Divided by Disaster

Vermeulen headshot in.jpg

Topics Discussed

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do what we do without you. To become a financial supporter of the show, please visit our Patreon page, subscribe to our Premium content on Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, purchase a copy of our book, I Think You're Wrong (But I'm Listening), or share the word about our work in your own circles. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook for our real time reactions to breaking news, GIF news threads, and personal content. To purchase Pantsuit Politics merchandise, check out our TeePublic store and our branded tumblers available in partnership with Stealth Steel Designs. To read along with us, join our Extra Credit Book Club subscription. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

Episode Resources

Transcript

[00:00:00] Beth: In thinking more about why we are, where we are today and what pressures people specifically who have only experienced a post 9/11 world understand. It kind of makes me think, well, if the tools that we have in our everyday lives today had been present in the way they are today in 2001, what would September 11th have felt like?

Would we have had that moment of national unity?

[00:00:37] Sarah: This is Sarah. 

Beth: And Beth. 

Sarah: You're listening to Pantsuit Politics. 

[00:00:41] Beth: The home of grace-filled political conversations.

[00:01:04] Sarah: Hello everyone! Welcome to another episode of Pantsuit Politics. On today's podcast, we're going to talk about Biden's multi-pronged approach to managing the pandemic, including his most recent announcement about vaccine mandates that a vocal minority is big mad about. 

We're talking about the impact of 9/11 and have brought back Dr. Karla Vermeulen to talk to us about her new book Generation Disaster, which focuses on the experiences of young people who have come of age in a post 9/11 world. And finally, we'll talk about what's on our minds outside politics. 

One of the things that's been on everybody's mind outside politics is my advent calendar practice. I've gotten so many messages over the last few weeks. So people, this week on Instagram stories, I will be sharing the 2021 Sarah Holland advent collection. What I ordered for myself and my children. I'm trying to figure out how to share what I got for Nicholas, because it's a surprise and I don't want to ruin the surprise and I can't trust him.

So y'all might just have to wait until it shows up. I'm sorry about that one. And then we have some other fun holiday developments as well. Beth, you want to tell the people what we decided?

[00:02:10] Beth: Well, first, if you are a new listener, we love commemorations around here. We did a whole second podcast about commemorations for a while called The Nuanced Life. You can check that out if you want to hear those. And Sarah specifically loves buying presents for herself that last for many days in a row. And so that is where her advent calendar expertise comes in. We got a message from long-time listener and executive producer, Katie saying, listen, I have big Enneagram seven energy trying to will you all to be a lifestyle brand. And what I want from you as a holiday guide, I just want you to tell me what to buy and who to buy it for and where to buy it. And I will go do those things. And so we started talking about how given our love of commemorations and Sarah's advent calendar expertise, a Pantsuit Politics guide to having the best holiday available to you might be in order. So we are working on that. We will have it out soon because spoiler alert, our big piece of advice is we all need to get on this this year. This is not a last minute kind of holiday shopping year. We'll talk more about that soon on the show, but that holiday guide'll be coming your way.

Thank you, Katie, for sharing your big Enneagram seven energy with us. I think our team needs a seven in the mix pushing us out there a little bit. 

[00:03:20] Sarah: I mean, listen, I love making recommendations and holiday gift recommend. Especially, but I mean, our real expertise here is that we know the politics of the situation and particularly the politics of the supply chain, which is what we're going to be talking about in the show.

And we thought, listen, the best advice we could give and then help you put into effect in your own life is to buy it now. So we are hoping to get that holiday guy to you in the next couple of weeks. So we can all wrap this up by the end of September and sit back and relax as things get more stressful and stressful and stressful for people ordering.

And October, November and December, just saying, just saying, we're just trying to get y'all stress-free and having the best holiday available to you.

on Thursday. After we recorded our show, of course, president Biden presented the administration's new plan to fight the Delta variant. And he had some pretty strong words for un-vaccinated Americans. My message to unvaccinated Americans. Is this what more is there to wait for? What more do you need to see?

We've made vaccinations free, safe, and convenient. The vaccine is FDA approval. Over 200 million Americans have gotten at least one shot you've been patient, but our patients is wearing thin and your refusal has cost all of us. So he's done. A lot of people are done. And as a part of being done. Is some pretty hardcore vaccine mandates.

He laid out the specifics that will run through the department of labor and OSHA, including a new OSHA rule that any private employers with a hundred or more employees must ensure that their workforce is fully vaccinated or require any workers. Needed to produce a negative test result on at least a weekly basis before coming to work.

So this was the rule for federal workers. Now federal workers must get vaccinated. So he's putting this rule through OSHA, into effect for private employers, but this came right on the heels of our conversation, where I asked you where you stood on all these facts. I meant dates for private employers. How are you feeling?

