from backgrounds that do not align very well. So our students, once they enter our college campuses, some of them are having to learn what it means to be a student in higher education. Dr. Brooms:                           Unfortunately, there's ways in which we don't think about that within higher education. In terms of on the faculty side, where do students know what APA is? I'm being very rudimentary because until somebody explains it to students, they might not know what APA is. The unfortunate reality is that there is a lot of assumptions that it is very for faculty and staff to make about the skillsets and the experiences and exposures that our students should come to college with. Dr. Brooms:                           The reality is, and this is not just black males, this is students across racial and ethnic backgrounds, gender identities, et cetera, urban, rural, suburban. Maybe they're not exposed to those things. So we need to make sure that we're helping to close the gap in terms of language and expectations and the ways in which we think. Dr. Brooms:                           It's a little bit of a shift in terms of the unspoken expectations that we have with who students are and what skills they automatically ought to have: Well, you're in college. You should know. But I don't, so now where do I go? Because what you're telling me is I can't ask you. Jolie Sheffer:                          Right. And who's responsible for filling that gap in knowledge? I mean, higher education has really shifted so much where there's such anxiety because of the costs of higher ed, about ensuring students get jobs. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          That often translates into conversations about vocational training. Dr. Brooms:                           Yep. Jolie Sheffer:                          But what you're talking about is really that kind of success. We're not talking about those people should be groomed for the trades, but rather any kind of professional education has multiple dimensions. It has dimensions of academic or subject matter expertise, but it is also learning a new set of codes and practices. Dr. Brooms:                           Yes. Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          And not knowing those codes doesn't mean you can't do the academic work. It means you haven't yet learned that secret handshake. Dr. Brooms:                           That's right. So something people talk about this in terms of cultural capital, and again, that's privy to what are my background experiences? What have I been exposed to? What's my family background? As you mentioned, these are things that people can learn if we're willing to teach them. Dr. Brooms:                           So then the questions just becomes, well, do they not get it in your class because you're not willing to offer it to them in some form or capacity? And are you still willing to hold them accountable to this metric, knowing that they don't know? Dr. Brooms:                           This is really important, because it also speaks to how students feel like they belong. Where I've got these expectations placed on me and I don't know these things. I don't even know where to go and ask. You know what? Maybe college isn't for me. Jolie Sheffer:                          Does the faculty make them feel stupid for not knowing? Or does the faculty member step up and say, "Oh, let me explain what this is"? Those two things can make a dramatically different- Dr. Brooms:                           Absolutely. Especially when you're thinking about those- Jolie Sheffer:                          ... experience for the black male student. Dr. Brooms:                           ... early transitional experiences. We know that first-year to second-year retention is critical for student persistence in college. So what are those experiences that I'm having that first semester, that first year, that says to me there's people here at this institution that believe that I can do it. I might not be doing the best work that I can do right now, but they don't see that as a limitation in terms of what I'm able to accomplish. Dr. Brooms:                           Sometimes those early reads on folks, sometimes we write people off very early in those early interactions that don't allow them an opportunity to blossom and bloom into who they can be. So what type of environment are we creating where we are helping students pursue their goals and achieve the successes that they believe they can achieve? Or are we inherently closing doors and opportunities on them because we just don't believe that they're going to get there? Jolie Sheffer:                          Some researchers studying the intersection between race and education have observed that much of the scholarship revolving around the black male experience highlights the negatives and outlines what institutions are doing wrong. Some of those folks argue that scholars ought to instead focus on positive experiences and what institutions are doing right in order to create a framework for success. How does your work reflect one or both of those positions? Dr. Brooms:                           I would say it reflects both. It reflects both because my work comes out of student experiences. So if it's one or the other, in some instances it can be, depending on what the topic is. But in many ways it's both. But whatever it is, it is coming through student experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           So I don't approach it, my work, from a standpoint of what might be right or wrong. I approach it from what are your experiences? How do you make sense of that? If these things didn't work, then what did you do in response? Dr. Brooms:                           I'm trying to find out what are the ways in which students try to pursue accomplishing their goals. Invariably, what ends up coming up and coming out are some of the obstacles, roadblocks and challenges that they face. Dr. Brooms:                           Then what we see as we map those experiences into the larger student narratives across colleges within our society, that these are some actual impediments in higher education that doesn't serve, necessarily, some of our student population well. Or these are some of the things that are doing really well. Dr. Brooms:                           I mean, one of the things that students talk about that they have overwhelmingly identified as critical to their success is relationships. So some of these relationships are with their peers, in particular, their male peers who might be in these black male initiatives with them. But very often, it's also about faculty and staff. Dr. Brooms:                           So these students are able to name an individual or a number of individuals who have made a critical difference in their college experience. Sometimes it's intervention. Sometimes it's mentorship. Sometimes it's recommendation because they've been doing well. I don't want to suggest that all of the males are, they're struggling. Dr. Brooms:                           Some of it is informing them about opportunities, because they've been so stellar, academically: "You know what? You've been doing this really well. You might want to think about graduate school in these particular fields." But that's relational. So that relational capital becomes really, really important, because it can point students to resources and opportunities that really has a positive impact on their experiences. Dr. Brooms:                           I think that's critical and I think that's in place at every institution. I think we'd be hard pressed to find an institution where there's not somebody there that are making students feel like they're welcome. Dr. Brooms:                           The fascinating thing is that it's not always faculty and it's not always staff, in terms of people in student affairs. Sometimes it's a custodian. Sometimes it's someone working in the cafeteria. Sometimes it's a librarian whose, across these, through their main job isn't necessarily student success. Dr. Brooms:                           But they have engaged students in interactions that really spoke to the positive realm of making students feel like they belong. Making students feel like they're comfortable. Letting students know that they've got people supporting them, even though they might be in non-traditional spaces where we might look for support. Dr. Brooms:                           So in terms of what institutions are doing right, there's committed people. The hope is that there are more and more of those committed people. And that students kind of build relationship with these individuals early in their careers, so that they can help mitigate maybe some of the challenges and struggles that they might face later on. Jolie Sheffer:                          Well, what you're talking about is some of that mentorship or support right now is accidental or incidental. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          And we in higher education have to work, when you get back to the idea of equity and inclusion, we have to make sure those things are built into our infrastructure, so that it isn't just a happy accident to get that support. Dr. Brooms:                           Yes. Jolie Sheffer:                          But that, hopefully, there are multiple people at multiple levels to building that. What are some of the ways institutions can help build that capacity? Dr. Brooms:                           Some of the BMI programs do these orientation events that are catered specifically to black students in general in some instances, or black males in particular. They also invite faculty and staff to those, so very early on in black male students' college careers they're able to meet people across the university. Dr. Brooms:                           I might not have Dr. Sheffer for class, but I met her and I felt like I had a good conversation with her. And that might be somebody that I reach out to later on down the line. I met people who might've been administrators. I met people who are other staff, whether it's in advising. This individual may not be my advisor, but I know there's a friendly face. Dr. Brooms:                           By introducing students to these individuals earlier, where they can potentially at least plant the seeds for a relationship to grow, is incredibly important early on because it helps neutralize. Some of our students have traveled very far to attend our institutions and so being homesick, being away from family, is a challenge for some of our students. Dr. Brooms:                           So what are the ways in which we can build family-like atmospheres for students very on in their college careers plays a big role. As you mentioned, I think that's really critically important is that our students need multiple ways and levels of support. Dr. Brooms:                           So when I talk to students, even students that I work with very closely, I tell them, "You should not have one mentor. You need a community of mentors. You need a community, period. You need a number of mentors because not one mentor can meet all of your needs." Dr. Brooms:                           So helping students really hear that message and understand that message, in some ways even brokering relationships on their behalf. Not in place of them, but saying, "You know what? You're going to go over to Dr. Sheffer's office. I'm going to walk with you." Dr. Brooms:                           So as opposed to sending a student to an office and hoping the student