How Reading Humbled Us in 2023

TOPICS DISCUSSED

  • Content that Shaped our Perspective in 2023

  • What we loved about the Culture Zeitgeist of 2023

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it without you. To support the show, please subscribe to our Premium content on our Patreon page or Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, or share the word about our work in your circles. Sign up for our newsletter or follow us on Instagram to keep up with everything happening in the Pantsuit Politics world. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

EPISODE RESOURCES

This podcast and every episode of it are wholly owned by Pantsuit Politics LLC, and are protected by US and international copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. We hope you'll listen to it, love it, and share it with other people, but not with large language models or machines and not for commercial purposes. Thanks for keeping it nuanced with us.

TRANSCRIPT

Sarah [00:00:09] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.  

Beth [00:00:10] And this is Beth Silvers. Thank you for joining us for Pantsuit Politics.  

[00:00:14] Music Interlude  

[00:00:34] Hello, everyone. We're here with you on Friday, December 1st. A whole new month. The official kickoff of year end reflection time. As we do our work all year long, we read and watch and listen to a lot. Sarah, I hate the word content. You know this about me. But I don't have a better word, so I'm just going to surrender and say that today we're reflecting on the content that shaped us this year. We're going to talk about where and how we took in news and opinion and just interesting analysis about the world books, long reads, and Outside of Politics, the cultural zeitgeist things that gave us a lot of joy. Speaking of books that shaped us, one of mine this year was Jane Ferguson's No Ordinary Assignment, which our Fall book club read. And this week on our premium show, More to Say, we're sharing my conversation with Jane about her career in life as a war reporter, which sounds very heavy, and it is. But Jane is warm and gracious and thoughtful, and I think you will love this conversation.  

Sarah [00:01:34] Then on Thursday night, Alise and Beth will be hosting a live book club night for premium members on Crowdcast. And we hope you've enjoyed the increased community engagement around the book club this quarter. We are really excited about our first Book Box of 2024. We partner with Lisa of The Bookshelf Irvington to create a limited number of special boxes with the books and a few little treats in them. Sales for those boxes start for premium members. The week after that, the week of December 11t, the boxes themselves won't be delivered until January, but we wanted to get the sales out there for those of you who want to buy them as gifts. So if you want a shot at getting one of those special book club boxes and to be a part of all the community engagement around the books for our first box of 2024, make sure and head over to Patreon or Apple podcast subscriptions to become a premium member.  

Beth [00:02:19] Next up, let's talk about the content that helped us see more clearly this year. I want to flag for you as you listen that we do touch on themes of sexual assault and rape and some other mature topics. So please take care as you need to as you listen.  

[00:02:32] Music Interlude  

[00:02:43] Sarah, we both read a lot of news. Like a lot, a lot of news from different sources. And so I feel like there is a responsibility in this episode to focus in on something that really shifted things for us this year. A source that took us to a different place, a different mindset, a different way. That was my criteria. And considering my new sources that I wanted to share. Did you think about this the same way, and what did you arrive at?  

Sarah [00:03:17] Yeah, I wasn't really thinking about it in terms of sources. I mean, listen, if you subscribe to our premium channels or you listen to this podcast regularly, you know my source. My sources is The New York Times. My source is the paper of record. And so what really changed for me is how I read that source. After listening to Ezra Klein talk about going back to the office and his dependence on paper, I revisited the idea of getting the New York Times in print. I looked into it, and at the time they basically said, "Well, obviously you're outside of our delivery zone." But then I realized I could get it mailed to me. So I get the Sunday New York Times mailed to me. It comes usually on Thursday after it comes out on a Sunday. And then I also subscribe to The Economist, which is another source I depend a great deal on. And something about getting them in print has just changed everything. The main thing I notice is I read a wider variety of articles. I read articles. I wouldn't read if I saw them on the home page. I read articles I never encounter online, which seems weird to me because I check it so often, but I see a lot of series or deeply researched pieces that I just don't see on the home page. And I'm just more likely to read them in print. My attention span is better. I can pay attention for longer. I get more out of them. I can see connections across the paper and across the edition of The Economist because I'm just like sitting and spending time with them and reading a wide array of pieces all at once. It has been a game changer for me. It brings me such happiness to sit down and be like, this is my time. Like tear off the plastic. And here we go. I love it. I love it so much.  

