1 00:00:05,320 --> 00:00:08,000 Speaker 1: Hey, this is Emilyn, and this is and you're listening 2 00:00:08,000 --> 00:00:22,360 Speaker 1: to stuff Mom never told you, so be yes, Eve 3 00:00:23,800 --> 00:00:27,320 Speaker 1: a little like psycho about this topic we're talking today. 4 00:00:28,320 --> 00:00:32,320 Speaker 1: So this is a perfect example of just as a disclaimer, y'all, 5 00:00:32,800 --> 00:00:37,720 Speaker 1: Emily's unpopular opinion about to come out you because I 6 00:00:37,800 --> 00:00:41,720 Speaker 1: have been hearing the term man interrupt or, man interruption, 7 00:00:42,040 --> 00:00:45,720 Speaker 1: ma interrupting used over and over again in a lot 8 00:00:45,720 --> 00:00:48,640 Speaker 1: of headlines, and part of me wants to say, yeah, 9 00:00:49,080 --> 00:00:54,840 Speaker 1: stop silencing women, stop interrupting women, stop you know, policing 10 00:00:54,840 --> 00:00:57,160 Speaker 1: women's speech, and let her speak, let her hold the floor, 11 00:00:57,280 --> 00:01:02,600 Speaker 1: especially when it comes to Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren 12 00:01:02,720 --> 00:01:06,160 Speaker 1: and the Hill, or if we're talking about a presidential debate, 13 00:01:06,200 --> 00:01:10,279 Speaker 1: of course. But another part of me, the wonky nerdy 14 00:01:10,319 --> 00:01:14,640 Speaker 1: research junkie, has looked into these studies and maybe a 15 00:01:14,680 --> 00:01:18,200 Speaker 1: little too closely, and have come to find out that 16 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:26,240 Speaker 1: there is very little evidence, very shaky, crappy research that 17 00:01:26,640 --> 00:01:32,440 Speaker 1: leads to hyperbolic headlines. And I as a research driven 18 00:01:32,560 --> 00:01:39,520 Speaker 1: human being and a feminist and very opposed two and 19 00:01:39,600 --> 00:01:45,520 Speaker 1: wary of being accused of being perpetuating feminist propaganda, and 20 00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:48,240 Speaker 1: so I think it's important that as we talk about 21 00:01:48,320 --> 00:01:52,160 Speaker 1: very real issues that affect women and inequality and injustice, 22 00:01:52,600 --> 00:01:55,920 Speaker 1: that we also retain a very high standard for accuracy, 23 00:01:56,000 --> 00:01:59,680 Speaker 1: because going out there perpetuating myths in the name of 24 00:01:59,760 --> 00:02:03,960 Speaker 1: gen or quality doesn't really help anybody. So today, I'm 25 00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:05,720 Speaker 1: curious to see what your reaction is going to be 26 00:02:05,800 --> 00:02:09,120 Speaker 1: to this bridget because I'm also a notorious interrupter, and 27 00:02:09,160 --> 00:02:11,280 Speaker 1: I'm aware of that. Y'all. We're gonna we're gonna talk 28 00:02:11,320 --> 00:02:15,400 Speaker 1: about that. Um, I want to really unpack why this 29 00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:19,000 Speaker 1: is such a troubling issue for me and why I'm 30 00:02:19,040 --> 00:02:22,320 Speaker 1: not on the bandwagon of calling out man's man not 31 00:02:22,400 --> 00:02:26,040 Speaker 1: man splaining, different, interrupting, interrupting. If you are a woman 32 00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:30,800 Speaker 1: in and you make your living bea speaking or giving presentations, 33 00:02:31,280 --> 00:02:34,359 Speaker 1: it's we've all experienced it, and so I think it 34 00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:37,520 Speaker 1: might be one of those things where you everyone has 35 00:02:37,520 --> 00:02:40,600 Speaker 1: a story. Everyone didn't happen. There are high profile things 36 00:02:40,600 --> 00:02:43,280 Speaker 1: that happen in politics, were in pop culture, and it 37 00:02:43,320 --> 00:02:45,919 Speaker 1: can feel very truthy that this is something that we're 38 00:02:45,919 --> 00:02:49,080 Speaker 1: living with that men interrupt more, you know, more than women. 39 00:02:49,360 --> 00:02:52,600 Speaker 1: That meant that there's a flood of men interrupted women 40 00:02:52,680 --> 00:02:55,919 Speaker 1: mid thought and it's really disrespectful and awful, and that 41 00:02:56,120 --> 00:02:58,040 Speaker 1: I I want to push back and say that I 42 00:02:58,120 --> 00:03:00,240 Speaker 1: think that it's possible for both of those days this 43 00:03:00,240 --> 00:03:03,239 Speaker 1: would it be true that it's true that that happens 44 00:03:03,280 --> 00:03:05,760 Speaker 1: and it doesn't feel good, but it happens as women, 45 00:03:06,280 --> 00:03:09,760 Speaker 1: and it's possible that it's true that scientifically speaking, it's not. 46 00:03:09,960 --> 00:03:12,639 Speaker 1: We don't know if it's happening on grand scale, if 47 00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:15,240 Speaker 1: men are doing it more to women. I agree with 48 00:03:15,240 --> 00:03:17,720 Speaker 1: that completely. I'm glad you put it that way because 49 00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:20,320 Speaker 1: I think there needs first and foremost, there needs to 50 00:03:20,320 --> 00:03:22,480 Speaker 1: be way more research done. And I have a proposal 51 00:03:22,560 --> 00:03:25,480 Speaker 1: for any scientists listening to this episode. I will lay 52 00:03:25,480 --> 00:03:27,639 Speaker 1: out for you what I think would be an actual, 53 00:03:28,320 --> 00:03:31,400 Speaker 1: well executed scientific studies. So someoney, give me money to 54 00:03:31,440 --> 00:03:33,840 Speaker 1: do this study, please, or go do this study and 55 00:03:33,840 --> 00:03:36,400 Speaker 1: tell me how it goes. Um. But here's the here's 56 00:03:36,440 --> 00:03:40,360 Speaker 1: the beef I have. The New York Times ran a 57 00:03:40,440 --> 00:03:46,160 Speaker 1: story recently with the headline the universal phenomenon of men 58 00:03:46,720 --> 00:03:52,160 Speaker 1: interrupting women. That's a pretty bold headline, just as bold 59 00:03:52,440 --> 00:03:57,080 Speaker 1: Glamour Magazine's headline on the topic, which is a little 60 00:03:57,120 --> 00:04:01,000 Speaker 1: older than the more recent moment with Kamal Harris inspiring 61 00:04:01,040 --> 00:04:05,400 Speaker 1: that New York Times piece was Yep, science confirms man 62 00:04:05,400 --> 00:04:11,240 Speaker 1: interrupting is real. Those don't sound like like this is 63 00:04:11,240 --> 00:04:14,760 Speaker 1: a subtle thing we should look into. Those sounds very definitive, 64 00:04:14,760 --> 00:04:16,720 Speaker 1: don't just have the pretty explicit. I think I think 65 00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:18,640 Speaker 1: I have less of a problem with the first headline 66 00:04:18,680 --> 00:04:22,680 Speaker 1: because they they at least are not saying this is 67 00:04:22,720 --> 00:04:25,240 Speaker 1: a confirmed thing. I've been saying, like, Oh, it's a phenomena, 68 00:04:25,400 --> 00:04:28,200 Speaker 1: universal phenomena. They're kind of saying like what I was 69 00:04:28,240 --> 00:04:30,680 Speaker 1: saying before, which is every women have all seemed to 70 00:04:30,680 --> 00:04:32,599 Speaker 1: be dealing with this and talking about it on Twitter. 71 00:04:33,200 --> 00:04:36,000 Speaker 1: Thus it is a universal phenomena. The Glamor headline, I 72 00:04:36,040 --> 00:04:38,240 Speaker 1: think I have more of a problem with because they're 73 00:04:38,240 --> 00:04:40,920 Speaker 1: getting into some scientific evidence that I have a lot 74 00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:43,960 Speaker 1: of questions about. Yes, and so we're gonna unpack those 75 00:04:43,960 --> 00:04:46,400 Speaker 1: studies in a second, But first I want to ask 76 00:04:46,640 --> 00:04:52,200 Speaker 1: a couple of questions too that that unpack the underlying 77 00:04:52,240 --> 00:04:56,400 Speaker 1: assumptions when we talk about man interruptions. First, is is 78 00:04:56,520 --> 00:05:03,400 Speaker 1: an interruption definitively a reflection enough power, disrespect or respect? 79 00:05:03,480 --> 00:05:06,359 Speaker 1: Or is it could it be? And I'm very defensive 80 00:05:06,400 --> 00:05:10,960 Speaker 1: about this could it be a natural way of completing 81 00:05:10,960 --> 00:05:15,600 Speaker 1: each other's sentences, of speaking communally, of you know, chatter 82 00:05:15,720 --> 00:05:19,680 Speaker 1: with your girlfriends. Does context make a difference to that? 83 00:05:19,960 --> 00:05:23,760 Speaker 1: I think that's so not to interrupt, but I think 84 00:05:23,800 --> 00:05:27,120 Speaker 1: that's so true, right. It depends on Like most things, 85 00:05:27,160 --> 00:05:30,679 Speaker 1: that depends on relationships and the context. My best friend's 86 00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:33,839 Speaker 1: definition shout out to Stephany people always tell us that 87 00:05:33,880 --> 00:05:35,719 Speaker 1: when we have like when we're at brunch, when we 88 00:05:35,720 --> 00:05:38,159 Speaker 1: have a long conversation, it shuts us. It turns into 89 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:40,520 Speaker 1: just us yelling over each other in a very excited 90 00:05:40,560 --> 00:05:44,400 Speaker 1: way and some people. For some people, that would be maddening. 