engages in the conversation, by walking with student, I think that shows a level of care and concern that the students really appreciate. I think it can help plant the seeds for that relationship to develop even further, quicker, which then means that our students have these strong positive relationships early on. Dr. Brooms:                           So that if there's a struggle in a particular class, I might not feel like I can go and talk to that instructor or faculty member, but I do have people on campus that I can go and talk to. And maybe they help me devise an email that I can send. Maybe they help me think through, like, "Oh, well, that might not be the best approach." Dr. Brooms:                           They can help channel those students to tapping into the resources that are available on campus: "Oh, you know what? Maybe you should go check out the writing center. They've got tutors there to help you with any class that you're taking. Oh, have you been to the math tutors?" Dr. Brooms:                           Again, these resources are available. There's stigmas attached to some of these where especially as I think about black males who some exhibit not the best help-seeking behaviors. So de-stigmatizing writing center or math tutors. Whereas like, "Well, you do realize that a lot of students go over there and it's not about you. It's about you getting better at what it is that you're trying to accomplish." Dr. Brooms:                           So helping demystify some of the resources, helping them literally, walking them to other resources, helping brokering meetings with them and other institutional agents, I think is all critical to building that community, to building that support network that can help them navigate the institution. Jolie Sheffer:                          Part of what you're saying makes me think that one of the messages we might want to get out is that while we acknowledge it's really important for students of color to find people on campus that they recognize as having experiences that might be like their own, for looking at people with similar identities, to really ensure a student's success, we need a web of ally-ship that isn't just with individuals who have been designated mentors, designated advisors on an issue. Jolie Sheffer:                          But that faculty, staff members, that sort of white ally-ship and just ally-ship, generally, being not a passive thing of "Well, if a student comes, I'll be helpful." But a sort of actively helping to set up structures and touchpoints to ensure a student's success. Dr. Brooms:                           I absolutely agree. I mean, even as I think about my own experiences when I was in college. We had an admissions personnel by the name of Andre Phillips. Mr. Phillips, I don't even know if he had an open-door policy. I mean, you hear people talk about open-door policies. Dr. Brooms:                           But I know when his door was open, I would knock and he'd let me come in and sit down. He would talk to me about my experiences or he would just let me sit down and read. I knew I had a space on campus that I could go, A. And B, I knew I had somebody I could talk to. My college experience would not have been the same if I didn't have that office. Dr. Brooms:                           It also allowed me to develop the confidence to build relationships with other people, so there are other ... As you can imagine, Andre Phillips was a black male. There were other people who worked in the Admissions Office who weren't black males. They were other people and I built relationships with multiple people in the office because, one, I was in there a lot. Dr. Brooms:                           But it also helped me see that there are many people at the institution who could be a supporter, who could help point me in a particular direction, who could help me better understand an experience that I had or help me pursue an opportunity that I might not have known about. Dr. Brooms:                           I think your point is critical, is that we need a web. I mentioned Andre Phillips in particular because to my knowledge, he never taught a class. So I wasn't going to him for necessarily academic advice, but it was more so in understanding what I was experiencing. And I had an advisor who was Maxine Proctor, who was phenomenal. Dr. Brooms:                           So as I think about people on the staff side, they helped me make sense of what I was experiencing on the academic side. They offered support that helped me believe that I can do this, because they could talk to me about other students who had come through that space. I was in their offices or in the vicinity of them when other students were talking to them. Dr. Brooms:                           I think about those two in particular that helped me see that if I'm going to make it through this place and be successful and accomplish what I want to accomplish, I need a team of folks. And we know that. Dr. Brooms:                           So to your point, it doesn't have to be formal. We can do better at surrounding our students with support and we can do these in very informal ways that allow for dynamism and fluidity for students to tap into it in their own ways. Dr. Brooms:                           But what it also does is allow us, in a sense, these kind of wraparound services where students don't feel like they have to compartmentalize what's academic, what's social, what's personal. But people are here for their kind of holistic development and their success. Jolie Sheffer:                          What's interesting is so much of what you're talking about, that these things that help students be successful, are really low-tech. And low investment in a lot of ways. Right? Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). Jolie Sheffer:                          They're about the human touch. Dr. Brooms:                           Yep. Jolie Sheffer:                          And about personalizing what can feel like a very impersonal, bureaucratic system. Because universities are large, bureaucratic places and I think we forget sometimes that from a student point of view ... I mean, I've been at my institution here 12 years, so I know who to call if I have questions now. Right? Dr. Brooms:                           Right. Right. Jolie Sheffer:                          But students don't. Dr. Brooms:                           Yep. Jolie Sheffer:                          There's so much that can be done in a low-tech way just to make them feel like people again and not like they're a social security number or whatever their student ID number is. Dr. Brooms:                           Mm-hmm (affirmative). And that goes to this sense of belonging, sense of mattering and sense of value. When people know you by name, I mean, that makes a difference in what students experience. It's one of the guys that I work with said, "They notice when you're not there." That means that I'm looking for you to be there and I want you to be there. Dr. Brooms:                           As you mentioned, I mean, these are all from that point of humanity, that point of human touch, where being in proximity to others really does help feel like I'm supposed to be here. Whereas if I'm just trying to figure this all out by myself and I feel alone, I feel isolated, I feel alienated, that makes this work being a student that much harder. Dr. Brooms:                           That impacts students in very real ways. That not only impacts their academic work, it also impacts them personally and socially. It impacts their wellbeing. It impacts their social-emotional wellbeing. We know that college is a place where there's so many opportunities but also can be alienating and isolating. So that human touch is critical. Jolie Sheffer:                          At ICS, we are invested in fostering conversations outside of academia as well as within our campus and with other academics. How do you see your work influencing people outside of the academic world? Dr. Brooms:                           When I think about some of the service work that I engage in ... I'm heavily invested in numerous communities and some of that is through Boys and Girls Club. Some of that is through YMCA. Some of that is just through the neighborhood and some neighborhood organizations. Some of that is with families. Dr. Brooms:                           I think that engaging with these different communities and community members and organizations really keeps the work that I do very focused on individuals and families. So one of my tag lines is that I wouldn't be a professor if there were no students, period. Dr. Brooms:                           We know that our students come from families. They come from communities, so part of our work should be centered, I believe, and maybe that's kind of my Africana studies training coming out, where the community is important to what it is that, the work that we're doing when we talk about equity and social justice and things like that. Dr. Brooms:                           But I also know that our students have lives beyond the academy. Some of the students who I work with and connected with, they have graduated and they participate in things beyond their professional lives. Like flag football. I'll go to those games because I'm invested in them as people and not everybody's going to stay in higher education or the academy for their careers. Dr. Brooms:                           Obviously, as a student doesn't mean they're going to go back and work in those spaces. So showing up in other areas of people lives, really reveals to them, shows them and demonstrates that you do care about them beyond just what they do academically and how well they might perform in terms of a GPA and things of that nature. Jolie Sheffer:                          And only while they're your student. Right. Dr. Brooms:                           And only while they're on your campus. This goes to technology, where we can really take advantage of it. I have students that I have text conversations with that we set up phone calls, saying, "Hey, man, I haven't talked to you for a while. We need to check in on each other." Dr. Brooms:                           This is both men and women, even though most of my research is on black males. They are students who have moved to different parts of the country I've written recommendation letters for, but that's because they've asked me to. So there's something about the relationship that they value and they believe that I'm going to speak well in their behalf. Dr. Brooms:                           Some of them are working in their jobs and they just call me, reach out, talk to me about how it's going. But I think that's part of community, is that our work is not just confined to the walls of the institutions where we work. For me, it spills out into the communities and where our students and where people live and the families that they develop and engage in and the communities they build outside of that. Jolie Sheffer:                          Thank you so much, Derrick. Dr. Brooms:                           Thank you. Jolie Sheffer:                          It's been a pleasure talking with you. Dr. Brooms:                           Absolutely. Jolie Sheffer:                          Our producer today is Chris Cavera. A special thanks to the College of Arts and Sciences, The School of Media &           Communication, the Center for Women and Gender Equity and the Violence Prevention Center. Thanks so much. Dr. Brooms:                           Thank you.  