Beth [00:05:08] How much time are we talking about? How long does it take you to get through The New York Times in print?  

Sarah [00:05:14] Well, it depends because some of them are more beefy than others. And, look, I'm not reading every article, that would take you all day long. If you read every article on every section, I don't know if you could even get through it in a day. But I would say that I'm spending probably 1 to 2 hours on the weekend just sitting and reading it. And that's our problem with online. I don't want to sit in front of my computer reading for 1 to 2 hours. Hard pass. I don't even really want to sit with an iPad and read because I did that for a long time and I still use Instapaper and will save longer articles that I encounter throughout the week. But it's still not as satisfying as reading the print. It's like easier on my eyes. I don't feel drawn to side ads or to click over or to check something else in the same way I do if I'm reading it on my phone on an iPad or on my computer.  

Beth [00:06:06] So my news that I wanted to mention here is Reuters, which I have been getting their email for a couple of years now. But what I noticed this year is that I think Reuters tends to be a little bit in front of stories. They are talking about things before I see the story become a thing everywhere. And so now I realize sometimes I'll pull up an email from Reuters and I'll think, well, none of this is what we're going to talk about today. But every time I pause and go, "I'm going to read it anyway," it becomes relevant a week or a month out every time. And so it has really kind of gotten me attuned to the fact that our headlines don't come out of nowhere. A lot of people do see things coming. Paying attention to where things are going is really important. Paying attention to something that seems like it could go nowhere pays off. And it's kind of changed my mentality around what I want to talk about, especially on our premium show More to Say. Reuters did this phenomenal interview with a woman who would like to challenge Vladimir Putin in Russia's March 2024 election. And it would have been easy to dismiss that story, to not do it at all, to say she has no shot, whatever. But it's fascinating and it's important. And I think it's a real perspective shift and much more humble and curious to say I'm going to pay attention to the thing before everybody's decided that it's a thing worth paying attention to.  

Sarah [00:07:35] That's interesting. I use Reuters a lot as a source, particularly in the news brief, but I don't engage with them enough to notice those patterns. And that's my favorite. My favorite is when you're engaging with a source enough that you do start to notice the editorial patterns. So I don't know, maybe I'll subscribe to their email that's just in the morning news summary email.  

Beth [00:07:54] Yeah, it's very good.  

Sarah [00:07:55] I get a lot of those. What's one more?  

Beth [00:07:57] What's one more? And one that brings you something different. That's what I really like about it. It jumps out at you as being like a really different set of choices.  

Sarah [00:08:06] Yeah, I love that.  

Beth [00:08:07] On the opinion side, I have found The Triad to be extremely valuable to me this year. It is a premium product from the Bulwark. And Jonathan V Last writes it. Always, I think, how does he rank so many of these a week? Because he writes something every single day and it is always insightful and well-researched and committed to the details, but it's not super long. So I get an interesting take that I know has a bunch of substance behind it and I can read it quickly and that is extremely valuable to me. Also, it usually comes in the afternoon, which I appreciate.  

Sarah [00:08:50] Okay.  

Beth [00:08:50] So I cleaned out my morning stuff, I sit down and have lunch late in the day and read The Triad and it's a good little ritual for me.  

Sarah [00:08:58] I don't have a great opinion source. I mean, obviously I listen to Ezra Klein's podcast, did not love it when he was on his book break this year. Glad he's back. But as far as editorials, I don't consistently read anybody in The New York Times. I don't really consistently read anybody anywhere. I like Matt Iglesias's email subscription, but they're way too long. Way too long. So that's interesting. Maybe that will be my goal for 2024 to find the take. But maybe that's not it. Maybe I don't need one person's take every time. Maybe I should just release that expectation.  

Beth [00:09:32] Yeah. I am surprised that I'm interested in reading this every day, honestly. But he explores a wide range of topics and then often at the end will highlight something nonpolitical, kind of like our format. And I skip those sometimes, but sometimes it's really great too. He loves baseball. It's just a good fit for me, is what I'm saying.  