91 00:05:44,440 --> 00:05:46,960 Speaker 1: But it's just how we communicate with each other as 92 00:05:46,960 --> 00:05:49,480 Speaker 1: people who have known each other for forever and ever 93 00:05:49,520 --> 00:05:51,680 Speaker 1: and ever. We see eye to eye on a bunch 94 00:05:51,680 --> 00:05:53,960 Speaker 1: of things. We get excited about the same things we 95 00:05:54,040 --> 00:05:56,599 Speaker 1: want to agree verbally. Are you trying not to interrupt 96 00:05:56,640 --> 00:06:01,120 Speaker 1: me right now? Because you're hamfully trying, I'm like know why. 97 00:06:01,160 --> 00:06:05,839 Speaker 1: It's because our cementy listeners have sometimes kindly and sometimes 98 00:06:05,880 --> 00:06:09,640 Speaker 1: not so kindly, called me out for my desire to 99 00:06:09,720 --> 00:06:14,920 Speaker 1: provide verbal feedback almost continuously or verbal agreement. So I'm 100 00:06:14,920 --> 00:06:18,360 Speaker 1: constantly over here like, M yes, get it. I'm like 101 00:06:18,480 --> 00:06:21,599 Speaker 1: cheering you on, and people are like, get out of 102 00:06:21,640 --> 00:06:24,119 Speaker 1: my earbuds. I'm trying to listen to bridget like shut 103 00:06:24,200 --> 00:06:25,880 Speaker 1: up at M l A. But I think if most 104 00:06:25,880 --> 00:06:28,479 Speaker 1: people and the right, I think it's different when you 105 00:06:28,480 --> 00:06:30,200 Speaker 1: have a podcast. But I think for most folks, if 106 00:06:30,200 --> 00:06:33,480 Speaker 1: they had a microphone recording a conversation over brunch, they 107 00:06:33,520 --> 00:06:37,400 Speaker 1: would be surprised how often they interrupted their friends. I 108 00:06:37,440 --> 00:06:38,760 Speaker 1: think you're just trying to be nice to me, but 109 00:06:38,880 --> 00:06:41,880 Speaker 1: I'm going to take it. I appreciate it. Um. So 110 00:06:41,920 --> 00:06:45,640 Speaker 1: that's the first underlying question or underlying assumption to I 111 00:06:45,680 --> 00:06:47,880 Speaker 1: want to push back on. Maybe, like me, you grew 112 00:06:47,960 --> 00:06:50,120 Speaker 1: up in a household where air time was limited because 113 00:06:50,160 --> 00:06:54,680 Speaker 1: there were six of us around every dinning dinning dining 114 00:06:52,880 --> 00:06:57,960 Speaker 1: dinner table, and you know, we had to compete for 115 00:06:58,000 --> 00:07:01,640 Speaker 1: airtime and listening to Listening is a skill that can 116 00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:07,080 Speaker 1: be taught and learned that I was not, frankly exposed 117 00:07:07,080 --> 00:07:09,560 Speaker 1: too much as a kid, So I you know, I 118 00:07:09,640 --> 00:07:14,040 Speaker 1: have painfully tried to learn how to be a better listener. Uh, 119 00:07:14,080 --> 00:07:17,680 Speaker 1: And my default is feeling entitled to speak. Well, it's 120 00:07:17,680 --> 00:07:20,640 Speaker 1: like that that question they ask when people are talking, 121 00:07:20,840 --> 00:07:23,680 Speaker 1: do you listen or do you wait to speak? And 122 00:07:23,720 --> 00:07:27,760 Speaker 1: I think I definitely wait to speak, really and I 123 00:07:27,800 --> 00:07:30,600 Speaker 1: think I've gotten I've taken Honestly. One of the things 124 00:07:30,640 --> 00:07:34,640 Speaker 1: that's made it easier for me to listen is going 125 00:07:34,680 --> 00:07:38,520 Speaker 1: to therapy, because they really highlight when someone you're in therapy, 126 00:07:38,720 --> 00:07:42,360 Speaker 1: when you say something mirroring back what they've said, to 127 00:07:42,480 --> 00:07:45,160 Speaker 1: show that you understand, that you've digested it, that you've 128 00:07:45,160 --> 00:07:48,280 Speaker 1: internalized it. And if you if someone is just like 129 00:07:48,320 --> 00:07:50,880 Speaker 1: black blah blah blah blah blah, and then when you 130 00:07:51,040 --> 00:07:53,440 Speaker 1: they stop, you are talking about something else and really 131 00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:56,520 Speaker 1: to get back to you, you're not showing that you've 132 00:07:56,520 --> 00:07:59,480 Speaker 1: internalized it, digested it, and you that you can, you know, 133 00:07:59,760 --> 00:08:01,640 Speaker 1: get it back to them. So being in therapy is 134 00:08:01,640 --> 00:08:04,240 Speaker 1: something that will really help you at least helped me 135 00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:07,200 Speaker 1: understand how to listen better and how to you know, 136 00:08:07,560 --> 00:08:09,840 Speaker 1: glean things from what people are saying, rather than just 137 00:08:10,080 --> 00:08:12,640 Speaker 1: wanting to be like, oh great, back to me again, Yeah, 138 00:08:12,680 --> 00:08:16,559 Speaker 1: exactly exactly. It's it's a harder skill. It's a harder 139 00:08:16,600 --> 00:08:19,000 Speaker 1: skill to learn, uh. And I think some of us 140 00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:22,360 Speaker 1: get it more than others, and we can all get better. 141 00:08:22,440 --> 00:08:26,240 Speaker 1: I definitely would include myself in that. But it just 142 00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:30,920 Speaker 1: reminds me that sometimes interrupting can be acknowledgement, can be 143 00:08:31,720 --> 00:08:36,319 Speaker 1: UH agreement or accordance, or it can be very disrespectful. 144 00:08:36,360 --> 00:08:40,240 Speaker 1: I think it really depends, and the research doesn't always 145 00:08:40,280 --> 00:08:45,079 Speaker 1: differentiate between the intent behind an interruption or the contact 146 00:08:45,120 --> 00:08:47,480 Speaker 1: or the contact, the formality, the power dynamic. You know, 147 00:08:47,720 --> 00:08:50,600 Speaker 1: some I think it's very offensive when your boss interrupts 148 00:08:51,040 --> 00:08:53,400 Speaker 1: only the junior women in the office continuously and not 149 00:08:53,480 --> 00:08:57,480 Speaker 1: the men. And I think there's definitely anecdotal evidence to 150 00:08:57,520 --> 00:09:00,800 Speaker 1: say that that is a chronic if experience for women 151 00:09:00,840 --> 00:09:03,079 Speaker 1: out there, not that the hard research, by the way, 152 00:09:03,120 --> 00:09:06,760 Speaker 1: that is out there really reinforces this. The second thing 153 00:09:06,760 --> 00:09:09,679 Speaker 1: I want to talk about underlying assumption to push background here, 154 00:09:10,440 --> 00:09:14,760 Speaker 1: do men really interrupt women more? Or do they interrupt 155 00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:19,920 Speaker 1: women as much as other women interrupt women? So that 156 00:09:20,040 --> 00:09:22,440 Speaker 1: was something about this research that I found fascinating is 157 00:09:22,480 --> 00:09:27,560 Speaker 1: that everybody, we're all just interrupting women. Men are doing it, 158 00:09:27,720 --> 00:09:30,679 Speaker 1: women are doing it perhaps more if this, if this 159 00:09:30,720 --> 00:09:34,000 Speaker 1: research is to be you know, trusted, more than than 160 00:09:34,040 --> 00:09:37,200 Speaker 1: men are doing it. So everybody is interrupting women. Women 161 00:09:37,240 --> 00:09:42,960 Speaker 1: can't finish a freaking sentence pathetically. And that's why, I mean, 162 00:09:43,040 --> 00:09:46,079 Speaker 1: one of the conclusions I'm starting to draw personally here 163 00:09:46,160 --> 00:09:49,800 Speaker 1: is that the way women speak. I'm not saying this 164 00:09:49,840 --> 00:09:52,640 Speaker 1: is victim blaming, that we're inviting this or we're the 165 00:09:52,640 --> 00:09:55,000 Speaker 1: ones to blame here, but the way women tend to 166 00:09:55,080 --> 00:10:00,480 Speaker 1: speak sometimes leaves us open to being interrupted at a 167 00:10:00,520 --> 00:10:04,640 Speaker 1: higher rate than men. And so I, you know, obviously 168 00:10:04,800 --> 00:10:07,280 Speaker 1: let's talk about some of the public instances where we've 169 00:10:07,280 --> 00:10:09,640 Speaker 1: seen this, because this gets everybody riled up on the internet. 170 00:10:09,679 --> 00:10:12,400 Speaker 1: I get it. I wanna, you know, buy a Nevertheless, 171 00:10:12,400 --> 00:10:15,040 Speaker 1: she persisted T shirt too, when who it was that 172 00:10:15,120 --> 00:10:19,720 Speaker 1: was Elizabeth Warren was told she was warned she was 173 00:10:22,880 --> 00:10:27,680 Speaker 1: but nevertheless she resisted. And I find that persistence admirable. 174 00:10:27,840 --> 00:10:30,800 Speaker 1: I think all women did well. I think most women 175 00:10:30,840 --> 00:10:33,160 Speaker 1: who you know tweeted it out a million times did 176 00:10:33,240 --> 00:10:35,760 Speaker 1: because in the light of someone trying to interrupt you, 177 00:10:36,240 --> 00:10:40,240 Speaker 1: she asserted herself, she didn't allow herself to be interrupted. Yeah, 178 00:10:40,280 --> 00:10:42,400 Speaker 1: And I think what's important to note is that with 179 00:10:42,480 --> 00:10:46,280 Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren's example, it was almost this meta interruption because 180 00:10:46,320 --> 00:10:49,199 Speaker 1: Warren was trying to read this letter by Kreta Scott 181 00:10:49,280 --> 00:10:52,720 Speaker 1: King opposing Jeff Sessions talking about how awful he was 182 00:10:52,840 --> 00:10:56,240 Speaker 1: and that Warren was not permitted, so creta Scott King 183 00:10:56,400 --> 00:11:00,600 Speaker 1: was not permitted to sort of speak through right. Did 184 00:11:00,600 --> 00:11:02,720 Speaker 1: you hear how I just interrupted, Bridget? Did you hear 185 00:11:02,760 --> 00:11:04,720 Speaker 1: how that happen? It happens. This is a very meta, 186 00:11:04,800 --> 00:11:08,560 Speaker 1: sorry meta episode. I don't mean to do it with 187 00:11:08,679 --> 00:11:11,720 Speaker 1: disrespect either, No, I know, and I think painful speaking 188 00:11:11,760 --> 00:11:16,160 Speaker 1: about the like sentence construction and sort of speaking in 189 00:11:16,160 --> 00:11:20,040 Speaker 1: ways that make it easy to interrupt. I am known 190 00:11:20,200 --> 00:11:22,240 Speaker 1: for like a long run on sentence. I am like 191 00:11:22,400 --> 00:11:25,559 Speaker 1: known for this. I love a winding, winding road of 192 00:11:25,559 --> 00:11:27,599 Speaker 1: a sentence, and those are the kind of sentences that 193 00:11:27,640 --> 00:11:32,880 Speaker 1: are very easy to interrupt. Yes, she said, after taking 194 00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:35,319 Speaker 1: a beat and a breath and trying not to be 195 00:11:35,360 --> 00:11:40,560 Speaker 1: the ignorant co host. Um. Yes, and that's that's what 196 00:11:40,679 --> 00:11:43,880 Speaker 1: actually has come out of to me. Is made in 197 00:11:43,920 --> 00:11:47,520 Speaker 1: the most compelling way in some of the research I've read, 198 00:11:47,559 --> 00:11:51,679 Speaker 1: which is again, I might be projecting here because I 199 00:11:51,760 --> 00:11:55,280 Speaker 1: am accused of interrupting you often, Bridget, But this way 200 00:11:55,320 --> 00:11:59,480 Speaker 1: of speaking mid conversation interruptions or mid sort of sentence 201 00:11:59,520 --> 00:12:03,720 Speaker 1: instruction interruptions is commonly happening with people who use passive 202 00:12:03,840 --> 00:12:08,640 Speaker 1: phrasing and more dependent clauses in their speech. It opens 203 00:12:08,679 --> 00:12:12,560 Speaker 1: them up to being interrupted male or female. Now, A 204 00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:15,840 Speaker 1: dependent clause, let's unpack that for a second is defined 205 00:12:15,880 --> 00:12:19,280 Speaker 1: as a group of words with a subject and a verb. 206 00:12:19,440 --> 00:12:23,000 Speaker 1: It does not express a complete thought, so it is 207 00:12:23,040 --> 00:12:27,360 Speaker 1: not a sentence and can't stand alone. These clauses include 208 00:12:27,360 --> 00:12:29,880 Speaker 1: adverb clauses, adjective clauses, blah blah blah. You get it 209 00:12:29,960 --> 00:12:33,840 Speaker 1: right from phonetics one O one. But when we speak 210 00:12:33,920 --> 