We have the honor of speaking with author, social worker, and community activist Feminista Jones about the importance of supporting black women at the workplace and the ways in which people can help lift up and advocate for them. We also talk about her new book, Reclaiming Our Space, and announce a giveaway of some free copies!Connect with Feminista on IG and Twitter!Her new book, Reclaiming Our Space: AmazonPatricia Hill Collins’ catalog: AmazonTRANSCRIPTAde: "An extensive survey of hundreds of books, articles, and white papers concludes that women leave the tech industry because they're, quote, treated unfairly, underpaid, less likely to be fast-tracked than their male colleagues, and unable to advance. A study by the Center for Talent Innovation found that 20% of women in tech feel stalled in their careers and 32% are likely to quit within one year. 48% of black women in tech feel stalled." This excerpt from Rachel Thomas called The Real Reason Women Quit Tech (and How to Address It) speaks to the ever-present challenges women, especially those of color, face at work. The common narrative is that diversity and inclusion drive innovation. If so, why are black women so often on the short end of the stick, and what does it look like to effectively support them? My name is Ade, and this is Living Corporate.Zach: So today we're talking about supporting black women at work.Ade: Yeah. So why do you think we're focusing specifically on black women and not talking about women as a whole?Zach: Well, one I think because the reality of intersectionality is real, right? The fact that we exist in multiple spectrums, not just one or the other. I think that when you talk about--when we have conversations about gender, they often can be overly binary in a way that really erases the very real experiences and perspectives of millions of people, particularly when it comes to black women. You know, often times we ignore the fact that, historically, the feminist movements of the early 1900s ignored or aimed to kind of like neutralize and minimize black women's voices. We ignored the fact that black women have endured a history of abuse and negligence by our country. I think that we really often enough just don't talk about and really seek to empower black voices and experiences, particularly black voices and experiences who are women. So that's why I think we're talking about--we're zooming in on black women today.Ade: So you can't see me, but I nodded so hard throughout all of that. I want you to know that if I have whiplash in the morning, I'm billing you directly.Zach: Don't bill me. Don't bill me please.Ade: No, thank you for sharing that. To kind of expound and share some of my own personal experiences, I mean, I've been in situations where I had my bonus docked at work, and I'm asking for concrete reasons as to why I don't have all my money, because I earned this bonus, and the manager is making excuses like, "Oh, well, your computer failed, therefore you didn't get this deliverable in on time," and I'm like, "Okay, so you acknowledge that this was something that this was not within my control and I'm still being punished for it anyway?" And I had no allies. Like, I had plenty of people who were nice to me, plenty of people within that space who would listen to me and bring me coffee and acknowledge that I would be, you know, one of the few people who would show up to work on Sundays to get work done, which I'm never doing again. But nobody felt the need to go to bat for me the same way that they did for other people, and I think in retrospect there were a lot of people who were like, "Oh, she's got this. Oh, she's strong enough to deal with this. Oh, she'll speak up for herself." I mean, and I did, but nobody was listening to me, right? And that's just one of several occasions in which I felt alone. I felt like I was being punished for things that were outside of my control, and even when I spoke up for myself people would treat me as though as I was overreacting or disturbing the peace by just asking to be treated fairly, right? And I found that ultimately I have had to be my own best advocate, and I think in ways that others don't even have to think about, right? Thinking about ways in which I am communicating. For example, I have a pretty sarcastic sense of humor.Zach: Yep.Ade: Thank you for backing me up. But I found that there are situations in which I have consciously dialed back, because I recognized that there were people who would say that I am being mean or that if I am not relating to the topic at hand--for example, people are just kind of talking through experiences that I've never experienced. I'm not gonna get up every day and wash my hair. That's not how my hair functions. And so if I'm quiet in that conversation, people will report that I'm being standoffish. And so there are all of these things and all of these micro-aggressions that ultimately lead to me feeling isolated and unsupported in various workplace scenarios and situations. And so ultimately I want a world in which I don't have to feel different. Like, I want to feel as though I can bring my whole self to work, my whole self, whether my twist-out is bomb or not, whether I feel like I need to go on every single coffee run with every single one of my coworkers just so that I feel like I belong. But that's a conversation we can have a little bit later. Can you think of any situations that you've observed in which you felt that the black woman or black women in your spaces weren't being taken seriously or were being treated differently?Zach: So for sure, right? Interestingly enough though in my career, I have not--I haven't really worked with a lot of black women who were not actually much more senior than I was, right? So, you know, my first experience when I think about it was I was in industry. I was in the oil and gas industry, and she's now a mentor of mine. She's easily one of the most learned, most educated people that I know period. Like, she has an MBA, a Ph.D. She teaches. She's a college professor. And it was interesting watching her navigate these spaces, like, despite her education, people still, like, kind of, like, looking past her or, like, looking through the things that she would say and kind of just cutting her off and making a lot of very presumptive statements.Ade: Ooh. Cutting her off? Good lord.Zach: Cutting her off. Cutting her off, yeah, and watching her handle those situations with a lot of poise and grace and a still certain level of, like, firm confidence. Like, "Okay, nope. I got it." And she's--you know, she's about, like, my mom's age, so certainly she's had a litany of experiences that I would imagine have, you know, helped her kind of deal with what it means just to be who she is in the spaces that she exists. But yeah, I think--I think that that's been, like, the most common experience that I've seen, like, black women in the workplace who would be directors, senior managers--again, they were always senior to me--and they would be--they'd just be dismissed. Like, their opinion would be kind of, like, taken with a pound of salt, slight eye rolls and things of that nature, or kind of to your point, even I've seen situations--and this has been my experience as well, but we're not talking about Zach's experiences, we're talking about black women's experiences--where people will--you know, they'll smile and they'll nod, and then they'll go off and they'll do exactly what they want to do anyway.Ade: Oh. Oh, my God. This is--this is just bringing back so many different flashbacks.Zach: [laughs] No, but it's real though. I've seen that, like, where it's like, "Oh, okay. Yeah, okay. Yeah, no, for sure," or like I said, you know, they'll say things--they'll be very nice, but then, like, they don't really support you, and I think that kind of, like, speaks to a larger phenomena of people who think that you being nice is in some way you being an advocate, right? Like, no. Like, you're just being nice. Like, there's a difference, and I think to your earlier point about, you know, people saying you're overreacting, I think people--it's so funny. Like, when it comes to--in my experience when it comes to people of color, particularly women of color, folks are really able to see the implications of their decisions with folks' careers when it's their career.Ade: Mm-hmm, say that.Zach: But they don't understand--like, they don't understand the reality of your decision when it comes to my money, right? So, like, when you sit back and you say, "Oh, okay. Well, yeah, you know, your computer didn't work, and so we cut your bonus." You understand, like, you're taking away my money? You're taking away my livelihood. We live in a capitalistic society. Like, I need bread to live.Ade: Right.Zach: So when you sit back and you make decisions that are gonna impede my promotion, they're gonna impede my ratings, they're gonna impede my bonus, like, you're actively taking money out of my pocket. So if you're gonna do something like that where you're gonna take money out of my pocket, you need to have a quantitative, valid, ethical and legal reason--Ade: Have an ironclad reason.Zach: An ironclad reason to do so, and it's just crazy that people don't grasp, like, you know, you're talking about my bread. We're gonna have a problem. But guess what though? I bet if somebody came at you like that, you'd be the first one to run to a lawyer, to run to whoever you're gonna run to who's gonna listen to you.Ade: You'd be on the phone with [inaudible].Zach: On the phone [inaudible] lickety-splickety. So, like, why are we playing?Ade: [laughs] Lickety-splickety.Zach: Lickety-splickety.Ade: But yeah, I couldn't have said it better myself. I spoke only of my own experiences, but there's, like, a litany of experiences of the women in my circle and the women who are well above me who are just dealing with things that I don't think they would be dealing with if they were white men, right? Just being excluded or people being condescending to you or people either treating you like you're the third rail and they can't speak to you like you're a regular human being, or when they do speak to you it's with this air of condescension like they know better than you what to do when you're the subject matter expert, and it's just--I can't list literally every single one of things, but I do know this. I know that the tide is going to have to turn, not just because that it is so, but because people who have been studying and working and putting in time and effort to elucidate just what it means to be a black woman in America have extended themselves, right? And so I know that the work is being done. I know that I am just a small piece of a much larger universe of women who are like, "Yeah, this is cute and all, but we're not having it. Thank you." And of those, I think you had the opportunity to speak to one very, very amazing writer. You want to introduce her?Zach: Yeah, so absolutely. So I got the opportunity, or rather Living Corporate had the opportunity, to speak with Feminista Jones. For those who may not know her, she's an activist, she's a black feminist. She's a wonderful person, great writer, and she actually has written a book called Reclaiming Our Space, and we'll get into that in the interview. The next voice you're gonna hear is in the interview that we had with Feminista Jones, and we'll talk to y'all soon.Ade and Zach: Peace.Zach: And we're back. And as we said before the break, we have Feminista Jones on the show. Feminista, welcome to the show. How are you doing?Feminista: I'm doing well, thank you. How are you?Zach: I'm doing great. Now, let me--let me ask you this. For those of us who don't know you, would you mind sharing a bit about yourself?Feminista: Sure. For those who don't know me, I am a writer. I am a social worker. I am an activist. I am a speaker, I am a mother, and I am a really amazing friend.Zach: Let's go, yes.Feminista: I do a lot around really advocating for girls and women, advocating for racial justice. I do a lot of anti-poverty work. That's, like, my main primary focus is anti-poverty work. And I'm located in Philadelphia. I'm a native New Yorker, but I moved to Philadelphia a couple years ago because I really wanted to do work to fight poverty, and this city has such a high poverty rate that I wanted to come here and see what work I could help, you know, get done while I'm out here.Zach: So today we're talking about supporting black women in the workplace.Feminista: Mm-hmm. [laughs]Zach: [laughs] I am familiar with your content and your work through social media. We're excited to have