Sarah [00:09:51]  Okay. I'm interested.  

Beth [00:09:53] Tell me about books. I know you read so many books. I want to know what floated to the top for you for this episode.  

Sarah [00:10:00] I do read a lot of books. I'm at like 55 for the year over my goal of 52. Very excited about that. Well, I would say the book that I have told the most people about, literally forced them to order, is outlived by Peter Attia, which is about longevity. You are currently reading it now, are you done with it yet?  

Beth [00:10:19] No. I'm having trouble making myself go back to it. I liked it. I think it's interesting, but I liked reading it outside by the pool. And now that I can't read it outside anymore, I don't want to touch it. It's like I made a memory with that book. That's the physical space I wanted to read it in and now it's cold, so I got to make a new imprint with it.  

Sarah [00:10:38] I love it so much. We're trying to get him on the show. It is an assessment of our medical system, what we've gotten right, what we've gotten wrong along the several different versions. He says we're in sort of medicine 2.0 and he's pushing for medicine 3.0, where instead of waiting for us to get sick and using tools of limited efficacy, that we should try to prevent the four horsemen, as he calls them: metabolic disorder, heart disease, cancer, and neurodegenerative diseases. And then he goes through his recommendations. He over the years has sort of come around to where I am, which is I, for many years of my life, was very interested in nutrition. And I'm now seeing the benefits of exercise and prioritizing that higher because his conclusion, which is not when I had articulated it but when he said it, I thought, oh, yeah, that's where I'm at. Which is as long as you eliminate the crap from your diet, after that sort of personal preference, it's like eliminating the stuff that really slows us down is key. And then he really focuses on exercise, which is something I've thought a lot about as I've entered my 40s. Increasing and sustaining mobility is very, very important to me. And he talks about your centenarian decathlon, like what are the things that you want to be able to do in your 80s and 90s? And I saw this lady on Instagram who was 91 doing leg pull ups and push ups on a bench, it was a credible. And she didn't start exercise until she was 65. So stuff like that I'm so interested in. He talks about mental health and, well, what are we living long for? We don't want to just live long to live long. This is not just an optimization to optimize. Like, what's the goal? And just it pushed all my buttons. I just love all that stuff. I love health and longevity. I know that it can be a toxic space. And so when I find someone that I think is really thoughtful and careful and backed by a lot of science-- and he says like, "I got this wrong before." He talks about fasting. He's like, "I did it. I was obsessed with it. And now I'm like, I don't think it matters." Well, I'm thinking that the impact outweighs the risks. I love it. I think it's so, so interesting.  

Beth [00:12:56] So I took the other side. And the book I've been obsessed with this year is about health care also, but it's about paying for it, not the actual practice of medicine. It's We've Got You Covered by two economists, Liran Einav and Amy Finklestein. And I've talked about it a little bit on the show, I'm sure, because I have mentionitis about it. I just think that they have done such a public service by examining systems all around the world, taking pieces of what works. They have not identified a perfect system. They're not like, "Listen guy, it's the Swedish model."  

Sarah [00:13:28] Singapore. I feel like Singapore always rises to the top.  

Beth [00:13:31] Yeah, they're not doing that. They're like, there are pieces from here and pieces from there and considered throughout the fact that we are a really big country and have said here's what we think would work. I also love that they illustrate how even if we got to what we think would work, the democracy model is tough in managing health care because we are a representative government and our system has been built by a group of activists going to Congress and saying, this disease is so hard. This disease so badly needs funding for research. This disease so badly needs funding for care. This disease needs to go on this schedule for Medicare and Medicaid. And we've done it one thing at a time because that's what democracy leads us to. And it is probably the case that even if we completely dismantled the system we have today of paying for care, which is what they recommend and start over, that we would layer on to that all of these things that get advocated for one group at a time with momentum and one politician at a time who has a pet project and has the power to get it through Congress. And so it's just made me think a whole lot about how our system works and what it does well and what it doesn't do well. And none of that makes me say we should give up and we shouldn't try. But it's level setting to have that awareness. That there isn't any purity available and there isn't even the most efficient outcome available. That's not what Congress can do. Congress can do better than it's doing now in health care, but it will always do some weird things that an economist wouldn't create. And that's the trade off that we accept by having a representative government.  