[00:05:44] Beth: There are lots of pieces of his plan and maybe it would be good to start with what I agree with in his plan instead of going right to the private employer mandate situation, because there was a lot more, and I'm frustrated that the coverage isn't picking up, that there was a lot more. In addition to this, you have to have a vaccine if you're a healthcare worker in a setting that receives Medicaid or Medicare reimbursement. There's just lots of money going into trying to keep schools open lots of money going into testing, which that is where I have wanted to be for at least a year now. Lots more resources going to rapid testing. I'm interested in learning more from the UK's approach of having kids unmasked in school, but testing very, very frequently, much more than once a week in the UK. 

They're sending more department of defense clinician teams out to help hospitals that are being overwhelmed. So I did not like that this rolled out as just heavy-handed vaccine mandate without talking about everything that wrapped around it.

All that said, would I have done this were the President of the United States? This meaning require employers to handle the vaccine in a particular way? No, I would not have, I can't imagine what it feels like to have 1500 people a day dying on your watch. And so I have enormous grace for the frustration and the pressure political and otherwise that the president's feeling right now.

I look at this kind of similarly to the framework that I bring to a lot of questions about federalism and feel like there is a really good intention here. And I want private employers to have more flexibility. There are employers at a hundred plus employees where it is going to make vastly more sense to just let everybody keep working from home than to ask everybody to produce a negative test result or proof of vaccination.

And I think flexibility is really important in running a business. I think this is going to be used in a lot of workplaces to rush people back to work, which is why a lot of business isn't too upset about it. Right. They're ready to have people back in the office. And so you're not hearing big mad from the sort of business round table set. 

[00:07:54] Sarah: Yeah. I mean, I think the political reality of this vaccine mandate in part is the economic reality that the economy is lagging and that's got people really concerned, including the Biden administration. And so they were running out of ways to dial up the heat on the unvaccinated.

I mean, I just think that's the reality. And if we are going to get out of this, if we are going to get out of this before we have a variant that might evade the vaccines, then vaccine and testing is the only way, right? And vaccine and testing for a higher percentage of the population than is currently vaccinated and is currently frequently testing.

And I think that that's just the reality they were looking at. What 600,000 Americans dead at this point? So, so much commentary during the 9/11 Memorial that it felt intense to be marking the lives lost of, you know, 3000 Americans when we're losing that many, every two days to COVID. And I think like the numbers are so hard to take in, but they're not hard to take in, like you said, if you're the President of the United States and look, I think in conversations about federalism and limits on federalism are important, you know, but the reality in the United States is that in moments of crisis, The federal government expands its power and response to the crisis, whether it's Abraham Lincoln, suspending, habeas Corpus, whether it's FDR creating the modern presidency as a result of the great depression world war two, that's what happens.

The federal government says, well, we got bigger. Our problems got big. And the way we're going to respond to them effectively is also going to have to get bigger. And I just think that's the reality. And I don't think that we should silence people who have concerns about that. And I think the concerns are important, but I think that as the country gets bigger and we live in times that get more complicated, the federal government has to respond in kind. And that's what you're seeing here. 

[00:10:24] Beth: Well, I don't disagree with the premise that the federal government has a very critical role to play here. And that that role is going to be larger in our lives. And it's been before. And I think the federal government has done that through spending lots and lots of money on this problem through putting requirements in place prior to this most recent wave of announced.

I would like to see the federal government do more in specific areas outside of this requirement. I think part of what frustrates me here, I'm coming from the experience of having worked in HR and seeing all these places where the federal government has an objective, an important objective and objective that I wholly agree with.

And the way that that objective gets operationalized in the context of a company. Is about as divorced from the spirit, with which we would wish for people to meet those objectives as possible. It becomes things like filling out your EEOC report, looking just at the raw numbers of people that you have in different demographics.

Right. And so when I think about, yes, the federal government has a role to play in establishing what a safe workplace looks like. I think OSHA requiring every employer to have a COVID safety plan specific to their environment. Is completely reasonable. I think that the federal government expanding what it does to give us technology, to make it easier for employers to verify vaccination status would be entirely appropriate.

Right now, it is incredibly difficult to prove that you've gotten a vaccine. If you have lost or damaged the tiny car. Or cards that you got when you went to get your vaccine, right? Like in places that don't have a technological vaccine passport, if the federal government really wanted employers to require this and to facilitate that being easy, but would have been an expansion of federal power that I think would have been super.

I think it would be super helpful if the FDA could like move along with authorizing the vaccines for children under 12. It's not that I don't want the government to do anything here. It's just that this to me seems to be an unhelpful expansion of federal power into places where a lot of businesses were going to do this anyway.

And I know that a lot of businesses are grateful for the cover. This provides them. And that's like not a philosophical point, right? That's just a Prudential. It's hard to make these decisions right now. Kind of. And I respect that, but I would rather see more flexibility within the business community to just do things that make sense, especially as we continue to grapple with the fact that for them.