00:12:38,959 Speaker 1: in sort of casual trailing ways, to me, I always 211 00:12:38,960 --> 00:12:41,160 Speaker 1: feel like, whenever we're on air or not, we're always 212 00:12:41,200 --> 00:12:45,040 Speaker 1: sort of constructing a sentence together and winding our way 213 00:12:45,120 --> 00:12:47,760 Speaker 1: through a thought process. It's kind of it's more interesting 214 00:12:48,240 --> 00:12:50,920 Speaker 1: to me. I completely agree. And that's going back for 215 00:12:50,960 --> 00:12:54,680 Speaker 1: a minute to the kind of examples of ma interrupting 216 00:12:54,840 --> 00:12:58,079 Speaker 1: from in the public eye. Uh, That's why I thought 217 00:12:58,120 --> 00:13:01,360 Speaker 1: the way that Hillary Clinton was so so often interrupted 218 00:13:01,360 --> 00:13:03,880 Speaker 1: in the debates was so awful, because in those debates, 219 00:13:04,080 --> 00:13:06,440 Speaker 1: it's very clear, this is your time to talk, and 220 00:13:06,480 --> 00:13:08,960 Speaker 1: this is that your time to talk. It's there's no 221 00:13:09,000 --> 00:13:12,240 Speaker 1: confusion about it. You're not, you know, it's it's very 222 00:13:12,360 --> 00:13:14,760 Speaker 1: very clear. And the fact that she was so often 223 00:13:14,800 --> 00:13:17,520 Speaker 1: interrupted when it was not, you know, when it was 224 00:13:17,559 --> 00:13:19,440 Speaker 1: not someone else is tarting to talk, it was her 225 00:13:19,480 --> 00:13:22,880 Speaker 1: time to talk, that I found horrible. Exactly, So, there 226 00:13:22,880 --> 00:13:26,120 Speaker 1: were literal timers for how much air time you have 227 00:13:26,280 --> 00:13:29,280 Speaker 1: and and he had. And it's not like she's using 228 00:13:29,280 --> 00:13:32,200 Speaker 1: dependent clauses, y'all. She's in the middle of a gosh 229 00:13:32,280 --> 00:13:40,120 Speaker 1: darn sentence. And that I think that direct comparison made 230 00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:44,600 Speaker 1: him look compulsive, right, That's my biggest concern is looking 231 00:13:44,640 --> 00:13:48,320 Speaker 1: that compulsive as an interrupter. When I'm excited and I 232 00:13:48,360 --> 00:13:50,480 Speaker 1: have something to say, and I think it's I think 233 00:13:50,800 --> 00:13:52,360 Speaker 1: it adds to what you're saying, and I wish I 234 00:13:52,400 --> 00:13:55,559 Speaker 1: could talk at the same time. It meld meld minds 235 00:13:55,559 --> 00:13:58,400 Speaker 1: in that way. But that is very different than a 236 00:13:58,559 --> 00:14:05,360 Speaker 1: timed breathe moderated, sometimes not so effectively debate that the 237 00:14:05,440 --> 00:14:07,520 Speaker 1: rules of the game are very clear, and the animosity 238 00:14:07,559 --> 00:14:10,800 Speaker 1: was also very clear. Right because speaking of like slogans 239 00:14:10,800 --> 00:14:13,599 Speaker 1: that sprung from this last election, that's when we have 240 00:14:13,679 --> 00:14:15,320 Speaker 1: the phrase nasty woman. She was in the middle of 241 00:14:15,320 --> 00:14:18,560 Speaker 1: saying something and Trump interjected such a nasty woman in 242 00:14:18,600 --> 00:14:22,680 Speaker 1: the middle in the middle of her boy, and You're like, wow, 243 00:14:23,160 --> 00:14:26,920 Speaker 1: it almost seemed to pathological, like he can't help it. 244 00:14:26,920 --> 00:14:30,640 Speaker 1: It's like a tick. And I can relate in a 245 00:14:30,680 --> 00:14:34,560 Speaker 1: sad and scary, terrifying way in that part of me. 246 00:14:34,560 --> 00:14:36,760 Speaker 1: When I'm listening to podcast is like talking along with 247 00:14:36,800 --> 00:14:39,640 Speaker 1: the radio, you know what I mean. But it's not 248 00:14:39,720 --> 00:14:42,680 Speaker 1: your time. It's not your turn. And I think the 249 00:14:42,720 --> 00:14:45,960 Speaker 1: intent of equal airtime, which is something we bring to 250 00:14:46,040 --> 00:14:49,880 Speaker 1: this podcast and something that is imbued in a presidential debate, 251 00:14:50,640 --> 00:14:54,800 Speaker 1: is maligned when someone is constantly interrupting the other. So 252 00:14:55,080 --> 00:14:59,680 Speaker 1: I think intent really matters, power dynamic really matters. And 253 00:15:00,680 --> 00:15:04,440 Speaker 1: you know, to say in a blanket way men are 254 00:15:04,480 --> 00:15:09,520 Speaker 1: always interrupting women is not quite accurate, or at least 255 00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:11,960 Speaker 1: not based on this researcher, which we're going to unpack, 256 00:15:12,000 --> 00:15:16,000 Speaker 1: I promise in a second. But it also um simplifies 257 00:15:16,640 --> 00:15:22,800 Speaker 1: what is actually a very complex, uh conversational habit. You 258 00:15:22,800 --> 00:15:24,920 Speaker 1: know what I would like to see bridget I would 259 00:15:24,920 --> 00:15:29,800 Speaker 1: like to see because of this dependent clause usage setting 260 00:15:29,800 --> 00:15:32,800 Speaker 1: women up. If in fact, women use dependent clauses and 261 00:15:32,800 --> 00:15:35,640 Speaker 1: passive speech more than men. It sets them up as 262 00:15:35,680 --> 00:15:40,640 Speaker 1: women to be more often interrupted. To test that, researchers 263 00:15:40,840 --> 00:15:44,480 Speaker 1: take note, to test that assumption, we should have an experiment. 264 00:15:44,520 --> 00:15:48,000 Speaker 1: There should be an experiment out there in which, um, 265 00:15:48,160 --> 00:15:51,680 Speaker 1: they test whether gender or passive speech is the bigger 266 00:15:51,720 --> 00:15:55,600 Speaker 1: indicator of interruption. All it would take is having men 267 00:15:55,720 --> 00:15:59,840 Speaker 1: and women researchers engage in conversation for a few minutes. 268 00:16:00,520 --> 00:16:04,360 Speaker 1: The test subjects and well, obviously test subjects would be man, 269 00:16:04,680 --> 00:16:07,280 Speaker 1: male and female, and they could test men man to 270 00:16:07,320 --> 00:16:09,280 Speaker 1: man and woman to woman and man to woman and 271 00:16:09,360 --> 00:16:13,120 Speaker 1: woman to man interruptions. But have both the man and 272 00:16:13,160 --> 00:16:16,640 Speaker 1: woman who are the researchers be trained to basically read 273 00:16:16,640 --> 00:16:19,640 Speaker 1: off of a passive script, right, have both of them 274 00:16:19,720 --> 00:16:21,920 Speaker 1: use passive special fascinating? I think to add to that, 275 00:16:21,960 --> 00:16:24,720 Speaker 1: it will be interesting to add the nuance of like race. 276 00:16:25,200 --> 00:16:28,760 Speaker 1: You know, um, I remember watching this documentary It's it's 277 00:16:28,840 --> 00:16:32,240 Speaker 1: hilarious talking funny, and it has these four comedians, It's 278 00:16:32,280 --> 00:16:37,520 Speaker 1: Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock, Luis c K and Rickey Gerais 279 00:16:37,720 --> 00:16:39,960 Speaker 1: and they're all like, it's just like them sitting on 280 00:16:40,000 --> 00:16:42,600 Speaker 1: a stage having a conversation. Then, because they're all hilarious, 281 00:16:42,640 --> 00:16:45,240 Speaker 1: the conversation it's hilarious, but I did know. I was like, 282 00:16:45,280 --> 00:16:49,320 Speaker 1: I feel like Chris Rock is getting interrupted by the 283 00:16:49,400 --> 00:16:52,040 Speaker 1: other men more and I could. And part of it 284 00:16:52,080 --> 00:16:56,320 Speaker 1: is like, these are four hilarious, you know, powerhouses of comedy. 285 00:16:56,680 --> 00:17:00,440 Speaker 1: No women, surprisingly because women aren't funny. Um, they should 286 00:17:00,480 --> 00:17:04,240 Speaker 1: do a remake with Amy Schumer and Samantha Yeah, I 287 00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:10,520 Speaker 1: would love that. Jessica Williams in um my favorite comedian 288 00:17:10,520 --> 00:17:12,760 Speaker 1: of all time, Wanda Psykes, which I feel like she 289 00:17:12,760 --> 00:17:14,840 Speaker 1: gets forgotten but she's hilarious. Go back and watch her. 290 00:17:15,040 --> 00:17:17,639 Speaker 1: She's hilarious. Um. But yeah, part of it is that 291 00:17:17,680 --> 00:17:20,119 Speaker 1: you have these funny men who were all funny, all 292 00:17:20,160 --> 00:17:22,800 Speaker 1: got something funny to say, but you can't help but 293 00:17:23,000 --> 00:17:25,960 Speaker 1: watch these dynamics that play. That you've got Jerry Seinfeld, 294 00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:28,000 Speaker 1: the richest and most successful comedian of all time, blah 295 00:17:28,000 --> 00:17:31,600 Speaker 1: blah blah, and Chris Rock's also successful and also probably 296 00:17:31,680 --> 00:17:35,760 Speaker 1: very rich. But you can't help but see power dynamics 297 00:17:35,800 --> 00:17:40,200 Speaker 1: at play. And it's unclear whether or not it's something's 298 00:17:40,240 --> 00:17:42,119 Speaker 1: going on or if it's just funny people who are 299 00:17:42,119 --> 00:17:45,040 Speaker 1: all friends talking. And I wonder do you think they 300 00:17:45,080 --> 00:17:47,640 Speaker 1: got called out for it? Because I get called out 301 00:17:47,680 --> 00:17:49,919 Speaker 1: for it, and I wonder if we call out women 302 00:17:50,080 --> 00:17:53,520 Speaker 1: interrupts more than male interrupted. I definitely think that's there's 303 00:17:53,560 --> 00:17:55,440 Speaker 1: something to that because I don't I don't think anybody 304 00:17:55,520 --> 00:17:58,000 Speaker 1: would have ever tweeted at them like Jerry let Chris 305 00:17:58,080 --> 00:18:00,800 Speaker 1: finish his thought. Don't think that whatever happened, Yeah, I 306 00:18:00,800 --> 00:18:06,320 Speaker 1: think it really boils down to entitlement and power and 307 00:18:06,520 --> 00:18:10,960 Speaker 1: who we see is having something to say. And that's 308 00:18:11,040 --> 00:18:13,560 Speaker 1: where I think, you know, the reasons so many of 309 00:18:13,640 --> 00:18:17,600 Speaker 1: us find those moments of women in power with something 310 00:18:17,640 --> 00:18:24,040 Speaker 1: to say getting shut down so offensive and so triggering 311 00:18:24,400 --> 00:18:27,600 Speaker 1: really is because we've all been a woman with something 312 00:18:27,640 --> 00:18:32,040 Speaker 1: to say in a room where somebody assumes we don't 313 00:18:32,119 --> 00:18:35,840 Speaker 1: have something to say. Yeah. Just recently, there was this 314 00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:39,880 Speaker 1: really kind of viral example of a female scientist who 315 00:18:39,920 --> 00:18:42,040 Speaker 1: was at a panel with I think three men on. 316 00:18:42,160 --> 00:18:44,800 Speaker 1: The scientist's name is Veronica