Sarah [00:15:18] That's so interesting because I've been thinking about why I don't feel a passionate draw to type 1 diabetes advocacy. And I think sort of what you articulated is why. And why Peter Attia to his book appeals to me, I think the most valuable perspectives about health care are very macro level perspectives. It's obviously not that I don't care about type 1 diabetes. It's not that I don't appreciate the people who dedicate their life to that advocacy, but to me, what I see when I look through the lens of the mother of a child with type 1 diabetes is like a broader more impactful perspective about metabolic disorder overall, about the role of our diet inside those metabolic disorders. Not just type 1 diabetes, but type 2 diabetes and prediabetes. And the coming already here wave of Semaglutide, all of that is super, super fascinating to me. And now I have like a real personal stake in it, but I don't feel drawn to that level of advocacy because I think with our health care system there's just a limit to everybody coming to the table and saying, "But what about my thing?" When it's such a comprehensive, integrated part of how we live all of our lives. That's why this book appeals to me, because he just like step by step. Sleep, how we move, what we eat, how we live in community with each other, it's all tied up together. You can't pull out one string and say, "Well, we'll strengthen this little thread." That's not how fabric works.  

Beth [00:16:51] It's also just like the legislative approach is kind of one. It's piece by piece, one thing at a time, one amendment at a time. It's given me new appreciation for the Americans with Disabilities Act because that was a big comprehensive look.. They could have said "No, here are the five things that everybody has to do because they accommodate these issues that we are focused on." But instead, it is a framework to say we actually have to look all the time and be ready to make new adjustments and new accommodations and change our thoughts around diseases that haven't even emerged at the time that we're writing this legislation. So just so much food for thought in this book. It's really, really well-done. What else floated to the top of your book list, Sarah?  

Sarah [00:17:37] Well, I was really, really, really impacted and borderline obsessed with Claire Dederer's Monsters. Which is sort of a memoir, but an exploration of how we make sense of creators who create art that we love but do horrendous things. She starts with Roman Polanski. She's a film critic and talks about his genius work and also the fact that all evidence points to the reality that he raped a little girl in a hot tub decades ago. And she talks about Michael Jackson. She has this incredible section on women and how the worst thing a female creator can do is abandon their children. And she talks about Joni Mitchell giving up a child for adoption. She talks about several writers that abandoned their children. And it's just unflinching in a way that I have incredible respect for. I think it's something we've all struggled with over the last few years especially in the wake of MeToo, where so many male creators were held to account. She really battles with this narrative we have that genius creates monsters, that a monster and a genius are the same species, right? That genius requires that in some weird way. And I just thought it was so good. I thought the conclusion was filled with grace and nuance. And it's not a surprise ending, but I don't want to rob the book of its impact by telling you her ultimate conclusion. It shifted my thinking. Ever since watching Never land, I really haven't been able to stomach the music of Michael Jackson. But after reading her book, I thought, okay, I'mma loosen my grip on this a little bit. It's just brilliant. It's so, so good. And I think if you've loved the art of a monster, which most of us have, I want to rock with you as a bop. You know, at the end of the day, it just is. And I think she battles through that and name some things I had been feeling in just the best possible way.  

Beth [00:19:46] I'm interested to read this book because I feel like I've been talking for a long time now about what does it mean to be redeemed? What does it mean to forgive?  

Sarah [00:19:57] She gets into that.  

Beth [00:19:59] And I also want to know when to decide that those things aren't mine to have. Creators who I admire in terms of their work and abhor in terms of their life choices, do not owe me personally an apology. There isn't a relationship in which I can forgive them. There is no redemption available between us. So what standards in my even holding them to? And what am I saying about myself in the world if I continue to enjoy those creations? And I just feel like we've put so much pressure on ourselves in that realm. And this sounds like there might be some pressure release when you said, "I'm going to hold that a little bit more loosely. I'mma loosen my grip," that appeals to me very much.  

Sarah [00:20:41] Absolutely. At the end of the book, she explores her own alcoholism and her own monstrosity, which she says we all hold.  

Beth [00:20:49] We do. Absolutely.  