you here because of your thought leadership in this arena. So what do you think are some practical ways black women can be better advocated for and supported in their 9-to-5 jobs?Feminista: This is a really great question. I'm someone who is in a senior management position in the social work field, in the community activism fields, and a lot of people have misconceptions about, you know, community work and social work and think that it's just about low-paying work all the time. And some of it is, but there is a lot of opportunities to move up, and when you're in a senior-level position you've got to use multiple skill sets. And I think, just for black women, you know, people make a lot of assumptions that we can do so much all the time, and they rely on us to do that. So I think a lot of times people take for granted the contributions that we make or they take advantage of them, and they may expect that, you know, black women will just handle it, you know? Whatever the fires that need to be put out, black women come with an extinguisher. You know, we're the problem solvers, and a lot of times, you know, we have no choice. We have to because we're looked at, you know, one as being black, two as being women. We're looked at it being doubly, you know, incompetent, and I feel like we've worked so hard to prove otherwise. And you're working alongside men or alongside white people or reporting to men or reporting to white people. You have to, like, be mindful of how you're gonna be perceived, and I think one of the biggest challenges facing black women in the workplace is this idea that people make assumptions about our attitude and our personality and just based on our affect, or, you know, they say we have attitudes or we have issues with communication. And that's one of the things that I struggle with, because I feel like men are celebrated for being, you know, direct and blunt and forward and aggressive. I feel like white people are celebrated for, like, not taking no for an answer and, you know, really kind of just putting it out there and taking risks, but it's like when black women do it, you know, people kind of look at us like, you know, we just tried to suggest something really radical. They kind of look at us like, "How dare you?" almost, and it sucks because we are smart and we are capable, we are talented, and sometimes it's just we're not appreciated simply because we're black women.Zach: That's just--that's so true, right? So, like, as a black man in the workplace--so I'm a consultant, and I don't often really work with black women on projects. I don't really work with other black people often, but when I do I notice that there's this--there's this pattern where if a black woman speaks up--I've noticed where if they speak up and they're being assertive, it is taken completely different than when a white woman speaks up as being assertive and certainly when a man, especially a white man, speaks up and is being assertive. Now, speaking for myself as a black man, there's also, like, a weird balance, right, because we--like, black men do participate in patriarchy of course, and we also--we also sit higher on the privilege pyramid than black women, and at the same time there's a--there's a certain level of balance in terms of not being too assertive but but not being assertive enough at the same time. It's like you truly can't win for losing, so I definitely--I relate to that, and I have--and I've seen it more than a few times with black women, especially if they're, you know, a bit more seasoned in their careers. Let's say if they're, like, over 35 and they really know what they're talking about, they're often seen as a--they're often seen as a threat as opposed--Feminista: Absolutely, absolutely. And I just wanted to touch really quickly what you were saying about, you know, black men in the workplace. Like, I've had situations where I've been, you know, on the same level as a black man, and, like, he's made mistakes, and I'm like, "I'm not trying to have this brother go down," you know what I mean? Because he messed up, or I'm not gonna make him look bad in front of these white people that hired--you know, that are over all of us, but at the same time I'm looking like, "Bruh," like, "I need you to get it together."Zach: And support me.Feminista: "You can't rely on me to fix all your things, you know?" Like, you know that I have a certain skill set. You know that I'm not gonna let you fail 'cause you're my brother, but at the same time don't take that for granted.Zach: That's so true.Feminista: And then when you do have the space to advocate for me as, like, a woman, I need you to do that, and I think, you know, one of my colleagues, I had a great conversation with him, and he said, you know, "I can get the race stuff with the snap of a finger," he said, "but every time you point out something about gender," he said, "I think about it, like, what if this was being said about a white person?" And he's like, "And I feel so stupid that I don't get it," you know? And so it's--like, there's work to be done, and he's acknowledging that, like, some of his gender stuff is still real, and it's almost like I have to compare it to race to help him to see it more, and he hates it. Like, he feels so bad, and he, like, resents it, but, you know, definitely he's getting better, and I respect him for at least doing the work. But there are, like, those boys' club kind of environments that while I know a lot of brothers say that, you know, they have their own experiences, they're still invited into those clubs before we are.Zach: That's true. Absolutely, absolutely. So I've been married for about 5 years, 5 1/2 years, and being married has really helped open my eyes to male privilege. And again, like, it's a--I think black men, like, we can get really sensitive about kind of broaching that topic 'cause it's like, "Well, there's still racism." It's like, "No." Absolutely, like, white supremacy still exists, and it subjugates all non-white people. At the same time, there's still a nuance, an element of privilege that we participate in because we are men, and it's important to realize that. Also to your point around women helping--you said you've helped your colleagues in the past 'cause they're a brother, and shout-out to the countless black women in my career who have pulled me aside and helped me and taken the time to just--felt the need to just educate me or mentor me. Really that's really the inspiration behind Living Corporate, because I didn't have a lot of those people in my family coming up giving me, you know, professional wisdom and insights, but it would often be black women pulling me aside and being like, "Hey, look now. [I know that you did this?]."Feminista: [laughs] Yeah, I hear that a lot. You know, if my colleague listens to this he'll laugh, because just the other day we were at the--we were at a conference, and we went to the bar, and I sat him down and we were drinking, and I turned to him and I said, "Look, I'ma need to get your ass together," you know what I mean? Like, I really--he said, you know--and he got quiet. He's like, "I know it's coming from love. I know it's coming from a good place," but it's like--it is, because it's like, "Brother, I don't want to see you fail, but, you know, some of the things you're doing is like--I need you to do better," and I said, "I'm gonna help you because I have the resources and I have, you know, the ability to do that, because I want to see you succeed," and I think sometimes, you know, I think within our spaces, particularly as black women, it's like we are so few when we're in, you know, these upper spaces, it's like we look to each other to build community, and it's like that's all we got, you know? That's really all we got, and so it's hard when there's tension there, 'cause it's like, "We shouldn't have tension between us." We can disagree on things, but honestly we all we got.Zach: We've got to work together.Feminista: That's the approach I'd take, yeah.Zach: Absolutely, and you know--I don't want to get on too much of a tangent, but your other point around there is, like, this desire and, like--'cause I cape for black women every day. Like, I have to. My mom is black. My wife is black. Like, I have black sisters. I love--I love black women, right? And what I realized is a lot of times I do believe that there has--there is a pattern of black men, like, using up black women, like as means of support and encouragement and all these different things and really taking them for granted. And I've seen it--I have seen it in the professional workplace. Of course I've seen it in the workplace. We see it in relationships. We see it--we see it in a variety of spaces, and I do believe to your other--to your point around black men need to play a more assertive part for advocating for, speaking up, and supporting black women as well. Okay, so let me ask you this. I do feel as if language is becoming more inclusive but at the same time not as explicit when it comes to centering blackness, specifically black women. So as an example, we hear things like "person of color" or "women of color," but often in my opinion our race is the uniqueness of black identity and black feminine identity. So my question is one, am I tripping, and if two--if not, what are ways to affirm and assert intersectional identity, do you think?Feminista: Mm-hmm. Well, you're not tripping, and I think, you know, anti-blackness is, you know, a quite valuable currency, even among black people. We have all internalized the idea that black is bad, and it's going to take generations, centuries of work, to collectively divest of that idea that blackness is tarnishing, blackness is a blemish. And so there are people who will say women of color, people of color, rather than just saying black, because people have been afraid to say black. And, you know, of course for some people, you know, black means a black American, but for me, you know, when I say black I mean, you know, inclusive of everyone in the diaspora, whether you are from the continent, whether you're from South America, North America, Asia, wherever, Europe. For me that's just a unifier. For others it means different things, you know? So a lot of times people shy away from that, and then when they say people of color or they say women of color, in many ways it does dilute the focus, and what happens is this. So much of what happens to women, like, say, in a negative way, happens to black women, and so people want to use our statistics to make their points. And so they'll say "women of color," right, but of those 10 women of color, like, 7 of 'em are black, and so they can say, you know, "70% of women of color experience this," and it's like, "Yes, seven black women experience that." [laughs] We see that in the feminist movement. We see that in the queer movement. We see that wherever black people exist. Folks want to use our statistics to push their agenda, and I have a problem with that. I have a very serious problem with that, and I agree with you. Like, we need to name blackness for what it is, or if you want to say African-American or Afro-Latino, whatever you want to say. They need to name it for what it is, because it's real. Like, if you look at some place like Brazil, it's--like, you can't say there's 55 million, you know, women of color in Brazil. No, there's 55 million black women in Brazil, you know? And that's more black--there's more black women there than there are black people in the United States. So no, we have to name these things, and it's powerful. It's powerful when you name blackness for what it is, for its achievement and success but also for its struggle, because it puts the focus and the spotlight on us. So, like, when you're talking about black women and black feminine identity, particularly, like, in the workspace and beyond, we have to focus specifically on that, because an Asian woman is not facing the same hair issues. She may have similar name issues on her resume, right? But she's not--she's not facing the hair issues, right? An Indian woman may be seen as, you know, she's super smart with tech, because that's an assumption that is made, you know? It's very different for us, you know? Either a biracial woman, you know, may not have the same issues with color if her skin tone is lighter. You know, there's a--there's a lot of things that are going on there that we need to name explicitly.Zach: And see, I think--and my anxiety about even bringing that question up is that people will hear that and say, "Oh, okay. Well, now you're excluding other people," when not