hub Me, and she was 317 00:18:44,800 --> 00:18:48,000 Speaker 1: basically being constantly interrupted by the moderator. And what made 318 00:18:48,040 --> 00:18:50,959 Speaker 1: it worse is that this was sort of a combination 319 00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:54,080 Speaker 1: of so called man interrupting and man explaining, because the 320 00:18:54,119 --> 00:18:58,639 Speaker 1: moderator was clearly explaining her own research to her. And 321 00:18:58,680 --> 00:19:01,159 Speaker 1: eventually there was where she just kind of sits back, 322 00:19:01,200 --> 00:19:03,159 Speaker 1: and they all the men just all talk, and somebody 323 00:19:03,160 --> 00:19:06,480 Speaker 1: from the audience eventually screams, let her finish her thought, 324 00:19:06,800 --> 00:19:09,919 Speaker 1: because you know, it's her theory, right, And so I 325 00:19:09,960 --> 00:19:13,240 Speaker 1: think people gathered this is a woman with something to say. 326 00:19:14,119 --> 00:19:15,760 Speaker 1: This is her theory. She should be talking about it, 327 00:19:15,840 --> 00:19:17,960 Speaker 1: and they won't let her. So I think that context 328 00:19:18,040 --> 00:19:21,280 Speaker 1: definitely matters. Yeah, and in that case, like, it's not 329 00:19:21,320 --> 00:19:23,720 Speaker 1: like she wasn't using the right phrasing, So we can't 330 00:19:23,800 --> 00:19:28,080 Speaker 1: victim blame universally. Um, let's let's dive into the research 331 00:19:28,119 --> 00:19:29,680 Speaker 1: when you come back from a quick break, because there's 332 00:19:29,680 --> 00:19:34,480 Speaker 1: three studies that are often cited on this and are 333 00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:38,159 Speaker 1: really falling short unfortunately at proving what is probably a 334 00:19:38,280 --> 00:19:40,920 Speaker 1: very real phenomenon. So we'll be right back after a 335 00:19:40,960 --> 00:19:51,920 Speaker 1: quick break. And we're back and we're trying really hard 336 00:19:51,920 --> 00:19:56,960 Speaker 1: not to interrupt each other. No, we're not just kidding, um, 337 00:19:56,960 --> 00:19:58,800 Speaker 1: but you know this comes from a good place. So 338 00:19:59,000 --> 00:20:01,640 Speaker 1: let's talk through some of the research that is commonly 339 00:20:01,720 --> 00:20:07,200 Speaker 1: cited in articles like glamour magazines. You know, yup, this 340 00:20:07,280 --> 00:20:10,400 Speaker 1: is a thing that really exists, that science confirms it 341 00:20:10,520 --> 00:20:13,560 Speaker 1: or is often cited in the New York Times and elsewhere, 342 00:20:13,880 --> 00:20:16,400 Speaker 1: the first of which is one of the most recent 343 00:20:16,920 --> 00:20:20,159 Speaker 1: studies that was done in two thousand fourteen at George 344 00:20:20,160 --> 00:20:26,440 Speaker 1: Washington University. In the study, they had forty participants, twenty 345 00:20:26,480 --> 00:20:31,560 Speaker 1: of whom were male. Uh that they set up with 346 00:20:31,760 --> 00:20:35,760 Speaker 1: three minute conversations, so they monitored and recorded a three 347 00:20:35,800 --> 00:20:40,240 Speaker 1: minute long conversation between men speaking with men, men speaking 348 00:20:40,240 --> 00:20:44,080 Speaker 1: with women, women speaking with men, and women speaking with women. 349 00:20:45,200 --> 00:20:49,720 Speaker 1: On average, the study concluded that women in the study 350 00:20:49,760 --> 00:20:54,760 Speaker 1: interrupted women two point nine times on average over the 351 00:20:54,760 --> 00:20:57,440 Speaker 1: course of a three minute conversation, so it's just about 352 00:20:57,480 --> 00:21:00,400 Speaker 1: an interruption a minute, which is probably what we've been averaging. 353 00:21:01,680 --> 00:21:07,040 Speaker 1: And then men interrupted women two point one times on average, 354 00:21:07,240 --> 00:21:12,040 Speaker 1: which is almost a whole third less than women interrupted women. 355 00:21:12,080 --> 00:21:14,959 Speaker 1: So really women are interrupting women more than men are 356 00:21:15,000 --> 00:21:17,480 Speaker 1: interrupted women. But that's not the headlines it but the 357 00:21:17,480 --> 00:21:22,199 Speaker 1: headline is man interruptions and more like beyond that is 358 00:21:22,240 --> 00:21:24,359 Speaker 1: that and this is where there is some credence to this, 359 00:21:24,880 --> 00:21:30,000 Speaker 1: that men interrupted other men one point eight times, so 360 00:21:30,040 --> 00:21:32,960 Speaker 1: that is you know, a whole third, no, not even 361 00:21:32,960 --> 00:21:37,280 Speaker 1: a third, it's point three difference. The point three difference 362 00:21:37,320 --> 00:21:40,440 Speaker 1: in terms of how often men interrupt women versus interrupt men. Right, 363 00:21:40,640 --> 00:21:43,560 Speaker 1: that's not very significant. Yeah, it's not. And honestly, that 364 00:21:43,640 --> 00:21:46,520 Speaker 1: reminds me just anecdotally of you know, being in a 365 00:21:46,560 --> 00:21:49,920 Speaker 1: lot of progressive professional spaces. I've actually found men who 366 00:21:49,920 --> 00:21:52,560 Speaker 1: are very and I'm not saying this is all men, 367 00:21:52,600 --> 00:21:56,120 Speaker 1: because Lord knows there's some interrupters out there that will 368 00:21:56,119 --> 00:21:59,040 Speaker 1: shut up, but at least my experience, I've been around 369 00:21:59,040 --> 00:22:01,880 Speaker 1: a lot of men in progressive spaces especially, who are 370 00:22:02,040 --> 00:22:05,919 Speaker 1: very particular about interrupting women, and they they'll say, like, 371 00:22:05,960 --> 00:22:08,560 Speaker 1: if they find themselves interrupting, they'll say like, oh, no, 372 00:22:08,720 --> 00:22:10,760 Speaker 1: I don't want to interrupt finish your thought. That is 373 00:22:10,960 --> 00:22:13,840 Speaker 1: something that I think a lot of spaces have tried 374 00:22:13,920 --> 00:22:17,159 Speaker 1: to normalize. But this research really aligns with that that 375 00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:20,280 Speaker 1: maybe men aren't the ones doing all the interrupting. Yeah, 376 00:22:20,320 --> 00:22:22,840 Speaker 1: so clearly women are being interrupted more than men are 377 00:22:22,880 --> 00:22:26,640 Speaker 1: being interrupted, but it's not necessarily by men. So how 378 00:22:26,640 --> 00:22:28,600 Speaker 1: can we take this and run with it and say, oh, 379 00:22:28,640 --> 00:22:31,879 Speaker 1: men are the perpetuators of interruptions. They're not, according to 380 00:22:31,920 --> 00:22:35,040 Speaker 1: this research, by the way, which has forty participants total, 381 00:22:35,320 --> 00:22:38,440 Speaker 1: which is free compuni. Okay, it's a really small really 382 00:22:38,440 --> 00:22:42,960 Speaker 1: small sample size, the differences are not that statistically significant, 383 00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:45,679 Speaker 1: And you know, one way of looking at this research 384 00:22:45,760 --> 00:22:48,840 Speaker 1: is saying, Wow, women interrupt women more than anybody. Yeah, 385 00:22:48,920 --> 00:22:51,000 Speaker 1: and and really women just aren't being able to finish 386 00:22:51,000 --> 00:22:54,119 Speaker 1: their thoughts or their sentences, regardless of whether it's a 387 00:22:54,160 --> 00:22:55,639 Speaker 1: man or a woman on the other side of that 388 00:22:55,720 --> 00:22:58,600 Speaker 1: interruption exactly. The other thing that I thought found interesting 389 00:22:58,640 --> 00:23:01,960 Speaker 1: about the study is that they concluded that when speaking 390 00:23:01,960 --> 00:23:07,480 Speaker 1: with a female, participants interrupted more clearly and used more 391 00:23:07,600 --> 00:23:11,959 Speaker 1: dependent clauses than when speaking with a male interested So 392 00:23:11,960 --> 00:23:14,000 Speaker 1: it's like, the people who are speaking to these women, 393 00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:17,040 Speaker 1: even though they were interrupting, we're using more passive language. 394 00:23:17,080 --> 00:23:18,840 Speaker 1: And I think that, to me is the very interesting 395 00:23:18,840 --> 00:23:21,680 Speaker 1: part I'd like to lean into and get more more 396 00:23:21,760 --> 00:23:24,440 Speaker 1: research done on. And maybe there is more out there, 397 00:23:24,480 --> 00:23:26,560 Speaker 1: but y'all have to help me find it, because we 398 00:23:26,560 --> 00:23:28,880 Speaker 1: we've been looking and this is These are the commonly 399 00:23:29,000 --> 00:23:34,480 Speaker 1: cited linked to, as you know, taken as pure evidence, 400 00:23:34,760 --> 00:23:38,880 Speaker 1: totally conclusive evidence that writen Ma interrupting is real, which 401 00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:43,280 Speaker 1: I find really problematic. And this other study that's often cited, 402 00:23:43,320 --> 00:23:45,960 Speaker 1: which I think is just it really tells you a 403 00:23:46,000 --> 00:23:48,080 Speaker 1: lot about the research is out there, that fact that 404 00:23:48,119 --> 00:23:51,800 Speaker 1: this is a sided so often. It's from nineteen and so, 405 00:23:51,880 --> 00:23:54,240 Speaker 1: first of all, that's a really old study things of 406 00:23:54,800 --> 00:23:56,679 Speaker 1: you know, I mean I don't I'm a scientist, but 407 00:23:56,720 --> 00:23:59,080 Speaker 1: like I would imagine things maybe are different. You know, 408 00:23:59,200 --> 00:24:01,600 Speaker 1: I wouldn't rely on a study from seventy five to 409 00:24:02,160 --> 00:24:04,880 Speaker 1: make claims about what's going on with men and women. Now, 410 00:24:05,320 --> 00:24:07,840 Speaker 1: that's probably interesting when it comes to speech, correct, it's 411 00:24:07,880 --> 00:24:11,000 Speaker 1: something that's changing so quickly that you know, historically young 412 00:24:11,040 --> 00:24:15,800 Speaker 1: women have been linguistic innovators. Remember we talked about, you know, 413 00:24:15,920 --> 00:24:18,320 Speaker 1: these things changed very quickly, and they changed quickly, so 414 00:24:18,359 --> 00:24:24,560 Speaker 1: we shouldn't be basing you know, large, large, boombastic claims 415 00:24:24,920 --> 00:24:27,040 Speaker 1: on you know, the study. So the study was from 416 00:24:27,040 --> 00:24:30,800 Speaker 1: seventy came out of UC Santa Barbara, and basically, despite 417 00:24:30,800 --> 00:24:33,439 Speaker 1: being very old, they only looked at thirty one quote 418 00:24:33,440 --> 00:24:37,160 Speaker 1: conversational segments overhood and coffee shops and drug stores on campus. 419 00:24:37,400 --> 00:24:39,119 Speaker 1: And so they don't know what these people are peers. 