Sarah [00:20:51] And so I think that just that reflection, I think there's a real exploration of what we've been talking about recently, which is sort of activism and what does that look like and how does that manifest? Is deciding never to listen to Michael Jackson again a form of activism? Not really. And so I think she just unpacks all that so, so beautifully in a way that I found incredibly, incredibly helpful to me as I think through all this. And as an Enneagram one, want to find a way to consume ethically, want to find a way to hold these creators to account because I'm highly motivated by justice. And so I can trick myself into thinking that something is justice when it's just an empty gesture.  

[00:21:46] Music Interlude  

Beth [00:22:03] Well, the book that met me most where I am and answers the questions that I've been thinking about and was therapeutic and cathartic, was Romney: A Reckoning. The biography that McKay Coppins wrote with an astonishing amount of cooperation from Mitt Romney himself?  

Sarah [00:22:21] I don't think cooperation is the right word. Vulnerability, disclosure, transparency, I mean, a bigger word than just cooperation.  

Beth [00:22:28] Yeah. Mitt Romney had intended to write his own biography and then didn't trust himself to do it. And then did trust McKay Coppins. And I think what must that feel like for someone to say, "You're the person who I think can do an honest accounting of my life while I am still living." It's just incredible. And I'm very, very excited because I'm going to get to talk to McKay Coppins about this book and share that with you soon. As someone who has struggled with political identity, not fitting anywhere, not really feeling super compelled to fit anywhere. Reading and learning more about Mitt Romney and his exploration, the questions he's asking himself at this stage of his life was important to me. It mattered to me a lot. And diving into what actually has motivated him has helped me see myself a little bit more clearly. It's a wonderful, wonderful book, and I cannot wait to discuss it with its author.  

Sarah [00:23:27] I would put good money on the fact that that's probably the most read book in Congress this year.  

Beth [00:23:31] I hope so.  

Sarah [00:23:31] With all these retirements and all this self-reflection, I bet you that's the one that got the most page turns inside the United States Capitol.  

Beth [00:23:39] I think that would be a good thing. I hate that the result of that could be all these retirements, though, because I don't read this book as saying I wish I had never entered public service. I wish I'd never gotten into the arena. I wish I had bowed out earlier. That doesn't seem like it to me. I worry a little bit that the soul searching going on around members of Congress is resulting in so many people saying this is too broken and I am not broken yet and I don't want to be broken by it. So I have to separate myself. Because how does this get better if no one is willing to do the soul searching and hold the tension of, like, this is broken but I am not broken yet. And maybe there's a way through.  

Sarah [00:24:25] Yeah.  

Beth [00:24:27] Tell me about your quest to read some of the banned books, as they have been termed this year.  

Sarah [00:24:35] Yeah, over the summer and spring, as the school year is wrapping up, there was just so much conversation around banned books and schools banning book and all those viral photos of empty bookshelves. I mean, I have a default position I can take here as a daughter of a librarian. But I also want to read some of these books to see what was threatening if I thought it was founded. And it was a very interesting experiment that did not always lead me to the places I expected. I kept thinking I'd talk about it in the show, but I never really did. So I'm glad I get a chance to do now. I started with Gender Queer, the most banned books in America, and that was an interesting place to start because I do not think that is a book that belongs in a high school library, it has some incredibly adult content. And there are pictures because it's a graphic novel. And that's what really pushed me over the edge. So there's not a lot I wouldn't let my kids read. I don't even know if that's a good stance. I don't know if that's developmentally appropriate. But my mom was kind of the same way. I remember reading some real sexy books in high school that were just lying around my house, but it's like you're just reading it. You're limited by what you know and what picture you can create in your head. But that's not true for Gender Queer, she draws pictures. So I talked to some librarians about it, some I really respect. And a public librarian that we've worked with repeatedly was like, that's in the adult section for a reason. But I was glad I read it because I thought, well, I wouldn't want to walk into a conversation righteous about banned books. And then someone present this page to me and me be like, "Uh, uh, uh," because I wouldn't have a good answer for them. But then the next book I read, though, was All Boys Aren't Blue by George M. Johnson. And I thought this book was beautiful. Just brilliantly written.  