at all. Really what we're trying to do is push that we're explicit with identity language across the board, right? So you just gave three examples, right, of why it's important to be specific when it comes to speaking to identity and intersectionality. I believe that we see it at a larger point, and we talked about this in season one, around the pay gap, and we talked about--we talked about that from the perspective of, you know, when you conflate gender across the board and you say, "Well, women believe this, and men are like--" Well, no. Like, that's--I mean, just being a very, like, initial cut, black men and white men do not have the same experiences. Black women and white women do not have the same experiences. Asian women and white women don't have the same experiences. So it's really empowering across if we can have the courage to just speak explicitly to who we're talking about.Feminista: Yeah, yeah. And, I mean, the experiences are different. People will say, "Oh, women make 77 cents on the dollar," but that's not true for a black woman. A black woman is more like 56 cents, 54 cents or something like that.Zach: It is, yeah.Feminista: Like, it's different. Again, but that's, like, padding the numbers, and things like that to bring down the average, 'cause I believe, like--I think I read something like Asian women are on par with white men, and white women are, like, 80% or something like that. Like, they're--Zach: So it's crazy. Like, the numbers absolutely agree [inaudible]. Like, you know, I've seen numbers that are, you know--so, like, white men are 100%, and then white women might be at, like, 77 cents. Black women are at 64 cents, and black men are at, like, 67 cents or 68 cents. But, like, we never talk about--we never talk--not we never talk about, that's not fair, because there's plenty of people driving those discussions, but when you talk about, like, the major narrative talking points in the media, we don't ever talk about the fact that, like, white women make more than black men. Like, that's--I've never heard that, right?Feminista: Oh, I've heard that discussion quite a bit. I mean, it just--we may just be in different circles.Zach: I defer.Feminista: You know, I've heard quite a bit, and it is important, you know, to discuss, because, I mean, it's the truth, right? So it's like--you know, but black women just kind of sit back and be like, "Y'all have at it," because you're either gonna bicker over the race thing or you're gonna bicker over the gender thing.Zach: It's never both, right?Feminista: And we're both. We're the ones that are saying it's both, you know? [laughs] And nobody wants to listen to us on either side, so you all hash it out.Zach: You're absolutely right. No, you're absolutely right, and so--and no, I defer. I would trust that if you've heard it then it's--then those conversations are happening in the right places. So I believe that leads us well into your book, Reclaiming Our Space. Can you talk a bit about the book and how you arrived at that title?Feminista: The title was really interesting. It took us a while to get there. I didn't know what I wanted to call it. What I did know was, you know, shout-out to my editor, Rakia Clark at Beacon Press. She's amazing. She's fantastic. She helped me along the way. On--okay, so if we talk about the book, I--she came to me, right? I guess she was among a bunch of folks who thought I had already written something like this, because my first two books were self-published and did really well, and so I was never--like, I wasn't looking for a publishing agent or a publisher or anything like that. I wasn't looking for a literary agent. I was like, "I can just do it myself," you know? And cut out the middleperson, but when she came to me and approached me it was like, you know, "Have you written anything like this?" And I was like, "No." She was like, "Well, do you want to?" Like, "We're interested in this," and I was like, "What? Sure, okay," and the idea was really to write about not just modern black feminism but specifically kind of speak to my experiences and those of my peers of existing as black feminists in these digital spaces. So ultimately the book is about how black feminists and black women, even those that don't openly identify as feminists, have been able to build community by using digital platforms and how social media has been a--you know, basically a change agent in how we do activism or how we connect across the world and how it's changed our ability to get our messaging out and to change the face of feminism, and we've been able to educate people and influence popular culture and shape laws and everything, you know? I talk about our political influence. I talk about our, you know, influence on television and, you know, this whole live tweeting thing came from us. And, you know, we're talking about black women voting. We're talking about critiquing white feminism. We're talking about--even things down to, like, quote tweeting and threading tweets and things like that. Like, all these things really became popular because of us. So I do a deep dive into that, but I start off with basics of, you know, what is black feminism? I wanted to write a primer for black feminism that was accessible to people of today. We know that people have shorter attention spans. They really want the hot takes. They want the summaries and things like that. They're not going to sit down with a thick Patricia Hill Collins book, although they should. They're not going back and reading, you know, everything from bell hooks, everything from Toni Morrison. They may not even know who Florence Kennedy is, right? But they need to, and so I was like, "Well, how do I tell our story? 'Cause I need to show how we got here," and so I do give a very straightforward quick primer on black feminism, and I go back, like, 125 years or so, and then I bring us to the present, and I'm like, "Well, here are your modern black feminists of today," and so I'm talking about, like, my sister Jamilah Lemieux. I'm talking about Imani Gandy. I'm talking about Zerlina Maxwell. I'm talking about, you know, these really--CaShawn Thompson, who created Black Girl Magic. You know, I'm talking about these women who, right now, in present day, are making history. I'm talking about Trudy, you know? And just a bunch of others. They're currently making history. Not just black history, not just women's history, but they are making history in the ways in which they are transforming these social media platforms. We are creating campaigns. We are, you know, changing literally the world and culture, and I'm writing all about it, 'cause I felt that it needed to be documented. We needed to have something that encapsulated this entire moment right now.Zach: So for our audience, I think many have heard of the term feminism, but the modifier black is still new for a lot of people. So would you mind explaining the difference between what we often think of as feminism and black feminism?Feminista: That's a great question. I get it a lot, and I think the difference is just we are directing people to our identity as black women, which we believe is important in every discussion about our womanhood, and I think, as I said earlier about kind of looking at the both sides of things, the gender and the race, there's a really great collection of works that really references this idea that, you know, all of the men are black and all of the women are white. When we think about, within our black community, you know, blackness really is depicted through a black man, and those are our leaders, and those are the people we care more about when they're killed by police and all these other things, but when it's for a woman, when we think "woman" it's white women, right? But some of us are--we exist in the middle, and to say that we are feminists is--you know, it's a collective idea. All people, women--all women of all races can be feminists, but when we say that we are black feminists, we are saying yes, we believe in women's rights, yes, we support gender, you know, equality, and yes, we support equity, but don't forget that we're black and that we have different issues on top of all of these other issues that women deal with, right? So we have all the feminist issues AND those that come with being not just black but black women within the black community.Zach: You know, it's interesting that you say that because, you know, I have a colleague who is a very senior leader, and she's a white woman, and she said, "Yeah, Zach. I mean, I'm a woman, but I'm white, right? Like, I don't have it that bad," and so--and she kind of chuckled about it, and she was like, "But let's be honest, I don't." And I said, "Okay." You know, with that being said--Feminista: Well, she's right.Zach: She is right. I said, "Yep." [laughs] Yeah, and I laughed. I was--you know, kind of as an aside, I laughed because I was so shocked because she's so senior and she was being--she was speaking so frankly that I said--I laughed and I said, "Well, you know, you're right. You're right," and so it leads me to this question. What are some practical ways you believe white women can support black women generally and at work? And what have you seen be helpful in your journey?Feminista: If I say get out the way, is that too harsh? [laughs] Nah.Zach: It's your energy.Feminista: You know, I mean, ultimately--the bottom line is this. There is no single person I believe that is willing to totally divest of whatever privilege they have if it means staying alive and it means that their children are fed, and I don't care who you are. You will cling to some privilege, whatever privilege you have, to make sure that you can stay alive and that your children are fed. With that said, there are white women who I have really come to know and love and respect, who value my opinions, my thoughts, my work, and amplify it without adding qualifiers to it. They'll share my work. They'll share information about my articles and my books, and they'll direct people to events that I'm having or things like that. They'll use their platforms to really kind of boost, you know, the work that I and other people are doing, which is super important. In the quiet spaces that I don't even have access to they'll stand up for me and folks like me. They'll call out people that are close to them, you know? Even at the risk of losing those connections. Those are women that I find to be truly amazing when you're talking about in the corporate space. I'm coming from, you know, the social work/non-profit field, and we know that that field is ripe with white saviors. Many liberal white women, and men, you know, kind of get into this work 'cause they want to "do good" and they want to "help the needy," and sometimes that can really be actually racist, 'cause the assumptions they make about, you know, people in need or poor people or black people or things like that under the guise of wanting to help can be rather violent. So I've had my share of run-ins with white women in that space, 'cause I'm like, "You'll never tell me that you know what's better for a black child than I do." [laughs] I don't care who you are. We have the same education and experience. But what you can do in that space is really just listen, and I think that, you know, social media definitely has made it a lot easier to listen and to access the voices and experiences of marginalized folks, whereas a lot of white women never really had exposure, you know, in such even and equal platforms. I can tweet just as much as you can, so we have an even playing field right there, and you can listen and you can read and you can learn from me as I'm telling you my experience that I just had today. You don't have to pick up a book later on in the year of anecdotes. You can see right now that I am telling you that 20 minutes ago my white boss did this, you know? And I think that that's really helped white women come to understand more about the daily experiences of women of color and black women specifically. So a lot of women are actually--you know, especially millennials. The younger folks are really kind of just, like, "Eff it. I'm just gonna say what I need to say."Zach: Yeah, we with the smoke. Yeah. [laughs]Feminista: "I'm gonna stand up for this--I'm gonna stand up for this black woman right here, 'cause this ain't right," you know? And I love the energy. I mean, you know, for an older person like myself, I really love the energy that I'm seeing. So maybe we'll see some major changes coming.Zach: Maybe so. That's my prayer for sure. Before we get out of here, let me ask you