420 00:24:39,160 --> 00:24:41,320 Speaker 1: They don't know if it's a student meeting with a 421 00:24:41,400 --> 00:24:44,320 Speaker 1: professor or you know, two friends who've been friends forever. 422 00:24:44,359 --> 00:24:46,760 Speaker 1: They don't know the context of what kind of conversations 423 00:24:46,760 --> 00:24:50,359 Speaker 1: are having, and so from the study, three quarters of 424 00:24:50,359 --> 00:24:53,600 Speaker 1: the thirty one conversational segments analyzed in this paper were 425 00:24:53,600 --> 00:24:56,440 Speaker 1: two party interactions recorded in coffee shops, drug stores, and 426 00:24:56,520 --> 00:24:59,960 Speaker 1: other public places in the university community. Such places reviewed 427 00:25:00,080 --> 00:25:03,119 Speaker 1: as routine settings in which everyday chit chat takes place, 428 00:25:03,240 --> 00:25:05,320 Speaker 1: but kind of talking we all do, even others are 429 00:25:05,359 --> 00:25:08,439 Speaker 1: likely to overhear us. So not even all of these 430 00:25:08,480 --> 00:25:12,480 Speaker 1: conversational segments had the same number of parties involved. Right, 431 00:25:12,560 --> 00:25:16,399 Speaker 1: So it just seems like apples to oranges, three people 432 00:25:16,640 --> 00:25:19,800 Speaker 1: around a brunch table versus one, you know, professor talking 433 00:25:19,800 --> 00:25:21,960 Speaker 1: to a student. So different, it's so different, and so 434 00:25:22,000 --> 00:25:25,440 Speaker 1: it just seems to me it's I wouldn't be if 435 00:25:25,440 --> 00:25:28,159 Speaker 1: I was a journalist, I would not be basing this 436 00:25:28,280 --> 00:25:30,679 Speaker 1: claim that, oh, this happens a lot or women are experience. 437 00:25:30,720 --> 00:25:33,440 Speaker 1: I think it's fine to have that be an anecdotal 438 00:25:33,480 --> 00:25:36,640 Speaker 1: thing where people on Twitter are fired up about men 439 00:25:36,720 --> 00:25:39,360 Speaker 1: interrupted women, because that's true. But I wouldn't then try 440 00:25:39,400 --> 00:25:42,159 Speaker 1: to ground it in some scientific evidence if that evidence 441 00:25:42,240 --> 00:25:45,240 Speaker 1: is just a little bit lack. And that's where, like 442 00:25:45,280 --> 00:25:48,080 Speaker 1: you mentioned earlier, the New York Times headline is slightly better, 443 00:25:48,200 --> 00:25:50,840 Speaker 1: but Here's a paragraph that they put in in this 444 00:25:50,960 --> 00:25:53,480 Speaker 1: New York Time story as they introduced the phenomenon. They say, 445 00:25:53,720 --> 00:25:57,679 Speaker 1: quote academic studies and countless anecdotes make it clear that 446 00:25:57,760 --> 00:26:01,480 Speaker 1: being interrupted, talked over, shutdown, or penalized for speaking out 447 00:26:01,800 --> 00:26:05,320 Speaker 1: is nearly a universal experience for women when they are 448 00:26:05,359 --> 00:26:10,240 Speaker 1: outnumbered by men. So yeah, that's true. But I mean 449 00:26:10,680 --> 00:26:12,320 Speaker 1: I'm just looking at the language. Now. You know what 450 00:26:12,359 --> 00:26:15,680 Speaker 1: they say here is that being interrupted, So they don't 451 00:26:15,720 --> 00:26:18,520 Speaker 1: even say by men, just being interrupted, So really that 452 00:26:18,640 --> 00:26:21,440 Speaker 1: is yea, that is true, that is true, right, women 453 00:26:21,440 --> 00:26:25,399 Speaker 1: are interrupted more than men, but man interruption And the 454 00:26:25,400 --> 00:26:29,840 Speaker 1: headline says the universal phenomenon of men interrupting women not 455 00:26:29,920 --> 00:26:33,720 Speaker 1: as true. But again I think I think that could 456 00:26:33,760 --> 00:26:36,480 Speaker 1: be true. Yeah, Like, not to get nippicky, but calling 457 00:26:36,480 --> 00:26:39,000 Speaker 1: it a universal I would say that calling it a 458 00:26:39,080 --> 00:26:43,719 Speaker 1: universal phenomena is not incorrect because it's something that women 459 00:26:45,480 --> 00:26:48,720 Speaker 1: clearly are dealing with. We have personal examples that women 460 00:26:48,720 --> 00:26:51,680 Speaker 1: are talking about on Twitter. We have like high profile 461 00:26:51,720 --> 00:26:54,359 Speaker 1: examples Kanye West, Taylor Swift, what have you, And so 462 00:26:54,400 --> 00:26:56,560 Speaker 1: I think it's not it would be a little bit much, 463 00:26:56,560 --> 00:26:58,960 Speaker 1: but it's not wrong to glean that this is a 464 00:26:59,040 --> 00:27:02,359 Speaker 1: universal phenomena in the sense that like it's something that happens, 465 00:27:02,359 --> 00:27:05,920 Speaker 1: Like you could say the universal phenomena of I don't 466 00:27:05,920 --> 00:27:08,320 Speaker 1: know anything and not have it be I wasn't ready 467 00:27:08,359 --> 00:27:11,560 Speaker 1: for that. I see, I had not I didn't interrupt that. Yeah, 468 00:27:11,560 --> 00:27:13,840 Speaker 1: and that sentence construction. I did not have an example. 469 00:27:13,920 --> 00:27:16,480 Speaker 1: You're coraborating at me that this is like the Google 470 00:27:16,560 --> 00:27:21,960 Speaker 1: Docs of conversation. You and I like to collaborate, create sentence, 471 00:27:22,000 --> 00:27:25,600 Speaker 1: my sentence, and I get yelled at, and so I 472 00:27:25,640 --> 00:27:28,160 Speaker 1: think I think it is I think it is a thing. 473 00:27:28,520 --> 00:27:30,120 Speaker 1: And so I just want to be clear that I'm 474 00:27:30,119 --> 00:27:33,960 Speaker 1: not saying, like when I see women on Twitter reeling 475 00:27:34,000 --> 00:27:37,440 Speaker 1: about this, I'm like, yeah, it sucks to be interrupted 476 00:27:37,440 --> 00:27:39,440 Speaker 1: and I hate it and it sucks and you should 477 00:27:39,480 --> 00:27:42,480 Speaker 1: call it out and I don't like that and go you. 478 00:27:43,000 --> 00:27:46,040 Speaker 1: But I wouldn't then say it's a fact that men 479 00:27:46,040 --> 00:27:47,879 Speaker 1: do it more than women. And I think that's gotten 480 00:27:47,880 --> 00:27:51,040 Speaker 1: that rap well because of the word band corruption, which 481 00:27:51,240 --> 00:27:54,479 Speaker 1: is a misnomer in my opinion, which is I know 482 00:27:54,520 --> 00:27:56,560 Speaker 1: that's an unpopular opinion to take, but I'm taking it. 483 00:27:56,680 --> 00:28:00,200 Speaker 1: So here's here's one other study that I do want 484 00:27:59,920 --> 00:28:02,320 Speaker 1: to tip my hat too, because to me, it's the 485 00:28:02,359 --> 00:28:05,600 Speaker 1: best study out there in that it actually deals with 486 00:28:05,760 --> 00:28:08,800 Speaker 1: race and power and privilege in a much more interesting 487 00:28:08,840 --> 00:28:13,240 Speaker 1: way than gender alone, without even controlling for race or 488 00:28:13,280 --> 00:28:15,680 Speaker 1: age like all of those other studies. I didn't see 489 00:28:15,680 --> 00:28:19,040 Speaker 1: any any acknowledgment that they were controlling for other factors, 490 00:28:19,040 --> 00:28:21,480 Speaker 1: which also seems like an oversight. But it was some 491 00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:26,320 Speaker 1: graduate students paper in, so you know, I probably didn't 492 00:28:27,280 --> 00:28:29,520 Speaker 1: she needed to graduate or something, you know what I mean. 493 00:28:29,560 --> 00:28:33,240 Speaker 1: But let's talk about the Supreme Court study. Um, and 494 00:28:33,280 --> 00:28:35,680 Speaker 1: I want to make sure I get the headline right, 495 00:28:35,760 --> 00:28:38,720 Speaker 1: but what it was or the name of the study right, 496 00:28:38,760 --> 00:28:42,760 Speaker 1: because it was a really interesting analysis of the Supreme 497 00:28:42,800 --> 00:28:48,200 Speaker 1: Court and in terms of the public arguments that were happening, 498 00:28:48,440 --> 00:28:50,240 Speaker 1: arguments is at the right or whatever. They were hearing 499 00:28:50,320 --> 00:28:53,680 Speaker 1: court cases. They were hearing cases in court. Things were 500 00:28:53,680 --> 00:28:56,760 Speaker 1: being recorded, thank you stenographers, so we were able to 501 00:28:56,800 --> 00:29:00,600 Speaker 1: really analyze word for word what was happening. And what 502 00:29:00,640 --> 00:29:05,440 Speaker 1: was interesting is they looked at how often judges or 503 00:29:05,480 --> 00:29:11,440 Speaker 1: justices rather interrupted other justices, and how often advocates a 504 00:29:11,600 --> 00:29:14,880 Speaker 1: k a Like attorneys and plaintiffs and all that jazz 505 00:29:15,080 --> 00:29:19,840 Speaker 1: were interrupting the justices. Even though that is expressly forbidden, 506 00:29:20,560 --> 00:29:25,160 Speaker 1: it happens. So this is called justice interrupted. The effect 507 00:29:25,240 --> 00:29:29,680 Speaker 1: of gender, ideology and seniority at Supreme Court oral arguments. 508 00:29:29,920 --> 00:29:31,600 Speaker 1: So they were not only looking at gender, but they 509 00:29:31,600 --> 00:29:33,880 Speaker 1: were looking at partisanship or ideology, like, this is a 510 00:29:33,880 --> 00:29:38,920 Speaker 1: conservative person interrupting a more liberal justice and uh, seniority, 511 00:29:38,920 --> 00:29:40,600 Speaker 1: how long have you been serving on the bench? So 512 00:29:40,800 --> 00:29:46,160 Speaker 1: check out these findings. We find that judicial interactions at 513 00:29:46,240 --> 00:29:50,120 Speaker 1: oral argument are highly gendered, with women being interrupted at 514 00:29:50,160 --> 00:29:54,360 Speaker 1: disproportionate rates by their male colleagues as well as by 515 00:29:54,440 --> 00:29:59,640 Speaker 1: male advocates. Oral argument interruptions are also highly ideological, not 516 00:29:59,720 --> 00:30:03,040 Speaker 1: only because ideological foes interrupt each other far more than 517 00:30:03,080 --> 00:30:08,880 Speaker 1: ideological allies do, but we show that conservatives interrupt liberals 518 00:30:09,120 --> 00:30:13,880 Speaker 1: more frequently than vice versa. Seniority also has some influence 519 00:30:13,920 --> 00:30:19,000 Speaker 1: on oral arguments, but primarily through the female justices learning 520 00:30:19,160 --> 00:30:24,960 Speaker 1: over time how to behave more like male justices, avoiding 521 00:30:24,960 --> 00:30:29,440 Speaker 1: traditionally female linguistic framing in order to reduce the extent 522 00:30:29,600 --> 00:30:31,720 Speaker 1: to which they are dominated by the men. So that's 523 00:30:31,760 --> 00:30:38,360 Speaker 1: really fascinating. Um. First of all, conservatives be interrupting, not surprising. Um. 524 00:30:38,400 --> 00:30:40,680 Speaker 1: I also I mean this really to me takes me 525 00:30:40,680 --> 00:30:43,479 Speaker 1: back to the episode we did around women in policing speech. 