[00:26:20] I would want it not only in high school and middle school librarians, I would love for it to be required reading. It has some pretty explicit moments, no doubt about it. But I thought in particular their recounting and reckoning and just emotional transparency surrounding their own sexual abuse was incredibly powerful. One of the best I've ever read in my life and I've read a lot. And even if you sort of trend more conservative, have an emphasis on traditional family values, their sort of story of their family and how they supported them is so beautiful. Again, one, I would love for my boys to read. Griffin read it because I just thought it was an example of how to be there for the people you love in your life as they go through something you don't understand. Four stars. And then I read some that were just not good. So I don't think we need to ban them, but I don't think anybody should read them because they're not good. I read The Bluest Eye for the first time. I never read it. It's a very intense book. I think it could be taught. I would struggle for someone to read it without some guidance, but it just was a good exercise. And just instead of having this high pitched, high staked disagreement about banning books, engaging with the books themselves and seeing like what I saw, the pattern I saw among these books is just kids going through difficult what I think a lot of people would describe as adult things. And I think we want to tell ourselves that that's not what happens. We want to create a reality where kids don't go through hard, difficult, adult traumatic things. And we want to tell ourselves that we're protecting our kids from those things. So we don't want any stories disrupting that narrative. And that's just not true. And in the interest of protecting kids who maybe are less traumatized, we leave the ones who are more alone. It's just so heartbreaking. So I'm really, really glad I sort of took this journey, especially as a mom of a new high schooler and surrounded by increasing numbers of teenagers. It was a good exercise and I'm glad I did it, even the ones that I did not care for.  

Beth [00:28:40] Listening to you talk about this has been useful for me just in continuing to think about what's the difference between banning a book and curating a collection for an audience. I had the pleasure of speaking at a conference for teachers recently with one of our listeners, Beth Strom, and the topic of books in classrooms came up. And what you're able to teach and how much parental input there should be. And I said to that group one benefit, I think, of this controversy-- there are many, many detrimental effects from it. But one benefit is that I do get a heads up from teachers when something thorny is going to be discussed. And that heads up is helpful to me as a parent. I would never say don't teach the book. But knowing what kind of questions might come home is really useful. And I don't know if we would have gotten there without the ugliness. I wish that we could. Maybe we would have. But it is nice. Even like on 9/11, I got a note from the teacher. We're talking about this today, and just having that in my mind that I'm experiencing this as an adult, but also my kids are going to be learning about it and reading about it and getting some new understanding of it. And so I need to be ready. That was useful to me. And I think if my kids were reading a book at school about sexual abuse, I would want to know. Not to block it, but to be prepared myself to know what I might want to ask the school for some support around. There are things that I'm not going to answer well, when they come home and I might need some resources. So I hope that conversation develops some layers that create more of a partnership between school and parent instead of just the fissure that's been there. Let's talk about long reads, which sometimes I like even more than a good book. There are a lot of books I read and think this could have just been a long read.  

Sarah [00:30:36] This could have been an article, friends.  

Beth [00:30:38] An article that I have thought about so many times since it was written is Megan Garber's The Mugshot is a Warning in The Atlantic.  

Sarah [00:30:46] You love Megan Garber.  

Beth [00:30:47]  I love Megan Garber. I love, love, love Megan Garber. I respect her thinking and her writing so much. When the photo came out of Trump in Georgia, she wrote this piece-- and there were a lot of pieces about the photo and about how he practiced for it and that he worked the lighting and the angles and the makeup. But she did what I think she always does, which is just so succinctly came in and said, understand that we will never be a menace to him. He will take anything and turn it around to make it a tool. And that has just dramatically changed the way I've taken in all the information about the Trump trials. I talk about his criminal issues a lot because I feel like that's part of my responsibility on More to Say. I have not covered it the way I think. I might have covered it without having read this article. I think I might have talked about it in a more passionate way. I think I might have been more interested in some of the details than I have been. I think I might have talked about it more frequently. But this article really helped me put into perspective what is political versus what is legal, and his just unrivaled ability to take what is political and always use it to his advantage. And I'm grateful for the perspective, even as I hate what that means for America.  