Percentage of people, percentage of adults who are unvaccinated, some percentage of those are ideologues, but some percentage of those are people with genuine questions of, as we've talked about a million times here, and some of those people who have questions just get frustrated by a one size fits all approach.

That seems like it lacks common sense to them. And then I, and I worry that that group gets a little bit more hardened by this as well. 

[00:13:32] Sarah: I guess what I'm frustrated about is that that sounds great, but who's going to review all those COVID safety plans. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that OSHA is understaffed and underfunded.

Like who's going to go find those better, more complicated solutions that meet the complexity of our country. Like that's what people want the government. To be the federal government in particular, to be flexible and adaptable and be able to take in the, you know, universe of experiences on the ground, but they don't want to fund it.

They don't want to staff it. And it's hard to get there without an, a certain amount of empowerment as well. And I just. I just think like, sometimes we, you know, they're doing this look, it's not easy. It's not going to be easy to endorse or to, sorry, let me say that again. It's not gonna be easy to enforce this either.

Like it's still gonna take staffing to check this and enforce it. But at the end of the day, like it's easier to check for rule breaking than it is. People through a complicated safety plan. Like I've not worked in corporate America that much, but the some experiences I've had through like accreditation processes where people have to put together plans.

I mean, my first job out of college, I was hired to just do that. They had to bring on an entire full-time staff person to put together a plan like that. And so it's just, I think that sounds great. But if we want that level of responsiveness from the federal government to the diversity. Of, you know, business in America, much less the diversity of just population in America, then we're going to need a much bigger federal government than we already have, which is already pretty big.

[00:15:05] Beth: I disagree with that. I think that this requirement in of itself, shows that there's only so much the federal government can do. You can have this rule in effect, but it is not going to get enforced by the federal government, unless people complain about it. The complaint catches someone's attention at OSHA, they do an investigation.

They find that it wasn't just an accident or they're, you know, there was like real defiance and then maybe a fine is appropriate. And there are lots of places where, as you said, accreditation is one example. There are lots of places where a plan is required. And having a plan with some flexibility in it is not harder than a rule being put in place.

And I think, especially as we get into. You know, not every company with a hundred people has like a robust HR function, like who is, who is tracking this stuff and how is it being tracked? And what kind of records are people giving to their company to approve this? This can be a mess in a lot of organizations and it is going to require a lot of federal resources to investigate that mess.

If it bubbles up to their attention in that respect, I never mind the federal government uses. The bully pulpit to say, we think you ought to be doing this. And then a lot of that is what this is, right. It is just saying, employers, you should be doing this. And we want you to, and human beings. We think it is this important that we're requiring your employers to do it.

And it gives everybody a little bit more cover and flexibility. It also reaches into schools in some states, depending on those states OSHA rules. So several people have asked me, like is a workplace of a hundred people going to. Cover school systems. It just depends on where you live because in some states there are OSHA rule extensions into the school system and others not.

And I know that local school boards would love to have some pressure alleviated from them having to make these choices. 

[00:17:04] Sarah: Well, no, I don't think it's that it's harder to create a rule than it is to create a plan. But the, if you're requiring people to submit a safety plan, that's everybody, not just who bubbles up as a rule breaker, where you're trying to tackle, you know, the worst among the worst.

You're trying to help everybody get together a plan, submit a plan and making sure the plan is good. Like I just can't fathom the bureaucratic lift. That that would be, that's what I mean, like, I think it's just a different. It's a really different and more expansive view of the federal government to say, Shepard us through this process, as opposed to, can you just catch the, the, the worst offense?

[00:17:42] Beth: Yeah, I'm not saying shepherd is through the process. I'm saying, give us guidelines and say, you ha you have to incorporate these into your workplace depending on whether they make sense for your workplace. But all of that aside, a takeaway for me from watching this unfold is that this to me, crystallizes.

How unfortunate it is that the Republican party has not been a governing partner on COVID. When you go against, against, against every effort at trying to combat this virus, you really can't come into the table in a serious way to say, I see what you're trying to do. Here are my concerns there. This could have been negotiated.

With a lot more seriousness by people who have concerns as I do about this process, but the people in positions to have those conversations for the most part have been so destructive and reckless in the way that they've approached the virus, that, that opportunity isn't there. And I think that we're all worse for it.

[00:18:50] Sarah: Well, and they're not arguing that, you know, these requirements. Well harm businesses for the most part, the overarching fear-mongering conversation that I'm hearing on Facebook that I'm hearing repeated in my social circles is just, well, this is the first step to the end of freedom and the end of Liberty.

And this is how it started with the Nazis. If I see one more Holocaust reference, I'm going to lose my mind. That's just illustrative of that sort of bankruptcy you're talking about. Like it's not any sort of critique of the governance. It is just pure politics. 

[00:19:28] Beth: Yeah. To be clear. I don't think this is the end of all freedom. That that would not be the Genesis of my opposition here. It's really just kind of the way in which there's, there's not really a place for someone like me in the modern parties, because it is just kind of thinking, I agree with the goal and I disagree with the way to operationalize that goal here and there are places where I would be more comfortable.