this. What was the process like for you writing this book? I know you talked about that you were self-published before. This was a different journey. You know, did you learn anything about yourself from this journey?Feminista: Oh, my gosh. Yes. This is totally different. My first book I wrote over the course of 2 years. The second one I actually pulled some pieces that I had written before and wrote some new ones, but it only took me a few months. This one I was on a deadline. I had, like, "You need this by this time and this by this time, and you need to get this in, and you need to review this, and we need this back by this day," and I was like, "What is happening?" I've been the kind of person who, if you give me a deadline it starts to feel like work, and sometimes when it starts to feel like work it doesn't come as--you know, it doesn't flow as well. So I struggled a little bit with that. I had 6 months to write it, and the first 2 months I just was like, "What?" I was like, "What is going on?" I had just had, like, a really bad breakup. I was depressed. I was like, "I don't want to do anything with anyone ever, and I don't want to talk anyone, and I don't want to do--" I couldn't write a word, and then my editor gently nudged me and reminded me of that first check that I got, and I was like, "I should probably write this book." The other thing, you know, I'm also, you know, a mental health consumer and advocate, and I realized that part of my writing struggle was the medication that I was--that I had been taking. It evens my mood so much that I'm--like, I can't--I'm not creative. I don't think of things. I couldn't--I literally couldn't write, so for about a month I stopped taking my medication, and I'll tell people, I wrote about 80% of the book in a month, that month, and it was, like, kind of--it was such a negotiation for me because I knew that without the medication I would be a bit manic, I would be a bit frenzied, you know? I would have these bouts with, you know, depression or whatever, but I knew I could get it done. And so there were days where, you know, I would write until 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning and just write, like, brilliant stuff, like, that I don't half-remember now, so. But I knew it was a risk, you know, and I am being very transparent about it because, you know, I just think it's important to do that, but it was a risk, but I was able to get it done. And so what I learned--it helped me really learn how much of my, you know, mental health experiences have been tied into my ability to write, and it's been a fascinating, fascinating discovery. So after the book was done, you know, I went back on my medication, and I've been in therapy and what have you, but as I was doing rewrites and things like that and reviewing it, I was reading it, like, for the first time. I was just like, "I wrote this?" I just couldn't remember writing so much of it, and then I was like, "I actually wrote this," and I was like, "This is pretty damn good." [laughs] But that's--you know, so that is a very, very unique writing process, and it's funny 'cause this is the first time I'm talking about it. A very unique writing process that I won't recommend to anybody else ever, but you know what? The easiest thing I'm gonna have to say is this - I enjoy writing about my friends and myself, 'cause that's really what I was doing, and if you can imagine--let's imagine we go back to the Harlem Renaissance, right? And we look at all those people that we group together as, like, these collectives from the Harlem Renaissance. Imagine if one of them had been documenting what they were doing at the time. It's kind of like the crisis, like, I mean, you know, these other papers and stuff that they had, like, imagine if somebody actually wrote a book in real-time kind of documenting, you know, what was happening and that we were able to read it in their words. That's what I wanted to do, and so I get to write about all these women that I love and respect and love reading their writing, love having drinks with them, love--you know, and I'm privileged. I'm privileged, and it was an honor for me to be able to document their contribution to black feminist work.Zach: That's amazing, and--I'm certainly taken aback, and I'm excited and honored with the fact that you're able to--you're transparent enough to share your journey in putting this work together. The book is called Reclaiming Our Space. Before we let you go, do you have any parting thoughts?Feminista: I'm just really excited that the book is coming out and that people can read it, and I wrote it to make it accessible to teenaged girls all the way up to your mee-maw, your big momma. I really hope that it gets into the hands of people that need it, and then maybe it could start to shift this discourse a bit and get black women a little bit more respect for what we're doing. [laughs]Zach: Amen.Feminista: Yeah, that's it. So thank you so much. Oh, my gosh. This was great.Zach: No, this is great. So Feminista, something you should know is on our website we have something called Favorite Things, and that's where we highlight books and even sometimes food and just other items, things that we really care for, and your book, Reclaiming Our Space, will be #1 on our Favorite Things list. So we're gonna make sure that we push and encourage people to check it out, to buy it and to read it. So thank you so much, and we definitely consider you a friend of the show. We hope we can have you back.Feminista: Oh, I would love to come back. Thank you.Zach: All right, now. Peace.Ade: And we're back. Thank you so much, Zach. That was amazing. Enjoyed that conversation. I think it helped me really think through what it means to lift up the black women in your circle, not just your personal circle, 'cause it's really easy to uplift your friends, but also thinking through how you're uplifting the black women at work, in your corporate spaces, wherever you might hold sway or have some sort of influence that you might be able to use better help others. What part of the conversation did you really enjoy?Zach: So we had a conversation there where we talked about the fact that really, for me, black women have always been, like, the core of my support in my career, right? So there was always some type of either kind of like motherly or kind of big aunt or big sister type figure around me. Like, they would chastise me, but it would always be out of love, right? It would always be in the spirit of "I want you to do better" or "I know you can do better so I'm holding you accountable," and it was crazy because these women who would--again, who would help me, they were not getting the support that they needed, and yet they still found it in themselves to give me the support that they knew I needed, and, you know, I think there's gonna have to be a day eventually--I mean, the day is now frankly, right--that black women are poured into, right? They can't continue just to be the exporter of support and wisdom and empathy and effort, right? Like, they're going--like, they need to be imported into. Like, they need to be given support. They need to be empathized with. They need to be heard. They need to be--and their words should be--their words should be adhered to, right? Like, they need--the things that they are giving they need to also receive.Ade: Aye, reciprocity.Zach: Reciprocity, thank you. No, straight up. That's the word really, reciprocity. Like, they need that, because I think so many times--like, it's so interesting. Also I've seen women at work, black women at work, who will eventually just get kind of fed up with, like, the BS and kind of call people on it. Like, in a professional way, but it may be, like, a more assertive way, and then the narrative is "Oh, she has an attitude problem," or she doesn't know how to handle things. Like, no, she doesn't have an attitude problem. She's tired of y'all treating her like this. She's tired of--she's tired of being the work mule for everybody, from a work perspective, from an emotional perspective. She's tired of it. Like, that's what it is.Ade: And I just want to say how important that is, because very often you'll hear about the trip of the angry black woman. I mean, it follows us everywhere, especially to Corporate America, and everybody wants to talk about the angry black woman, but nobody ever wants to talk about what y'all did to make her angry.Zach: That's so true, wow.Ade: Okay, so one, anger is a valid emotion.Zach: Right? [laughs]Ade: I just--I don't feel like running away from the trope. To be frank, so much occurs that we get to be upset about. Like, everybody gets to be upset about whatever it is upsets them, because that's their right, so I don't understand why it is up to black women--I mean, no, I do understand. I'm just saying that I'm done with that.Zach: Facts. [laughs]Ade: Women very often will be graded on likability, and black women will be graded on likability and your ability to swallow a whole bunch of nonsense and just grin and bear it, right? But if you decide that you are A. not going to grin and bear it and 2. not only are you not going to grin and bear it, you're going to alert the folks who feel as though it's your duty to grin and bear it that you see through the BS and you will not be having any portion of it. Suddenly you're the bad guy, and so ultimately I think it's important that we take away from this - if you feel as though the black women in Corporate America or in your spaces or at your jobs are angry, perhaps they have a right to be, right? There is this phenomenon I've noticed. I mean, I haven't conducted a federally-funded study of this, so there's that. Most of this is from my own personal experiences.Zach: Right, right.Ade: But I've noticed that, you know, these companies will bring in somebody who meets their diversity quota. So in this situation we're talking about bringing a black woman in to your notoriously anti-black misogynistic spaces, and you just leave her to sink or swim, right? And so this woman is cataloging all the ways in which you could be doing better as an organization and saying, "Hey, I have noticed that this is trash, and these are the ways in which you could do better," and instead of, you know, actually paying attention and doing better like the [inaudible] claim that you are, you ignore her. You shut her down. You make her feel as though she is imagining things or pulling things out of thin air or that she is in fact the problem, and then when she finally gets fed up and goes, "You know what? Y'all got it. I'm good," suddenly she is the insane one in the scenario, or suddenly she's the one that's making a big deal out of nothing, or she's playing the victim, and this mass gaslighting of black women in Corporate America 1. is trash, 2. honestly, I feel as though we can't be the only ones who see it, right?Zach: No. We're definitely--no, definitely not. Definitely not.Ade: And even further, here are some concrete ways in which I believe everyone could reach a hand out to the women in your circle. One, it is not enough for you to simply have a diversity and inclusion program. I mean, that's cool and all, but a lot of your diversity and inclusion programs are--flimsy is the word I want to use. It's the one G-rated word that I have off the top of my head to describe your diversity and inclusion programs. They're flimsy, and they do not actually take into account the needs and experiences of the populations that you want to actually address. So for one, every person that you hire, period, should feel like they're able to bring their whole selves to work. And I don't say--I'm not saying that they should show up to work in an unprofessional manner or that they should show up to work and bring drama or chaos to work. That's clearly not what I'm saying, and I'm hoping that you people hear me when I say that. What I am saying is that I should not feel as though I have to decipher what it is that you want from me as an employee because you are uncomfortable just speaking to me like I am a regular human being. I should not feel as though I don't know what the company culture is, because it is your responsibility as the company who creates the culture to communicate that clearly and honestly and fairly. Give me a fair shot to show that not only do I belong here, I can thrive here. And more importantly, do not put the onus on your individual employees to change the entire company structure. It is unfair. It is irrational to say that, "Well, they didn't say that they wanted an employee resource group," or "They didn't say that