526 00:30:44,120 --> 00:30:46,440 Speaker 1: I think, if you it's not surprising to me that 527 00:30:46,520 --> 00:30:50,200 Speaker 1: female justices sort of learned to speak in a way 528 00:30:50,240 --> 00:30:52,360 Speaker 1: that was that would mean that we be they be 529 00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:55,160 Speaker 1: interrupted less. But I don't know that I like that, 530 00:30:55,200 --> 00:30:58,320 Speaker 1: because I don't like the idea that in order for 531 00:30:58,840 --> 00:31:02,400 Speaker 1: a supremn justice to get her point across, she needs 532 00:31:02,400 --> 00:31:03,800 Speaker 1: to be more like a man. I think that the 533 00:31:03,840 --> 00:31:06,560 Speaker 1: answer should be, you know, people should follow the freaking 534 00:31:06,640 --> 00:31:09,959 Speaker 1: rules and not interrupt that they're not supposed to. Um. 535 00:31:10,360 --> 00:31:13,160 Speaker 1: I'm such more of a pragmatist on this front. So 536 00:31:13,440 --> 00:31:16,400 Speaker 1: here's where all my training at bossed Up comes into play, 537 00:31:16,520 --> 00:31:19,680 Speaker 1: because I'm constantly saying to the women who I work 538 00:31:19,720 --> 00:31:23,000 Speaker 1: with and who I train, especially on my most popular topic, 539 00:31:23,040 --> 00:31:26,600 Speaker 1: which is assertive communication, which is, there's nothing wrong with 540 00:31:26,640 --> 00:31:28,480 Speaker 1: the way you speak. Here's how to speak. If you 541 00:31:28,520 --> 00:31:30,080 Speaker 1: want to get that raise, here's how to speak. If 542 00:31:30,120 --> 00:31:31,760 Speaker 1: you're in an interview, here's how to speak and you 543 00:31:31,920 --> 00:31:35,440 Speaker 1: want to be interrupted. And the reality is that the 544 00:31:35,520 --> 00:31:38,680 Speaker 1: way that women are socialized to speak or naturally speak, 545 00:31:38,720 --> 00:31:41,000 Speaker 1: whatever nature or nurture argument you want to take on 546 00:31:41,040 --> 00:31:44,360 Speaker 1: that does not always set you up to be respected, 547 00:31:45,000 --> 00:31:46,840 Speaker 1: even though it should. It should, but we got to 548 00:31:46,840 --> 00:31:48,480 Speaker 1: play the cards we've been dealt in the world that 549 00:31:48,520 --> 00:31:50,840 Speaker 1: we've you know, that we live in. And I'm way 550 00:31:50,880 --> 00:31:54,960 Speaker 1: more practical saying good on you. So to Mayora, especially 551 00:31:55,520 --> 00:31:58,600 Speaker 1: because she was interrupted more than anyone. Well, she's a 552 00:31:58,600 --> 00:32:01,680 Speaker 1: woman of colors exactly, and so they were acknowledging that 553 00:32:01,800 --> 00:32:05,560 Speaker 1: although again sample size problem here one woman of color, 554 00:32:06,400 --> 00:32:11,080 Speaker 1: you know, and Clarence notoriously doesn't speak. He said like 555 00:32:11,080 --> 00:32:13,840 Speaker 1: a sentence his whole time, and it made the headline, 556 00:32:13,880 --> 00:32:18,240 Speaker 1: so they couldn't even include his oral arguments as part 557 00:32:18,280 --> 00:32:19,920 Speaker 1: of the sample. So it really was like a seven 558 00:32:19,960 --> 00:32:22,800 Speaker 1: person sample with a one person of color, you know. 559 00:32:22,960 --> 00:32:25,840 Speaker 1: Variable it's hard to draw conclusions, but the study really 560 00:32:25,880 --> 00:32:28,240 Speaker 1: acknowledged like, these are questions we need to learn more about, 561 00:32:28,800 --> 00:32:32,160 Speaker 1: you know, is power based on gender, you know, compounded 562 00:32:32,160 --> 00:32:35,320 Speaker 1: by race? And so do Mayor's case in that it 563 00:32:35,400 --> 00:32:37,600 Speaker 1: set her up to be interrupted more than anybody. I 564 00:32:37,600 --> 00:32:40,040 Speaker 1: would venture to say, yes, But again the research here 565 00:32:40,160 --> 00:32:44,600 Speaker 1: is not perfect, but interestingly so do Mayor did it 566 00:32:45,160 --> 00:32:48,160 Speaker 1: sort of adapted faster? Which isn't that interesting? If you 567 00:32:48,240 --> 00:32:50,440 Speaker 1: have been a woman of color your whole life, and 568 00:32:50,480 --> 00:32:53,160 Speaker 1: you've had to adapt from a gender perspective and a 569 00:32:53,280 --> 00:32:55,440 Speaker 1: racial perspective because of the way that the world police 570 00:32:55,480 --> 00:32:58,160 Speaker 1: is your speech. It doesn't surprise me that maybe she learned, 571 00:32:58,320 --> 00:33:01,160 Speaker 1: not learned, but adapted the fast. So the inc article 572 00:33:01,240 --> 00:33:04,800 Speaker 1: on this study that was titled how Ruth Bader Ginsburg 573 00:33:04,840 --> 00:33:09,200 Speaker 1: cut down on the Supreme Court's ma interrupting cites that 574 00:33:09,400 --> 00:33:13,040 Speaker 1: during their time on the Court, O'Connor, Ginsburg and Elena 575 00:33:13,120 --> 00:33:16,000 Speaker 1: Kagan cut their use of this sort of language they're 576 00:33:16,000 --> 00:33:22,040 Speaker 1: talking about passive language in half. So Mayor did it faster. 577 00:33:22,200 --> 00:33:24,200 Speaker 1: By the end of her first term, she had cut 578 00:33:24,280 --> 00:33:28,400 Speaker 1: so called polite phrasing from seventy five percent of her 579 00:33:28,480 --> 00:33:33,000 Speaker 1: questions to twenty, putting her in league with the Mail justices. 580 00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:35,720 Speaker 1: So she really learned with the quickness. And again that 581 00:33:35,760 --> 00:33:38,120 Speaker 1: doesn't surprise me at all in a world where women 582 00:33:38,160 --> 00:33:40,960 Speaker 1: of color often asked to adapt and change, and you know, 583 00:33:41,400 --> 00:33:43,280 Speaker 1: do this to not be threatened to this if you're 584 00:33:43,320 --> 00:33:45,880 Speaker 1: to the reatenaing with this to you know, in all 585 00:33:45,960 --> 00:33:47,600 Speaker 1: the ways, I think it doesn't surprise me that she, 586 00:33:47,800 --> 00:33:50,600 Speaker 1: you know, learned to adapt or adapted so quickly. Right, 587 00:33:51,400 --> 00:33:54,480 Speaker 1: So I think I want to talk about what we 588 00:33:54,520 --> 00:33:57,920 Speaker 1: can do to avoid interruptions in a second, but but 589 00:33:57,960 --> 00:34:00,080 Speaker 1: I think we should probably take a quick break. I 590 00:34:00,120 --> 00:34:04,280 Speaker 1: just want to conclude this segment by saying, Yo, cognitive 591 00:34:04,320 --> 00:34:07,960 Speaker 1: linguistics scientists out there, please point me in the direction 592 00:34:08,120 --> 00:34:11,160 Speaker 1: of better research on this, or let's get some better 593 00:34:11,200 --> 00:34:13,759 Speaker 1: research on the books, because if we are going around 594 00:34:13,840 --> 00:34:18,799 Speaker 1: perpetuating the phrase ma interruption, which I think is a misnomer, 595 00:34:19,200 --> 00:34:22,440 Speaker 1: we are going to get called out for perpetuating propaganda 596 00:34:22,840 --> 00:34:25,000 Speaker 1: in a world that clearly interrupts women more. But I 597 00:34:25,000 --> 00:34:29,239 Speaker 1: don't think it's there's strong enough conclusive empirical evidence to 598 00:34:29,280 --> 00:34:31,640 Speaker 1: say that men are the ones perpetuating it. Sorry on 599 00:34:31,760 --> 00:34:35,879 Speaker 1: popular opinion. Sorry not sorry. Yeah, let's talk more about 600 00:34:35,880 --> 00:34:37,440 Speaker 1: that when we come back from this word from our 601 00:34:37,440 --> 00:34:48,880 Speaker 1: sponsor and we're back just talking about some you know, 602 00:34:48,920 --> 00:34:51,920 Speaker 1: really getting heated talking about interruptions, and we all do it, 603 00:34:51,960 --> 00:34:54,480 Speaker 1: and women are getting interrupted left and right, um, and 604 00:34:54,520 --> 00:34:58,560 Speaker 1: there's really it's obnoxious to be interrupted, I think in 605 00:34:58,600 --> 00:35:00,680 Speaker 1: a lot of different contexts, and we wanted to talk 606 00:35:00,680 --> 00:35:03,200 Speaker 1: through some things you can do about it on both ends, 607 00:35:03,239 --> 00:35:05,799 Speaker 1: both as the interrupter, and the interrupted. And so one 608 00:35:05,840 --> 00:35:08,600 Speaker 1: of the things I was talking about earlier is active listening. 609 00:35:08,600 --> 00:35:11,719 Speaker 1: And this is something that I used to be terrible at, 610 00:35:11,960 --> 00:35:15,080 Speaker 1: and it was through things like therapy, through training, through 611 00:35:15,800 --> 00:35:18,440 Speaker 1: just really thinking about the ways that we listen that 612 00:35:18,560 --> 00:35:21,120 Speaker 1: I think I hopefully got a little bit closer to 613 00:35:21,200 --> 00:35:24,520 Speaker 1: someone who really listens. I'm not someone who waits to 614 00:35:24,560 --> 00:35:27,319 Speaker 1: talk and is listening to the absorbing the information that 615 00:35:27,320 --> 00:35:31,360 Speaker 1: someone else is telling me. And so really, I just 616 00:35:31,440 --> 00:35:35,200 Speaker 1: like with our police who given speech episode, I am 617 00:35:35,239 --> 00:35:37,160 Speaker 1: my advice as always, well, what if, why do the 618 00:35:37,160 --> 00:35:39,480 Speaker 1: women have to change themselves? Why don't the men change themselves? 