And that's just like, not a voice that you hear in the discourse and that's fine, but I am really happy with aspects of this plan. The one other piece of it that makes me uncomfortable, and I was curious to get your take on this, Sarah, is the booster shot piece. The administration, I say the administration, I should say the White House is very committed to this idea of a third shot rolling out the week of September 20th. You see some lessons learned from the first vaccine rollout incorporated here. They're really working on communication. Making it easy to figure out who's giving these booster shots, how you can get them, how you make your appointment. And I think all of that is good.

I like seeing lessons learned being incorporated into future plans. I am concerned about the idea. Like I could go get a booster shot. When I look at vaccine availability across the world and the critiques that I see from some folks saying, I just know that don't know that the data is there on healthy people, needing booster shots.

[00:20:52] Sarah: I agree. I'm not sure the science is 100% there. I know the science isn't 100% there because there's a pretty passionate debate in the scientific community about boosters. Now, I think the administration is wise to roll up booster shots for people who received the Johnson and Johnson vaccine. You know, I think that this is, like you said, it's more than anything it's about not getting caught.

Like if the science isn't there. Well, things change so quickly with COVID. We can't ramp up a booster shot program. Should we wait? And then all of a sudden we have a variant where we need the boosters a month ago and it's too late. I see where they're coming from. I really do. I understand this idea of like, Well, we understand that the science isn't 100% there, but if we wait for it to be there, if we wait for it to be there in this sort of worst case mega variant situation.

If we can't just get 300 million Americans a booster shot in a couple of weeks, like this has to have a ramp up. We have to put the infrastructure in place. We have to know how this is going to work so that if it does change dramatically and it changes quickly, we're ready. And so, I mean, I think it's, what's happened a lot with COVID and the debate.

With public health, which yes, there is. There's the science, there's the public health communication and there's the actual governing of the reality on the ground. And those are three different things and they have three different motivations and three different sort of environments to take in and understand and respond to.

And I think that's what you see with this debate about booster shots. 

[00:22:33] Beth: Yeah. I'm feeling some tension as we're having this conversation because I have more. Alignment with the administration than not. I have discomfort. I have questions. I think it's, I think there's a very big ethical question around these booster shots in the United States and a very big ethical question about how much we have shared vaccines and made them available throughout the world and not just ethical, but also like pragmatic because.

Variants of COVID proliferating in the world are always going to come back to the United States. And I feel in our conversation, like we're arguing as though I'm like on the opposite side of things as you are. And I don't, I don't feel like I don't feel that. I just also am not ready to line up here and say yes to everything because I generally trust this White House's intentions.

I do generally trust their intentions and I have, again, tremendous sympathy. Incredibly difficult position they're in. And I also want to be willing to like, ask the questions and have some critique of the White House without detracting from the overall message of yes, of course. I want people to get vaccinated.

I want people to wear masks. I want us to all do whatever we have to do to get through this. 

[00:23:46] Sarah: Yeah. I mean, I, I'm not in agreement with the White House completely on this. I wouldn't, if they told me in an email, let me say it again. If they sent me an email tomorrow and said, go get your booster shot. I would not for what it's worth.

I think the compromise is what I said. Like, I feel like you could get this situation, ramped up, get the logistics under control. By opening it up to people over 65 or who received the J and J vaccine enough to know we could do it enough to know it's available. And we're ready not to mention, like, we're going to have another ramp.

Coming because hopefully very, very soon. And they're going to approve the vaccine for 12 and under, and that's going to be a huge population to get vaccinated. So I understand their concerns, but I think there's a way to do that without opening up booster shots to the population for exactly the reasons you explained.

I mean, the global population and the risk of variants, continuing to rise and whether or not it's, you know, just the right thing to do. I mean, I think those are really, really important concerns. Well, this weekend was not only filled with passionate conversations about the vaccine mandate. It was also filled with memorials and remembrances surrounding the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

So next up, we're going to be talking about the impact of 9/11 and sharing part of our conversation with Dr. Karla Vermeulen, who is the deputy director of the Institute for disaster mental health, about her new book, Generation Disaster: Coming of Age Post 9/11.

So the past few weeks have been filled with reflections and long reads and book releases on everything 9/11 changed. From domestic surveillance to wars across the globe to our polarized politics. And this weekend was filled with memorials and I was really struck by how much of the conversations even surrounding the Memorial centered on how polarized we are.

And hearkening back to how United we were as a country on the days after 9/11. George W. Bush emphasized this in his remarks at the Memorial of United Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. 

[00:26:08] George W. Bush: So much of our politics has become a naked appeal to anger, fear, and resentment. That leaves us worried about our nation and our future together. I come without explanations or solutions. I can only tell you what I know. On America's day of trial and grief, I saw millions of people instinctively grab for a neighbor's hand and rally to the cause of one another. That is the America I know.