they needed sponsorship programs that would, you know, put the black women on partnership track," or "They didn't say that they needed XYZ in order to be more successful." It is--it is your responsibility as the managers, as the directors, as the partners, to reach out, because you are the ones with power in your hands to do something about the situation and the environment that your employees are in. And if you are a black woman who finds herself at work and incapable of really navigating your career to the best of your abilities, for one I am sorry. It's trash. It is a terrible situation to be in, to feel as though you have walked a thousand miles, you've crossed deserts, you have swam oceans. You have done everything above and beyond where you felt that you needed to be, where everybody else needed to be, and you walk into the room and people are still questioning your right and your ability to be in there and succeed. That's trash. Secondly, find allies. Find a safe space. Find somebody who is able to look outside of themselves and see you and really want to help you, and I am sorry that, again, it seems to be your responsibility to do so, but we gonna be alright. And thirdly, and I can't stress this enough, find a therapist, and here's why I say find a therapist. You will have days at work, some days, that make you feel as though it is all in your head and you really have no idea what's going on, but when you write things down and you're able to really talk through what happened and why you feel the way that you do at work it really helps. It helps you see yourself, see the truth of the situation, and also create, like, a plan of attack as to how you're going to address the nonsense that you are--that you are facing. I wish all of you love and light. I think we said all of that--not to be performative, but in the show notes we'll have a list of suggested readings for anyone who is interested in really learning about the crux of the conversation today, which was black feminism. We'll have some books, including Feminista Jones's book called Reclaiming Our Space, to help those who are interested in really helping black women at work. Zach, do you have any thoughts?Zach: I mean, nah. You said everything right there. I don't want to really encroach on your space. You did a phenomenal job. Let's continue on with our Favorite Things. You ready?Ade: All right, guys. Favorite Things. So this week, my Favorite Thing, it's called The Self-Taught Programmer by Cory Althoff. Actually, let me read the whole title. The Self-Taught Programmer: The Definitive Guide to Programming Professionally, and I've been reading this book, I mean, for the last couple of days between studying, and it feels good. I mean, it's giving some super actionable advice. It's not, like, a code-heavy or an algorithm-heavy book. Instead it talks about many of the habits that you need to build to be--like, to be really successful and have a sustainable trajectory, and it's been amazing. What about you?Zach: Yeah, so my Favorite Thing right now is obviously Feminista Jones's new book Reclaiming Our Space. It was a great, powerful, approachable read when you talk about around all items of black feminism. I love Feminista Jones's work, and what's refreshing about this book is that it captures the same unapologetic energy that she has, like, that's really part of her brand, and it just captures it well in this book. I think a lot of times you can end up kind of reading someone's book and it's like, "Man, this does not really capture your voice at all." It just doesn't really, like, align with things that I've read or things that I've--other things that I've seen come from you." This is not that, and it's also really convicting, right? Like, it--again, I think--I know rather that black women are often---their voices and experiences are often minimized, even when it comes to inclusion and diversity discussions or equity discussions, often times with black men being the predominant character in the--in the narratives that we drive, right? So, like, even when you talk--like, a prominent example would be police brutality, and they always say, you know, "Black men are killed at XYZ rate that's disproportionate," and that's true, black men are killed at ridiculously disproportionate rates compared to their white counterparts, but do you know who's killed at even higher rates disproportionate to their white counterparts? Black women, right? But, like, we don't--but when you talk about, like, the common talking headline, we don't say that. We don't say--we don't even just say "black people," we say "black men," right? Like, there's a desire to center them, to center us, in a space that--it's not even accurate, right? It's not even the whole truth, and I think that, you know, it's important for black men to recognize--and we talked about this during the interview as well, but to recognize that yes, we are--we are on the receiving end of oppression and white supremacy. We also benefit from a patriarchal society, and there are ways that we benefit from patriarchy that black women do not, and it is important for us to leverage that little bit of privilege that we have to help black women, 'cause they don't have--they don't have it. And that reminds me, we actually have a couple copies of her book, and we'll be giving them away. Yeah. So if you want to be entered in the drawing to win a copy of Feminista Jones's book Reclaiming Our Space, @ us a screenshot of a 5-star review on iTunes and caption Living Corporate, okay? So go on Instagram, take a picture, screenshot your 5-star review on iTunes, and then tag us in it, and we'll make sure to put you in the drawing so you can get the book.Ade: Dope. Well, thank you for joining us on the Living Corporate podcast. Make sure to follow us on Instagram @LivingCorporate, Twitter @LivingCorp_Pod, and subscribe to our newsletter through www.living-corporate.com. If you have a question you'd like us to answer and read on the show, please make sure you email us at livingcorporatepodcast@gmail.com. That's it for us today. This has been Ade.Zach: This has been Zach.Ade and Zach: Peace.

Pour la reprise, Célia, Chris, Binetou et Rhoda sont en colère ou plutôt s’attardent sur la colère comme réponse logique et légitime aux oppressions systémiques, particulièrement pour les Noirs en occident. Pourquoi a-t-on tendance à penser que “garder son calme” est plus intelligent qu’être en colère ? D’où vient ce sentiment d’illégitimité ? À l’heure des gilets jaunes synonyme de la manifestation d’une colère populaire, ils affirment l’importance de la colère pour les afro-descendants et de son rôle moteur dans le domaine artistique. Puis en deuxième partie, ils s’interrogent sur les enjeux du retour des descendants d’Africains déportés sur le continent : est-il inévitable ? Nécessaire ? Existe t-il une "bonne" façon pour le faire ? Et en bonus un DJ set de @tyshacee Sel & Poivre : 6’22 Gilets noirs: 23’27 Retour au pays natal : 1’07’00 Cube Maggi : 1’34’47 Dans cette émission on évoque : Donel Jack'sman, insulté de "sale Noir" sur scène, témoigne : https://bit.ly/2M5FifD Le livetweet du procès de Nick Conrad par Sihame Assbague : https://bit.ly/2D6Ul6c - "Le bon usage de la colère" de Salomon Nasielski : https://bit.ly/2QIiaoi “Black Celebration: A Rebellion Against Commodity” de Tony Cokes : https://bit.ly/2SQPuv6 “Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the Politics of Empowerment” de Patricia Hill Collins : https://amzn.to/2M6qZHL “Poem About Police Violence” de June Jordan : https://bit.ly/2SMfbNq “Killing Rage : Ending Racism” de bell hooks : https://amzn.to/2QGjvvK “The Uses of Anger: Women Responding To Racism” d’Audre Lorde : https://bit.ly/2RZjzI2 - “Un billet d’avion pour l’Afrique” de Maya Angelou : https://bit.ly/2AIQ6w1 “Africa Unite ! : une histoire du Panafricanisme” de Amzat Yabara-Boukari : https://bit.ly/2RGi3OL Cube Maggi : Rhoda : “Reparations for Black People Should Include Rest” de Janine François pour Broadly Vice : https://bit.ly/2VMMC4f “If Beale Street Could Talk”(The Original Motion Picture Score de Nicholas Britel : https://spoti.fi/2RrekFh Binetou : “Je ne suis pas un singe” d'Olivier Dacourt (Documentaire Canal+) : https://bit.ly/2FqqAih “Ferme ta gueule et cours” - Piment : https://bit.ly/2sxodCJ Tracklist : Kassav - ZIOUM Outkast - B.O.B. (Bomb Over Bagdad) Azealia Banks - Yung Rapunxel Bob Marley - Africa Unite Africando - Lindas Africanas Kiss Daniel - Gobe La playlist sur Spotify : https://spoti.fi/2RILXlm Contactez-nous : emissionpiment@gmail.com

Cette semaine, pour ce dix septième épisode de Quoi de meuf, Clémentine Gallot et Kiyémis nous parlent de l’éducation des jeunes garçons. Et si, au lieu d’apprendre aux filles à se défendre, on apprenait aux garçons à ne pas agresser ? Elles abordent également la question de l’injonction à la violence faite aux garçons dès leur plus jeune âge. Côté pop culture, il sera question du livre sur la virilité de Olivia Gazalé, du film Moonlight et du personnage de Ross dans la série Friends.Enfin, Clémentine et Kiyémis répondent à Joséphine, auditrice qui recherche des références de dessins animés non-genrés pour ses enfants.L'actu féministe de Clémentine Gallot de Kiyémis ( 01:20)Le thème de l'épisode : l'éducation des garçons (02:45)Expériences personnelles de Clémentine Gallot et de Kiyémis (17:50)Témoignage de Thomas Messias, professeur de mathématiques, qui évoque le défi d’inculquer une éducation non sexiste à ses trois enfants (21:07)Le moment Pop culture ( 32:54)Les recommandations culturelles (40:23)Le courrier des auditrices ( 43:18)Les références entendues dans l'épisodeUn article sur Bolsonaro, le nouveau président du Brésil, misogyne et raciste.Un article sur l'élection de Sahle-Work Zewde première présidente de l’Éthiopie.La citation «l'enfant est le père de l'homme» du poète William Wordsworth, citée par Clémentine.Le livre « Le mythe de la virilité » de Olivia Gazalé. (2017)L'article de Amnesty International avec l’interview de Olivia Gazalé dans lequel elle parle des attributs et des rites initiatiques de la virilité.«La fabrique des garçons. L'éducation des garçons de 1820 à aujourd'hui» de Anne-Marie Sohn. (2015)Les travaux des afro-féministes de Patricia Hill Collins et bell hooks (notamment son livre We real cool, black men and masculinity), qui parlent de « masculinité racisée ».Le concept « d'homosocialité » de l’universitaire, Eve SedgwickLe livre « Marianne et le garçon noir » de Léonora Miano. (2017)Le livre « Les féministes et le garçon arabe » de Nacira Guénif-Souilamas et Éric Macé. (2004)Le livre « Égalités des sexes en éducation et formation » de Nicole Mosconi. (1998)La citation « Il faut laisser les garçons pleurer » de l'écrivaine Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, citée par KiyémisLe livre « Tu seras un homme -féministe- mon fils ! » de Aurélia Blanc. (2018)Les recueils « Les émotions de Gaston » de Aurélie Chien Chow Chine. (2018)Le livre « La gloire de mon père » de Marcel Pagnol. ( 1957)La scène de Friends dans laquelle Ross demande à son fils d’arrêter de jouer aux BarbiesLe livre « Matilda » de Roald Dahl. (1988)Le livre « George » de Alex Gino. (2017)Le livre « Princesse Kevin » de Michaël Escoffier( 2018)Le livre « Le petit garçon qui aimait le rose » de Jeanne Taboni Miserazzi et Raphaëlle Laborde. (2011)Le livre "Boucle d'ours" de Stéphane Servrant (2013)Le film « Moonlight » de Barry Jenkins. ( 2016)Le film « Billy Elliot » de Stephen Daldry. (1999)Le film « Boyhood » de Richard Linklater. ( 2014)Le film « Love Simon » de Greg Berlanti, disponible sur Netflix (2017)Le livre « Histoire du soir pour garçons qui veulent changer le monde » de Ben Brooks. (2018)Le documentaire « Récréations » de Claire Simon. ( 1999)Le site de Benshi studio, qui répertorie les dessins-animés non genrés.La série d’animation “Allez raconte” disponible sur Netflix de Lewis TrondheimLa série d’animation “Mon chevalier est moi” de Joeri ChristiaenLa série d’animation “ Steven Univers” disponible sur Netflix de Jackie Buscarino et Rebecca SugarLes recommandations culturelles Kiyémis : Le livre de Bolewa Sabourin « La rage de vivre ». ( 2018).Clémentine : Le podcast « The Shadows » de Kaitlin Prest sur une histoire d’amour en 6 épisodesPour poser une question à la team Quoi de meuf : hello@quoidemeuf.netPour s'inscrire à la géniale newsletter Quoi de meuf : http://quoidemeuf.net/Quoi de Meuf est une émission de Nouvelles Écoutes, animée par Clémentine Gallot et Kiyémis. Réalisée par Aurore Meyer Mahieu, montée et mixée par Laurie Galligani, coordonnée par Laura Cuissard.