619 00:35:39,480 --> 00:35:41,480 Speaker 1: But as a society change and so I think we 620 00:35:41,480 --> 00:35:43,600 Speaker 1: should all be better at active listening and getting better 621 00:35:43,600 --> 00:35:45,520 Speaker 1: at that. I agree. And as someone who has a 622 00:35:45,560 --> 00:35:49,479 Speaker 1: lot of trouble with that myself, I have found uh 623 00:35:49,520 --> 00:35:52,400 Speaker 1: in a in a it's it reminds me of the 624 00:35:52,440 --> 00:35:56,520 Speaker 1: advice I give often on buzzwords, how to eliminate buzzwords, 625 00:35:56,880 --> 00:36:00,120 Speaker 1: which are meaningless verbal ticks. Right, So if you if 626 00:36:00,160 --> 00:36:03,040 Speaker 1: you have trouble keeping your mouth shut like I do 627 00:36:03,680 --> 00:36:08,000 Speaker 1: and don't want to be interrupting, substitute the vocal like 628 00:36:08,040 --> 00:36:13,600 Speaker 1: the vocalization with some other physical manifestation, but snapping, And 629 00:36:13,719 --> 00:36:15,760 Speaker 1: if you have ever been like in an activist space, 630 00:36:15,920 --> 00:36:18,520 Speaker 1: people snap to agree, and that comes from because you 631 00:36:18,520 --> 00:36:20,320 Speaker 1: don't want to interrupt what they're saying, but you want 632 00:36:20,320 --> 00:36:23,319 Speaker 1: to or occupy. We used up twinkles, so when you 633 00:36:23,320 --> 00:36:25,640 Speaker 1: are really into something, you would twiggle your fingers and 634 00:36:25,680 --> 00:36:28,520 Speaker 1: point them upwards to indicate agreement. But you don't have 635 00:36:28,560 --> 00:36:30,799 Speaker 1: to stop what they're saying. And it's easier from a 636 00:36:30,920 --> 00:36:34,560 Speaker 1: physiological standpoint. Apparently I don't have the research right in 637 00:36:34,600 --> 00:36:37,120 Speaker 1: front of me, but I remember when I was researching 638 00:36:37,120 --> 00:36:39,920 Speaker 1: for our curriculum on a sort of communication. It's easier 639 00:36:39,960 --> 00:36:42,759 Speaker 1: to substitute instead of eliminate. It's hard to eliminate the 640 00:36:43,320 --> 00:36:48,200 Speaker 1: iteration of the utterance right. Instead, I like to nod vigorously, 641 00:36:48,320 --> 00:36:50,520 Speaker 1: which sometimes makes my head fall off in the studio, 642 00:36:51,400 --> 00:36:53,719 Speaker 1: in replacement of, or at least I'm attempting to get 643 00:36:53,719 --> 00:36:58,600 Speaker 1: better at nodding verbally. So replace your vocalization with a 644 00:36:58,600 --> 00:37:02,600 Speaker 1: physical movement, like if you like me, struggle with that. 645 00:37:03,200 --> 00:37:05,480 Speaker 1: It's tough, it's really, I mean it's tough. I think 646 00:37:06,200 --> 00:37:09,640 Speaker 1: we must keep in mind that women interrupt women too, 647 00:37:10,400 --> 00:37:15,840 Speaker 1: and you know, question why question your underlying assumptions. Question 648 00:37:15,920 --> 00:37:18,520 Speaker 1: whether you're interrupting people who you see is having more 649 00:37:18,520 --> 00:37:22,040 Speaker 1: authority or power or credence for some reason. Is there 650 00:37:22,120 --> 00:37:26,319 Speaker 1: unconscious bias there based on race and gender? Probably take 651 00:37:26,360 --> 00:37:29,439 Speaker 1: an implicit bias test, like check your privileges and check 652 00:37:29,480 --> 00:37:32,120 Speaker 1: your biases when it comes to interrupting. But just know 653 00:37:32,160 --> 00:37:35,040 Speaker 1: that women perpetuate that bs as much as men do. Yeah, 654 00:37:35,040 --> 00:37:37,279 Speaker 1: I think it's and I think that's the like just 655 00:37:37,320 --> 00:37:39,920 Speaker 1: to lift up from that. I think that's really difficult 656 00:37:40,120 --> 00:37:44,360 Speaker 1: advice because it's very hard to unpack, you know, ugly 657 00:37:44,520 --> 00:37:47,239 Speaker 1: stuff that's inside of us, right, the things that when 658 00:37:47,320 --> 00:37:50,600 Speaker 1: we I think we all have motivations for things that 659 00:37:50,640 --> 00:37:53,399 Speaker 1: we do, whether they're you know, small things, are big 660 00:37:53,440 --> 00:37:56,040 Speaker 1: things that we that it might be difficult to turn 661 00:37:56,120 --> 00:37:59,440 Speaker 1: a lens in at. That's hard for everybody. It's hard 662 00:37:59,480 --> 00:38:01,560 Speaker 1: for me, it's hard for you. And I think that 663 00:38:01,719 --> 00:38:05,160 Speaker 1: is really a challenge. Like when you interrupt somebody, unpack 664 00:38:05,280 --> 00:38:07,960 Speaker 1: why that is? Do you find yourself interrupting women more 665 00:38:08,040 --> 00:38:09,640 Speaker 1: or women of color more? Are people who are more 666 00:38:09,840 --> 00:38:11,960 Speaker 1: senior or more junior like? And what what could it mean? 667 00:38:12,000 --> 00:38:14,240 Speaker 1: Maybe it means nothing, Maybe it means you're really excited 668 00:38:14,280 --> 00:38:17,439 Speaker 1: to talk about this topic, or maybe it doesn't mean that. Well, 669 00:38:17,560 --> 00:38:19,840 Speaker 1: that's why this has been such a horror like and 670 00:38:19,840 --> 00:38:22,640 Speaker 1: I don't want to say horrible, but a really vulnerable 671 00:38:23,120 --> 00:38:25,719 Speaker 1: experience for the first couple of months of going live 672 00:38:25,760 --> 00:38:30,400 Speaker 1: with you. Because the last thing I want to be 673 00:38:30,520 --> 00:38:33,520 Speaker 1: seen as is a woman who is silencing a woman 674 00:38:33,560 --> 00:38:36,400 Speaker 1: of color who I respect and admires, I adore you. 675 00:38:36,960 --> 00:38:41,359 Speaker 1: I mean, holy crap, you don't want the antithesis of 676 00:38:41,440 --> 00:38:46,280 Speaker 1: my intent in my career. And yet I have gotten 677 00:38:46,320 --> 00:38:49,319 Speaker 1: some very legitimate criticism about that, and you know, I 678 00:38:49,360 --> 00:38:52,640 Speaker 1: think it. It was really hard, and it was very 679 00:38:52,640 --> 00:38:56,959 Speaker 1: guilt inducing and shame inducing, and you know, to look 680 00:38:57,000 --> 00:39:00,000 Speaker 1: at that underlying thing and ask myself and my interrupt 681 00:39:00,000 --> 00:39:02,759 Speaker 1: doing bridget because she's a woman of color, and that's 682 00:39:03,280 --> 00:39:07,520 Speaker 1: that is a hard question, an uncomfortable question to ask ourselves. 683 00:39:07,880 --> 00:39:12,000 Speaker 1: Agree here here? So what else? What else can we do? Um? 684 00:39:12,160 --> 00:39:14,560 Speaker 1: We have a couple other pieces of advice here that 685 00:39:14,600 --> 00:39:18,000 Speaker 1: I found interesting. I'm again I'm the big advocate for 686 00:39:18,360 --> 00:39:20,120 Speaker 1: you know, love the way you speak. You can speak 687 00:39:20,120 --> 00:39:21,399 Speaker 1: the way you want to speak, but when you want 688 00:39:21,440 --> 00:39:24,839 Speaker 1: to be strategic, maybe like a supreme Court Justice wants 689 00:39:24,880 --> 00:39:30,440 Speaker 1: to be strategic about preventing interruptions. Learn to speak more assertively, 690 00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:36,239 Speaker 1: and that sounds like reducing the length of pauses in 691 00:39:36,320 --> 00:39:41,319 Speaker 1: your phrasing whenever possible, thinking about intonation ending not with 692 00:39:41,400 --> 00:39:44,680 Speaker 1: up speak as though you're continuing your thought and you're 693 00:39:44,880 --> 00:39:48,040 Speaker 1: just keep on going and you're sort of meandering vocally. 694 00:39:48,680 --> 00:39:52,280 Speaker 1: But instead speak like a gymnast like Yabby Douglas flying 695 00:39:52,280 --> 00:39:57,080 Speaker 1: off the balance being example, landing stick your landing like 696 00:39:57,120 --> 00:40:00,560 Speaker 1: a gymnast, and you know, say you're point, and if 697 00:40:00,600 --> 00:40:02,879 Speaker 1: you do get interrupted, you can say, oh, no, I'm 698 00:40:02,880 --> 00:40:05,600 Speaker 1: not quite done yet. Oh that's a good way to 699 00:40:05,600 --> 00:40:08,480 Speaker 1: to to come back from I'm not quite done yet. Yes, 700 00:40:08,520 --> 00:40:10,680 Speaker 1: And I'm pairing that here in the studio with a 701 00:40:11,280 --> 00:40:13,520 Speaker 1: hand gesture, you know, putting up your hand and saying 702 00:40:13,760 --> 00:40:16,040 Speaker 1: I'm not quite finished, putting up a finger and saying, 703 00:40:16,719 --> 00:40:18,800 Speaker 1: let me finish my thought, hold on just a second. 704 00:40:18,880 --> 00:40:22,920 Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton does that masterfully whenever she's not whenever, but 705 00:40:23,080 --> 00:40:25,200 Speaker 1: often when she's interrupted. I've seen her do it on 706 00:40:25,239 --> 00:40:29,680 Speaker 1: the debate stage and say hold on, let me finish that. 707 00:40:29,760 --> 00:40:31,440 Speaker 1: And then of course someone snaps a photo of her 708 00:40:31,480 --> 00:40:34,040 Speaker 1: with wagon her finger and says Hillary Cluton's an upity, 709 00:40:34,880 --> 00:40:37,759 Speaker 1: you know what. So it's you know, of course it's 710 00:40:37,760 --> 00:40:40,520 Speaker 1: not a perfect solution, but if you want to develop 711 00:40:40,560 --> 00:40:42,759 Speaker 1: your a sort of communication, you can. It is a 712 00:40:42,760 --> 00:40:47,480 Speaker 1: skill that can be developed, and it can, you know, 713 00:40:47,560 --> 00:40:52,080 Speaker 1: help you speak in a more active tone and use 714 00:40:52,280 --> 00:40:56,480 Speaker 1: less passive phrasing instead of saying, and this is straight 715 00:40:56,480 --> 00:41:00,640 Speaker 1: out of that ink article around the Justice is instead 716 00:41:00,680 --> 00:41:03,640 Speaker 1: of starting your phrasing with may I ask? Or could 717 00:41:03,719 --> 00:41:06,440 Speaker 1: I ask? Or excuse me? Would you mind if I 718 00:41:06,480 --> 00:41:10,480 Speaker 1: clarified this? You know, that sort of disclaimer type approach 719 00:41:10,520 --> 00:41:14,160 Speaker 1: at the qualifying approach to just getting to your point. Yeah. 720 00:41:14,360 --> 00:41:17,680 Speaker 1: And another really exciting, at least for me, exciting example 721 00:41:17,680 --> 00:41:20,280 Speaker 1: of ways that women have found to kind of gamify 722 00:41:20,440 --> 00:41:23,600 Speaker 1: being interrupted is um from the women of the White 723 00:41:23,600 --> 00:41:27,920 Speaker 1: House and your Obama administration this great amplification strategy. They 724 00:41:27,960 --> 00:41:30,920 Speaker 1: noticed they were getting interrupted. They people were taking credit 725 00:41:30,960 --> 00:41:34,080 Speaker 1: for their ideas, and so when one woman would state 726 00:41:34,120 --> 00:41:37,200 Speaker 1: an idea, they would all amplify it, and so they 727 00:41:37,200 --> 00:41:39,160 Speaker 1: would they would say it again, and they would give 728 00:41:39,200 --> 00:41:41,799 Speaker 1: credit back to the originator of that idea. So if 729 00:41:41,840 --> 00:41:44,200 Speaker 1: you've said I think we should do X, y Z, 730 00:41:44,440 --> 00:41:47,480 Speaker 1: and someone interrupted you or moved on or didn't you know, 731 00:41:47,560 --> 00:41:50,560 Speaker 1: spend time with that idea. Someone else would say, well, 732 00:41:50,600 --> 00:41:53,360 Speaker 1: it's just like Emily was just suggesting she thinks we 733 00:41:53,360 --> 00:41:55,880 Speaker 1: should do X, Y Z, and it forces people to 734 00:41:56,080 --> 00:41:59,000 Speaker 1: take a beat and deal with what the you know 735 00:41:59,080 --> 00:42:01,680 Speaker 1: what the women in the room have said. Yeah, it's 736 00:42:01,719 --> 00:42:06,040 Speaker 1: kind of like active listening, but in a proactive allied way. 737 00:42:06,239 --> 00:42:09,600 Speaker 1: Verbal active listen. Yeah, it's like a vocalization of active listening. 