[00:26:40] Sarah: You know, I had so many conversations in my life, Beth, where people were saying, that's just ridiculous. We were never really united. We were only united in our hatred for those who had attacked us. I was anxious to hear your thoughts on that as I was having these conversations over the weekend. 

[00:26:57] Beth: I think a lot of things are true at one time. I think we were not as united as we remember being particularly in the months after 9/11, as decisions started being made about how we were going to respond to it.

There was a ton of partisanship infected those conversations, and I've always been kind of grossed out by the sort of reminiscing about how united we were after September 11th, as though we wished for some kind of catastrophe again, to create that feeling. And so I'm not really looking for a definitive barometer of American national unity in the face of tragedy around 9/11 or anything else.

What I think is true ish is that we had people at least on the surface. In positions of leadership who were more willing than they are today to step up to the plate and say what needs to be said and convey the gravity of the moment. I watched not a lot about 9/11 because I just am kind of emotionally at capacity right now.

But I did watch former President Bush's speech. And I also watched a clip of him throwing the first pitch at a baseball game shortly after 9/11 in New York. And that to me is the kind of act that feels like it's from another era in terms of American politics, the way the crowd embraced him. Even though you are in a city where probably not a lot of excited, enthusiastic Bush voters, the juxtaposition of that with the way that former president Trump handled this anniversary, that is the piece to me that it's not really about how divided or United we are in terms of opinion. It's more like what is acceptable decorum in American public life that I think has changed so much. 

[00:28:59] Sarah: Yeah, I think the decorum is definitely a part of it. This might come as a surprise to many people considering my, you know, passionate opposition to the combat missions, post 9/11, that I've talked about feeling during that time.

But I do remember a lot of unity and I do remember this sense of like grieving together. And I think the reason. That we're so consumed with that particular question right now is not just because we are so polarized. I mean, we were polarized before let's not get it twisted. This was like post Monica Lewinsky, you know, like this was, we were still polarized.

I think it's two things. I think it's one that we're in this moment where we thought if we were tackling something together, Especially a virus that like you don't run the risk that you run up nine after 9/11, not just the risk, but the reality that, that patriotism and that enemy quote unquote, would play out in really awful discriminatory, violent ways against our fellow Americans.

This is a virus, right? So I think it's partly that we are living in this moment where we thought, well, we'll find that again. We'll have this. This time where we're United and working together. And I think people are trying in their conversations surrounding 9/11 are trying to work out why isn't that true right now?

And I think the other part of this conversation and what is the more interesting question and by interesting, I mean, sort of depressing is that. It was an opportunity. And I think that this conversation is getting at the fact that it was a wasted opportunity because you're right. It wasn't just a Corum.

Like it was also the fact that George W. Bush was enormously popular. He had 85% approval rating. Right. Especially post Monica Lewinsky, post like our already polarized time was a huge deal. It was an enormous amount of political capital and political will. And it, I don't think it just came from a shared enemy.

I think that if harnessed in the right way, the leaders at the time and not just George W. Bush, but leaders in Congress, leaders of both parties, but probably coming primarily from him, like could have directed it anywhere. He wanted green energy. We don't want to be dependent on foreign oil anyway.

Healthcare. We see what happens when our fellow Americans need us. They need to know that they can all, they are always cared for no matter what. Like I just think that there's a lot of things that we could have done and tackled in a big audacious way in that moment. And I don't think it's because we just, you know, we're blood thirsty and I don't think it's just because of a sense of nostalgia for that time.

I think there was. Real political capital. And I think we could have done something big because as terrible as this moment is, and as not united, as we feel, we have done big things in the face of this current pandemic challenge. The legislation that came out of Congress at the beginning of this pandemic was a huge deal.

We have reduced poverty in the face of a pandemic. Like there have been things, even the bipartisan infrastructure bill. Like I think you see that the, even when it feels like we're not united, that there is more unity than we think there is. Right? And I think that's what we're trying to scratch at with all this, the impact of 9/11 and the reflection.

[00:32:37] Beth: Yeah, I think there are a lot of things that are true at one time about George Bush, the man, and and there's a lot to unpack there and we could fill numerous episodes with why did he achieve that level of popularity? Why did he direct it in the ways that he directed it versus the ways that he could have?

What interests me in Dr. Vermuelen's work about generation disaster is that in thinking more about why we are, where we are today and what pressures people specifically who have only experienced a post 9/11 world understand is that it helps me ask like a slightly different question than the one you're asking instead of why. And not you, but like the general populace, instead of asking why doesn't the pandemic have that sense of unity, whatever that means. It kind of makes me think, well, if the tools that we have in our everyday lives today had been present in the way they are today in 2001, what would September 11th have felt like?

Would we have had that moment of national unity? I mean, we had people spreading conspiracy theory about 9/11 as soon as it happened, but I don't think we have, in the quantity and the intensity that we would have It if something like that happen today. And we had a spirit of partisanship around a lot of their responses to September 11th then, but nothing like today.