We're building off of last week's episode on sex and gender and breaking down the more complex ideas of intersectionality and feminist thought. How do you define intersectionality? What is feminist thought? And how can you apply these concepts to how you think and behave in your everyday life? (HINT: Be aware of your privileges, y'all!) We also talk about the amazing scholars-- like Patricia Hill Collins, Meda Chesney-Lind, and Kimberle Crenshaw to name a few-- who have founded these important concepts. Tune in to learn more!

In #InVinoFab episode no. 22 we are joined by Dr. Joan Collier and Dr. Marvette Lacy to share about their qualitative research using Sista Circles both as a practice and study. This research approach for a more culturally grounded methodology to understand the experiences of black women graduate students and scholars.What is a Sista Circle? Historically, coming together and sharing life experiences with other women. A space to be yourself and find support. These are informal gatherings where women get together for emotional care and share their ways of knowing with a core group for conversation and to talk about the topics of the day. In this rich conversation with Marvette and Joan, we explore the sense of belonging for women in higher education, academia, and more. Issues of power dynamics in doctoral programs and also the messiness of analyzing your own voice when scholars are embedded with your own n research. There's conversation about black and white feminism, and how we show up differently in this movement and how we should let others know “your slip is hanging.”Fresh off the dissertation process, we discuss the process of working on doctoral work and how to find meaning through this research process. Not answered, but we talked about the challenges we still need to address in the academy, including but not limited to: -- How are we mentoring scholars and researchers in a variety of methodologies that are authentic to the learners' experiences?-- What are the ways your department/institution reward tenure and promotion that consider fostering supportive relationships while advising  support doctoral scholars? -- What are the equity considerations we need to think more about when working with graduate students, professional programs, and doctoral programs for people of color? -- What are the historically white spaces and structural changes that need to offer support for a broader audiences who are coming to our colleges and universities?-- Are we seeing our doctoral scholars as people and not just as sources of production?-- How do you let your learners actually learn and explore their own ways of knowing in relation to how they show up in society?-- How do we allow students to explore what kind of researcher they want to be? -- What is your praxis as an educator, scholar or practitioner in higher education? How do you show up at your institution?Connect and learn more about their work, practices, and passions here:Joan CollierTwitter: @joancollierPhD #CiteASista Website: https://citeasista.com/ & #CiteASista (shout out to @Ms_BMWilliams)LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joan-collier-phd-52396415/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dr_mini_me/ Marvette LacyTwitter: @marvettelacyWebsite: https://www.marvettelacy.com/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MarvetteCCLacy/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marvette-lacy-phd-05604915A few of the MANY resources mentioned in this #InVinoFab podcast episode:-- College Student Educators International (ACPA) http://www.myacpa.org/-- Dr. Latoya Johnson methodology mentorship of teachers.https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/johnson_latoya_s_201505_phd.pdf-- Scholars of note and citation centred around black feminism and lived experiences in education, student affairs, and higher ed:    - bell hooks  http://www.bellhooksinstitute.com/    - Patricia Hill Collins https://socy.umd.edu/facultyprofile/Collins/Patricia%20Hill    - Cynthia Dillard https://coe.uga.edu/directory/people/cdillard    - Natasha N. Croom http://www.clemson.edu/education/about/directory/profile.html?userid=nncroom    - Lori Patton Davis https://www.loripattondavis.com/    - Kimberlé Crenshaw https://law.ucla.edu/faculty/faculty-profiles/kimberle-w-crenshaw/     - Pamela Felder http://pamelafelder.com/ -- Joan has the action-based response to discussing whiteness in scholarship, dissertation work, and research with your co-founder Brittany Williams, to support black women in scholarship through the #CiteASista movement: https://citeasista.com/about/https://twitter.com/CiteASista -- Marvette supports scholarship development with conducting literature reviews, being productive with your time, writing retreats, dissertation coaching, editing/transcription services, and workshops related to early career scholarship https://www.marvettelacy.com/blog #InVinoFab: Book Recommendations:- Well, That Escalated Quickly by Franchesca Ramsey http://www.wteqbook.com/ - Eloquent Rage: A Black Feminist Discovers Her Superpower by Brittany Cooper https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250112576 - How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective Edited by Keeanga-Yamahtta https://www.akpress.org/how-we-get-free.html  - At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape, and Resistance - A New History     https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/111678/at-the-dark-end-of-the-street-by-danielle-l-mcguire/9780307389244/ - The Woman in the Window by A.J. Finn https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062678416/the-woman-in-the-window/  Other references and citations to check out:Collier, J. N. (2017). Using Sista Circle Methodology to Examine Sense of Belonging of Black Women in Doctoral Programs at a Historically White Institution (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia).Lacy, M. C. C. (2017). Black Graduate Women's Self-defining Process Using Media and Sista Circle Methodology (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia).Taking up space: A Black graduate women's photo shoot as black feminist praxis https://citeasista.com/2017/04/04/taking-up-space-a-black-graduate-womens-photo-shoot-as-black-feminist-praxis/comment-page-1/ Graduation http://sa.coe.uga.edu/congratulations-to-the-spring-summer-2017-csaa-d-graduates/  Other works on Sista Circles in ResearchWomen of Color Ph.D. Candidates Thrive in Sister Circles http://diverseeducation.com/article/102621/ (Carver, 2017)Johnson, L. S. (2015). Using Sista Circles to Examine the Professional Experience of Contemporary Black Women Teachers in Schools: A Collective Story about School Culture and Support (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia). https://athenaeum.libs.uga.edu/handle/10724/33083 Presentation in 2017https://prezi.com/_fur2wflwo81/using-sista-cirlces-to-examine-the-professional-experience-o/ Sister Circles as a Culturally Relevant Intervention for Anxious African American Womenhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3212099/ (Neal-Barnett, Murry, Ralston Payne, Thomas & Salley, 2011)Is there someone else we should talk to? Do you have a question or issue we should chat about on a future pod?  Let us know. We'd love to hear from you about whose story we should share on a future #InVinoFab episode. Send us love, suggestions, and comments to: invinofabulum@gmail.com Stay connected for a future episode of the #InVinoFab Podcast: Hosts: Patrice (@profpatrice) & Laura (@laurapasquini); pronouns: she/her Twitter: https://twitter.com/invinofab Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/invinofab/ 

Chicago dominatrix Mistress Velvet did not intentionally build her practice around dominating white men. But she was living in a predominantly white part of North Carolina at the time, and most of the people who could afford to hire her, fit that demographic. "It just happened to be that a lot of my clients were white men," she says, "and they were just really awful." One client said he appreciated that she was so well educated. "I've had black mistresses in the past," he told her, "but they were often ghetto." At the same time, she said he seemed to be struggling with a lot of white guilt. She figured he needed some education himself -- and he happened to be paying her to tell him what to do. So she ordered him to read an essay by Patricia Hill Collins on the importance of black feminist theory. "It just gave me so much life," she says. "He was on his knees, at my feet, reading an essay to me, and I'm like snapping the whole time -- at least internally. You know, I have to keep up my persona of being very cold." She decided she wanted to be doing more of that kind of work, and now Mistress Velvet specializes in dominating white men and teaching them black feminist theory. Depending on the client, she says the assignments can be used as a treat or a punishment. Mistress Velvet joins us to talk about her work, mainstream perceptions of BDSM, and how race and racism plays into intimate power dynamics. We also have a conversation this week with poet, teacher, and self-described "queer black troublemaker" Alexis Pauline Gumbs. Her newest book, "M Archive," is told from the point of view of a future researcher, looking back on the antiblackness of late capitalism. The publisher describes it as "a series of poetic artifacts that speculatively documents the persistence of Black life following a worldwide cataclysm."

Hey, Pearls! Join hosts Jaimie and Porsha as we talk all things black feminist and womanist. This episode features the writing of Alice Walker and Patricia Hill Collins. Where do you fit into the flower garden?

President Jeffrey Herbst speaks with Patricia Hill Collins of the University of Maryland.