738 00:42:09,680 --> 00:42:12,160 Speaker 1: So maybe the person who immediately spoke after you didn't 739 00:42:12,200 --> 00:42:14,279 Speaker 1: actively listen because they moved on to just they were 740 00:42:14,280 --> 00:42:16,520 Speaker 1: waiting to talk. They were waiting to talk and not 741 00:42:16,719 --> 00:42:20,040 Speaker 1: really listening. That's a great strategy. I love that there's 742 00:42:20,040 --> 00:42:22,520 Speaker 1: a Washington Post article all about it, the women of 743 00:42:22,520 --> 00:42:24,839 Speaker 1: the White House, like how they made sure people got 744 00:42:24,880 --> 00:42:27,520 Speaker 1: credit for their ideas. I love definitely include that. So 745 00:42:27,840 --> 00:42:32,600 Speaker 1: there's one other stupid So there's no other way to 746 00:42:32,600 --> 00:42:34,640 Speaker 1: put it. I think this is the dumbest thing I 747 00:42:34,680 --> 00:42:39,000 Speaker 1: came across in this whole research. And y'all remember the 748 00:42:39,000 --> 00:42:41,640 Speaker 1: the chrome app that we kind of threw some shade 749 00:42:41,640 --> 00:42:44,440 Speaker 1: at during the whip policing women's speech. That helps you 750 00:42:44,480 --> 00:42:47,400 Speaker 1: eliminate passive language when writing an email or whatever, stop 751 00:42:47,400 --> 00:42:50,880 Speaker 1: saying sorry and all that good stuff. There's another app 752 00:42:51,440 --> 00:42:56,399 Speaker 1: for being interrupted for ma interruption. It's called women Women Interrupted, 753 00:42:56,680 --> 00:42:59,799 Speaker 1: which is like a play on girl interrupting, which shout 754 00:42:59,800 --> 00:43:03,480 Speaker 1: out who was that was that Winona was in Angela? 755 00:43:04,480 --> 00:43:08,960 Speaker 1: That was disturbed Susannah Casey. I loved that. I could 756 00:43:09,000 --> 00:43:10,600 Speaker 1: do an episode all about it because I watch it 757 00:43:10,640 --> 00:43:14,120 Speaker 1: like every month. We shouldn't. Also, the late Pretty Murphy 758 00:43:15,520 --> 00:43:19,120 Speaker 1: I love, She's great. Rolling with the homie, Yeah, clueless, 759 00:43:19,520 --> 00:43:21,359 Speaker 1: we should do an episode. Oh my god, don't even 760 00:43:21,360 --> 00:43:24,880 Speaker 1: get me started. We're gonna have to do that. Okay. Anyway, 761 00:43:24,920 --> 00:43:26,640 Speaker 1: we were about to make fun of this terrible, stupid 762 00:43:26,640 --> 00:43:28,160 Speaker 1: app that I think is the dumbest thing I've heard 763 00:43:28,160 --> 00:43:32,759 Speaker 1: of all day. Um to put it assertively, So there's 764 00:43:32,800 --> 00:43:36,280 Speaker 1: this app, women Interrupted that supposedly picks up on vocal 765 00:43:36,360 --> 00:43:38,759 Speaker 1: tone in a way that would tell you whether you 766 00:43:38,800 --> 00:43:40,919 Speaker 1: have a man's voice or a woman's voice, which, first 767 00:43:40,960 --> 00:43:45,120 Speaker 1: of all, that's really a rude limited It's not it's 768 00:43:45,120 --> 00:43:48,440 Speaker 1: gender is not that simple. Yeah, it's just totally erasist. 769 00:43:48,440 --> 00:43:51,800 Speaker 1: Transgender people from that spectrum, or women who have deeper 770 00:43:51,880 --> 00:43:56,319 Speaker 1: voices or men who have Yeah, so there's that, and 771 00:43:56,360 --> 00:43:59,799 Speaker 1: then it automatically picks up on supposedly when how many 772 00:43:59,800 --> 00:44:02,120 Speaker 1: times you've been interrupted, and it just tells you that 773 00:44:02,200 --> 00:44:03,440 Speaker 1: number at the end of the day, so you can 774 00:44:03,440 --> 00:44:06,200 Speaker 1: look at your phone and be like, I'm terrible. I 775 00:44:06,239 --> 00:44:08,800 Speaker 1: allowed myself to be interrupted to any live times today. 776 00:44:08,800 --> 00:44:12,319 Speaker 1: It's like, how unhelpful and statistic is that. I don't 777 00:44:12,320 --> 00:44:15,440 Speaker 1: get how that would make anything. What that do for you? 778 00:44:15,480 --> 00:44:17,040 Speaker 1: It would make you feel bad. Yeah, at the end 779 00:44:17,080 --> 00:44:19,000 Speaker 1: of the day, it's like, oh, I didn't feel bad enough. 780 00:44:19,040 --> 00:44:21,120 Speaker 1: It's being interrupted all day. Now I have an actual 781 00:44:21,200 --> 00:44:24,080 Speaker 1: like timer telling me how many times it happen. It's 782 00:44:24,120 --> 00:44:27,759 Speaker 1: like wearable tech gone awry. Yeah. I generally this is 783 00:44:27,800 --> 00:44:31,080 Speaker 1: a whole other episode. But I generally hate anything where 784 00:44:31,120 --> 00:44:35,800 Speaker 1: it's a a clunky tech solution for women. I hate 785 00:44:35,840 --> 00:44:38,400 Speaker 1: that to a feminist issue like I remember there was 786 00:44:38,440 --> 00:44:42,279 Speaker 1: a very well meaning group of scientists who designed nail 787 00:44:42,320 --> 00:44:44,480 Speaker 1: polish that you could dip your fingers into your drink 788 00:44:44,480 --> 00:44:45,920 Speaker 1: and it would tell you if your drink had been 789 00:44:45,960 --> 00:44:49,000 Speaker 1: spicefeed And I thought like, maybe we should tell boys 790 00:44:49,040 --> 00:44:51,520 Speaker 1: not to roofy with right. I thought that was I 791 00:44:51,560 --> 00:44:54,200 Speaker 1: had a real problem with that I know. It's it's 792 00:44:54,239 --> 00:44:57,440 Speaker 1: just like all of our STEM classes are going, you know, 793 00:44:57,680 --> 00:45:01,120 Speaker 1: overdosing on gender quality. I get it. They're like, how 794 00:45:01,160 --> 00:45:04,200 Speaker 1: can we make technology interesting for women? Let's make it 795 00:45:04,239 --> 00:45:07,520 Speaker 1: a date rape technology, or let's make it a pink 796 00:45:07,640 --> 00:45:09,920 Speaker 1: you know, let's pink a fy the Lincoln logs and 797 00:45:09,960 --> 00:45:12,600 Speaker 1: it's we should. We could do a whole lot on 798 00:45:12,640 --> 00:45:16,640 Speaker 1: that anyway, hopefully, y'all. I don't think we're that mean, 799 00:45:16,840 --> 00:45:19,400 Speaker 1: but but I just had to say, like that that 800 00:45:19,400 --> 00:45:23,560 Speaker 1: app is not the solution here. I I'm curious to 801 00:45:23,600 --> 00:45:26,880 Speaker 1: hear how this goes over because I was looking on 802 00:45:26,920 --> 00:45:29,880 Speaker 1: the internet, was like, tell me there's another level headed 803 00:45:29,960 --> 00:45:34,840 Speaker 1: feminist out there who has said interruption is a myth, 804 00:45:35,160 --> 00:45:38,160 Speaker 1: like the science doesn't back it up. Yes, we have 805 00:45:38,280 --> 00:45:41,440 Speaker 1: boatloads of anecdotal evidence, but that's not enough for me 806 00:45:41,520 --> 00:45:44,399 Speaker 1: to point the finger at all men and say, men, 807 00:45:44,440 --> 00:45:46,719 Speaker 1: you should feel bad because you're interrupting women more when 808 00:45:46,760 --> 00:45:50,040 Speaker 1: the one study that actually measures the difference shows that 809 00:45:50,080 --> 00:45:56,279 Speaker 1: women interrupt women. So I think, honestly, it's not um 810 00:45:56,320 --> 00:46:01,600 Speaker 1: prudent or responsible to even perpetuate this the word man interruption. 811 00:46:01,760 --> 00:46:05,960 Speaker 1: I don't even think that it makes sense or that 812 00:46:05,960 --> 00:46:09,160 Speaker 1: that word in and of itself holds water based on 813 00:46:09,200 --> 00:46:11,880 Speaker 1: the current research we have, and I hope to be 814 00:46:11,960 --> 00:46:15,759 Speaker 1: proven wry, I hope. So are you officially advocating that we, like, 815 00:46:15,800 --> 00:46:18,040 Speaker 1: we get rid of the word. I think it's a misnumber. 816 00:46:18,840 --> 00:46:22,400 Speaker 1: I do. I think that women interrupt women too, and 817 00:46:22,440 --> 00:46:25,919 Speaker 1: I think that interrupting women is not cool, especially when 818 00:46:26,640 --> 00:46:31,320 Speaker 1: uh power, gender race combine. But I don't I don't 819 00:46:31,400 --> 00:46:35,120 Speaker 1: feel comfortable personally using the word man interruption as though 820 00:46:35,160 --> 00:46:43,560 Speaker 1: that's a empirically, you know, solved reality. I mean, here's 821 00:46:43,600 --> 00:46:46,120 Speaker 1: the thing. If you're a woman interrupting Hillary Clinton on 822 00:46:46,160 --> 00:46:48,839 Speaker 1: the debate stage, it's not going to make headline. So 823 00:46:48,880 --> 00:46:55,600 Speaker 1: I think there's an overreporting car Hillary Clinton. That's not 824 00:46:55,640 --> 00:46:59,040 Speaker 1: a headline. So I think there's a higher likelihood that 825 00:46:59,160 --> 00:47:02,640 Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell makes headlines for being a jerk to Elizabeth 826 00:47:02,680 --> 00:47:05,600 Speaker 1: Warren the same exact action being taken against another man. 827 00:47:05,960 --> 00:47:08,480 Speaker 1: So I think there's a higher level of reporting happening 828 00:47:09,000 --> 00:47:11,200 Speaker 1: on that front. We really need some better science before 829 00:47:11,200 --> 00:47:13,160 Speaker 1: I feel comfortable using that term. And I think, but 830 00:47:13,320 --> 00:47:15,320 Speaker 1: I think it's just like you said, it plays into 831 00:47:15,480 --> 00:47:18,800 Speaker 1: a certain cultural dynamic that is that has immerged, and 832 00:47:19,239 --> 00:47:24,440 Speaker 1: I don't think that cultural dynamic is necessarily wrong. Do 833 00:47:24,440 --> 00:47:29,440 Speaker 1: you get it? I hope so. I mean, honestly, I 834 00:47:29,680 --> 00:47:32,480 Speaker 1: actually do want to hear um. I want to hear 835 00:47:32,520 --> 00:47:34,680 Speaker 1: your I mean, I'm sure we all have our interruption stories. 836 00:47:34,719 --> 00:47:36,880 Speaker 1: I want to hear these interruption stories. I want to 837 00:47:36,880 --> 00:47:39,879 Speaker 1: hear if folks think that MA interrupting is a thing, 838 00:47:39,960 --> 00:47:42,239 Speaker 1: and even if the science has not proven it yet, 839 00:47:42,280 --> 00:47:45,680 Speaker 1: it could or will or should. I'm really curious to hear. 840 00:47:46,200 --> 00:47:47,640 Speaker 1: I know that a lot of the people out there 841 00:47:47,640 --> 00:47:50,960 Speaker 1: probably have um have dealt with this in a personal way. 842 00:47:51,000 --> 00:47:52,759 Speaker 1: If you're if you're a dude, I want to know 843 00:47:53,239 --> 00:47:55,799 Speaker 1: what you know, what steps are you taking to be 844 00:47:55,800 --> 00:47:58,319 Speaker 1: sure that your female colleagues are being heard. You can 845 00:47:58,360 --> 00:48:01,319 Speaker 1: tweet at us at mom Stuff podcast on Twitter. You 846 00:48:01,360 --> 00:48:03,480 Speaker 1: can hit us up on Instagram at stuff mom ever 847 00:48:03,520 --> 00:48:05,800 Speaker 1: told you, or send us a good old fashioned email, 848 00:48:05,800 --> 00:48:08,319 Speaker 1: which we love reading so much at mom Stuff at 849 00:48:08,320 --> 00:48:20,120 Speaker 1: how stuff works dot com