Reversing it for me is important because it gives me a little bit more grace for our past selves and our present selves. It makes me realize like our past sells, we're not morally superior to our present selves. They lived in a different time with different tools and this wasn't even that past, right.

And our present selves are contending with different forces than our 2001 selves. And, and I just keep thinking about not to say like, Facebook is the worst, even though maybe. But just more like understanding that generation disaster probably isn't experiencing more or less actual disaster than humans who have lived at any moment in time. But the effect of it is so different because of the tools that surround it. 

[00:35:02] Sarah: Yeah, I think what's so valuable about her work is that for me as someone who's so interested in history, it's almost like she gives us a little bit of a fast forward, because for better or for worse, when you are still memorializing an event that millions and millions of people were present for that becomes the dominant perspective. It is, as it should be. The victim's families are dominant in the conversation. The decision makers at the time are dominant in the conversation. Those of us who lived through the event, even if we weren't directly affected like those perspectives take dominance. And I think what's so valuable about what she's doing here is saying, like, remember that right now in 2021, there are lots of people alive who have no memory of this event, who weren't even born yet now participating in our government and our democracy. And I just think that that is incredibly important. And here's Dr. Vermeulen defining Generation Disaster.

[00:36:05] Dr. Karla Vermeulen: I define generation disaster. And this is a term that I made up, but basically this is kind of the older part of what's now being called generation Z and the younger section of the millennials. So these are young people who were born roughly between 1989 and 2001. And I set those designations because that was the cohort, the generation that were emerging adults, which is considered 18- 29 years old, basically at the time I started writing the book. 

And so to me, This generation has been so shaped by 9/11, whether they know it or not, you know, these young people, some of them were roughly 10 at the time of the attacks. Some of them were barely born or not even born. And so many of them don't actually have specific memories of 9/11, and yet their lives have been informed by it.

So not just the attacks themselves, but then all of the societal changes that occurred within the US afterwards, the post 9/11 war. And then all of the other natural disasters, human caused disasters, certainly school shootings. I've heard members of this generation refer to themselves as the school shooting generation.

And then kind of in addition to those acute events, there's also just this underlying kind of stress. And anxiety about climate change is an enormous concern for this generation because they are the ones who are going to have to deal with it. They don't have the luxury of being in denial about it, and also racial inequities and economic inequities.

One of the things that really surprised me or that I really underestimated at the start of the research was just how powerful the economics. And for some of them that concerns questions around whether to attend college and then graduate with really crippling life limiting student loans, or do they not attend college and know that they have very limited job options at that point.

So really what I'm trying to do with the book is kind of point out, both validated for members of the generation. And then educate older people that yes, there are pretty high rates of anxiety and depression and other mental health issues among this cohort. But those are realistic reactions to the world that they have been handed.

I mean, they've never known anything, but this kind of stressful environments, you know, all of us going through the pandemic, you know, we think about like, well, we want to get back to our baseline and back to sort of things being less stressful for generation disasters. Their baseline is high stress and high anxiety about both now and about their futures.

[00:38:31] Beth: As I've been thinking about this high stress, high anxiety baseline, and specifically about September 11th, it occurs to me that all of the realities, this generation does not have the luxury of questioning are made worse by the fact that. Older generations, the people who are supposed to be guides, mentors, examples are not only incapable of relating to what these folks are going through, but we are also.

Worse than they are at navigating social media and worse than they are at navigating the changing pace of technology worse than they are at navigating disinflation. And that has to be so. Groundless. If you are a young person to look ahead and not only see people who are like, kind of clumsy. I mean, I remember feeling like the older people in my life were kind of clumsy about certain things.

The way that my grandmother called it, the Walmart sticks out to me as an example of like, just that, that little bit of tension that you start to feel as you get older and you see that the world is changing and the folks ahead of you aren't necessarily keeping up with it. What must it be like for it to not be V Walmart?

Grandmother saying like things that are actually disconnected from what you know, to be true and telling you that she knows them to be true, because she found them on the internet and her not being able to talk about that with any kind of critical lens. Like I just, I have so much lament for the situation that, that our kids are coming up in without adults ahead of them who can really wrap their arms around these challenges.

[00:40:20] Sarah: Look, I think the reality is that democracy is built on a shared sense of reality. And the reason we always bump up against these generational conflicts, be it surrounding national tragedies. Be it surrounding the way we deal with media or social media. All these things is because generations disrupt our shared sense of reality because it's not a shared reality.

If you were 18 or 19 or 20, like we were during 9/11. Versus someone who wasn't born yet, then we have a very different reality and a democracy. Like I said, like really sort of depends on that shared reality. And I think that's why generations and the way generations deal with things and this oppositional framework, this, you did it.

Right. I did it wrong. You did it wrong. I did it right. Is like, it's just killing us. Like I'm really ready for the next step of human evolution where we can drop this generational. Battle. It halts so much. It prevents so much. It keeps us from being adaptable and from learning from each other. And I think that's what, that's what she's getting at.

You know, they've always had the sense of perceived threats. They've always been aware of climate change, increasing natural disasters, and then how authorities are failing citizens in some of the disaster response for their compounding, that mistrust of authorities. So let's give them some credit. You know, the, the amazing things that they're functioning at all, and many of them are flourishing.

Many of them. Starting exciting businesses and becoming politically active and doing really exciting stuff. So let's just give them some credit for that and stop beating them down. And look, I think that advice is important for all of us. Let's just stop beating each other down, not just younger generations, but younger generations towards older generations, because I just think until we can.

If we can't drop this around something as big as 9/11 and understand that this affected us all so differently. And to give grace to one another, to see why, you know, older generations were desperate for that shared sense of patriotism while younger generations are confused by this nostalgic look back at a time of great national unity.

Like I wish we could all see. That it's just not serving us. It's not serving us and it's not certainly not serving our democracy. Well, thank you so much to Dr. Vermilion for coming on the show again and up next, we are going to talk about what's on our mind outside politics.

[00:43:10] Beth: Sarah what's on your mind outside of politics? 

[00:43:13] Sarah: Well, the situation is I'm going through a bit of a Kevin Costner face. I think it started with him walking out of the field at the field of dreams game in Iowa. Did you watch the footage of this? 

[00:43:25] Beth: Yes, I did. I did. 

[00:43:27] Sarah: Were you emotionally affected by it as I was? 

[00:43:30] Beth: I would not say that I was emotionally affected. I thought it was neat. I thought it was fun. 

[00:43:36] Sarah: I was when he walked out in that all white outfit, lookin really good for his age, might I add. I was like Kevin Costner. I'm ready to have a little more Kevin Costner in my life, specifically around Kevin Costner and baseball. So first up I watched Bull Durham, which is one of my most favorite movies.

I was a little scared that it might not hold up. I learned a whole new thing about my husband, which is like, this is one of the very few VHS as they had in their house. So he also loves this movie. We watched it, we laughed. I think it holds up very well. I convinced you to watch it, but as often the case, since it did not hold any childhood nostalgia for you, it did not quote-unquote holdup as well. Is that a correct assessment? 

[00:44:21] Beth: Yeah, I was so confused. I, first of all, I understand that you love sports movies more than sports. I do. I actually love baseball. So I, other than A League of Their Own, don't need a lot of baseball movies in my life. I just like watching actual baseball games and do that often.

So I watched it with my husband and the am. I guess my expectations were too high because I listened to you talk about it so much because as you do, you bring a lot of enthusiasm to the things that you are excited about. And I thought that the way that it portrayed the women in the movie was so. Weird and kind of gross.

I thought there was lots of like strange homophobia in it. I thought the plot itself was just bizarre. So I really struggled. I struggled with Bull Durham. 

[00:45:10] Sarah: Well, I mean a couple of things. One there's definitely homophobia, there's homophobia in all eighties movies. There's definitely homophobia still present in actual present day baseball. I feel confident in that. I actually don't mind the portrayal of the women in the movie. Although when you try to explain the plot, for those of you who do not know Bull Durham, Susan Sarandon is basically a sex baseball trainer, a baseball sex trainer. Nicholas says a muse is the best way to put it, but she like picks a guy from the, the Durham Bulls. Which also should be noted, I lived in Durham and went to Durham Bulls games. She picks them and like improves their career and she picks Tim Robbins, but really falls for Kevin Costner. Tim Robins is like the rookie Kevin Costner is like the, the grizzled player. Okay. My favorite thing I learned upon rewatching is that Susan Sarandon is 42 years old in this movie, a solid decade, older than the two male leads, Tim Robbins, who she met at this, on this film and you know, was in a longterm committed relationship with and had some children with was 30 and Kevin Costner was 33. I was like, dang, get it, Susan. That's amazing. I just think the writing is funny. I think the screenwriter did a good job. Like I think the jokes are funny. I think there's a lot of really good character actors.

Like a lot of times you watch all movies and you're like, this person has a terrible actor, but I felt like everybody in the movie was a really good actor. And there's just a couple of scenes that I think are still clever and. You know, I love when they're all out in the dugout and he's like, we're dealing with a lot of shit here.

Like, it's just so funny to me. So yeah, I thought it held up well. Again, if you don't hold any nostalgia for it, I can see how that, how you would struggle. I also watched Field of Dreams, which I do not believe holds up well. Have you watched that movie recently? 

[00:46:52] Beth: Yeah, it's strange. It's really, really strange.

[00:46:55] Sarah: Weird. Why are there baseball, ghosts? Why are we all acting like it's normal? It's such a weird movie. Oh my goodness. So how recently did you watch it? 

[00:47:05] Beth: I probably watched it a year or two ago. Relatively recently. And I, I am not here to criticize anyone's film choices. Okay. Like if you love Bull Durham, I'm delighted for you, Sarah. If you love Field of Dreams, happy for you. Neither of these movies is my cup of tea. 

[00:47:20] Sarah: Such a baby boomer energy. Like it's like, they're clearly working through some generational stuff, which you don't see when you're as a kid, but as you grow up and you're their age, you're like, oh, like so many references to the sixties and we really want to be different than our parents.

And like, same with Big Chill , The Big Chill. If you watched that movie, lots of baby boomer angst at midlife in that movie. I still greatly enjoyed the Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams. Although I say Amy Madigan steals every dang scene she's in and the wife she's so good in that movie, but not enough to prop up all the weird baseball ghosts littered throughout the plot. 

[00:47:53] Beth: Now I will tell you the one aspect of Bull Durham that I enjoyed was the relationship between Tim Robbins and Kevin Costner. I think the pitcher catcher dynamic is always really interesting. I wish, you know, I'm a Cincinnati Reds fan. I wish that Tucker Barnhart, our catcher was always wearing a microphone.

I just want to hear everything that he's saying, especially when he takes like a particular kind of walk out to the mound. There's just a way that he walks sometimes. And I'm like, oh wow. You're about to lay down something good. I wish I could hear it.

[00:48:23] Sarah: Yeah. I love it. When she shakes them off, don't shake them off. You're going to make him mad. Don't shake them all. It's so, so good. And listen, at the end of the day, even in a weird movie filled with baseball ghosts, Kevin Costner is a really good actor. I love him so much. I'll just, I miss him. I'm glad I went back and said, Kevin Costner you've been missing from my life.

I want you to be present again. I met him once. He was a delight. He's even more handsome in person. I just letter of recommendation, not for Field of Dreams, but for Kevin Costner movies generally. 

[00:48:51] Beth: So are you watching his TV show? 

[00:48:54] Sarah: No, I do not watch Yellowstone. I watched a couple episodes and it was. Not for me.

I'm not that devoted to him. I just needed a little bit more in my life than I had. 

[00:49:03] Beth: Okay. I get it. Small doses of Kevin Costner. 

[00:49:05] Sarah: Small doses of Kevin. I'm trying to decide right now. This is a big one. If I want to rewatch The Bodyguard, I really struggled to rewatch things with actors who have passed away whose death greatly affects me.

It's why I've found not rewatched the Sopranos. It's why I can no longer watch Almost Famous. And we all know how I feel about the tragic death of Whitney Houston. So I don't, I don't think I might be able to do it at the end of day. I really want to rewatch it, but I just think it'll be too hard. 

[00:49:32] Beth: For this period of my life, I find that I am unhappy going back and watching the movies. I am never mad at myself for going back and listening to the soundtracks. So that's what I do. If I'm feeling a little wistful for a movie of my youth, I'm going to the soundtrack. 

[00:49:48] Sarah: Well, it was such a good experience watching Bull Durham. I'm trying to replicate it. I'm trying to find another movie. I mean, I watch Sleepless in Seattle and When Harry Met Sally every Christmas and I'm like trying to search out another film, I like really adore that I could rewatch and enjoy and be on the lookout. Y'all share your share on I'll put something on Instagram and I'll collect people's comments on like, what's your wistful rewatching that's brought you a lot of joy and care recently. 

Well, speaking of the eighties, we're going to have a big episode for you on Friday. We are talking about Ronald Reagan and his legacy, both international psyche and international policy. So get excited for that. Thank you for listening today and until Friday- keep it nuanced y'all.

[00:50:39] Beth: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production.  

[00:50:45] Sarah: Megan Hart is our community engagement manager. Dante Lima is the composer and performer of our theme music.  

[00:50:50] Beth: Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers.

[00:50:54] Executive Producers (Read their own names):  Martha Bronitsky, Linda Daniel, Ali Edwards, Janice Elliot, Sarah Greenup, Julie Haller, Helen Handley, Tiffany Hassler, Barry Kaufman, Molly Kohrs.

The Kriebs, Laurie LaDow, Lilly McClure, David McWilliams, Jared Minson, Emily Neesley, Danny Ozment, The Pentons, Tawni Peterson, Tracy Puthoff, Sarah Ralph, Jeremy Sequoia, Karin True, Amy Whited, Emily Holladay, Katy Stigers.

[00:51:26] Beth: Melinda Johnston, Joshua Allen, Morgan McHugh, Nichole Berklas, Paula Bremer, and Tim Miller. 

[00:51:32] Sarah: To support Pantsuit Politics, and receive lots of bonus features, visit patreon.com/pantsuitpolitics.  

[00:51:38] Beth:  You can also connect with us on our website, PantsuitPoliticsShow.com. Sign up for our weekly emails and follow us on Instagram @PantsuitPolitics. 

Alise Napp4 Comments