Sarah [00:32:23] Well, this year was about the United States and all its inhabitants sorting out the new post Roe v Wade reality surrounding abortion. My first job out of college was at Planned Parenthood. I've spent a lot of my life thinking about abortion and abortion rights and abortion policy. And so anytime I encounter something that teaches me something or gives me a fresh perspective I haven't thought about surrounding abortion, I take note. And there was a piece in The Atlantic in August, it's actually from 2019, but I guess I just encountered it because of the new reality we're facing. It's called I Found the Outer Limits of My Pro-Choice Beliefs. It's by Chavi Eve Karkowsky. And she is an American obstetrician who moves to Israel and talks about the different approach to abortion in Israel, which I didn't understand. That's the first thing I just didn't know anything about it. Super, super interesting. They basically have a committee, but the committee approves all the requests pretty much. And so a lot of these screenings can send up warning signs where in America you would just push through. It wouldn't even come into play the idea that you would get an abortion because of this result, DNA, or ultrasound or otherwise. And she's talking about how the default goes the other way in Israel. The default is, well, if it's a flare, it could be. So you want to get an abortion? And how it really pushed her and made her uncomfortable. And she felt like it wasn't always the best application of the screenings. And it was just really, really, really good and thoughtful and careful. It's not like she comes to some easy conclusion. And it just helped me continue to expand because when you feel so strongly about something, as I do about abortion, and when you live in an environment where that issue has become even more high stakes, it's easy to get hardened, even more hardened. I think a lot about Yascha Mounk saying that when the stakes are high we sort of in-group and we police and we've become more extreme. And I don't want to do that. And I really appreciate this piece for helping me soften a little bit.  

Beth [00:34:50] I feel like a theme in the pieces that really touched me this year, and I hear this as you're describing yours too, is just humility and being pushed on things that I thought I had a really firm stance on and staying soft and being willing to revisit past positions. And that's why I probably my favorite long read of the year came from David Brooks and was called How Do You Serve a Friend in Despair, where he describes losing a very dear friend to suicide and depression. He talks about what he thought was helpful at different times in this friendship and now understanding that those things weren't helpful. He talks about all of our instincts when we're trying to love a person who's really suffering and the inability many of us have to truly see what that suffering is because we don't want to because it's too painful. And I just thought that this was a masterful reflection on how I could have been a better friend to someone who's no longer here. And I can't imagine how agonizing it was to think through that and to write this piece and to engage with other people who loved this person and to then put it out in The New York Times, like in such a public way. But I think it is an incredible act of service. And I've read it several times. I will continue to read it throughout my life because we will all know someone who's really suffering at some point. And I want to remember that what I think is helpful might not be. And I want to remember what someone who's walked this path before learned from it.  

Sarah [00:36:41] I like David Brooks. I think he takes too much crap from the internet. That's my personal opinion.  

Beth [00:36:46] I agree with you. I never read a piece of his and think I wish I hadn't read that. What a waste of time.  

Sarah [00:36:51] No.  

Beth [00:36:52]  I might not agree with him or there's something in it that might hit me wrong, but I always am glad that I read it.  

Sarah [00:37:00] No, I totally agree. The other piece that I guess is adjacent to conversations about abortion is a piece in The New Yorker this year by Larissa MacFarquhar. Living in Adoptions, Emotional Aftermath. I have been so interested. For lots of personal reasons, including being a court appointed special advocate and adoption activism. Ever since I learned about it through Gabrielle Blair's newsletter, she featured a lot of people in the Twitter space that speak openly and critically about adoption. And this piece was beautifully reported. We tried to get her on our show because this is something we wanted to talk about, but we want to do it in such a careful way. We wanted to sort of have a foundation on which to to build the conversation on. But it's an incredible piece. It's an incredible piece. There is a piece in The New York Times, too, about Korean adoptions that's just doing that hard work, sort of what David Brooks does in that article. This is something that is delicate and very high stakes for people. There is an enormous amount of emotion involved. It's pushing on a narrative that we have that something that is a universal good is more complicated. And I just think that is hard, but I think it's essential. And I thought this piece did it beautifully. Just let me tell you these stories. Let me share where these people have come from their experiences. And these are not people that were adopted and abused, these are people that were adopted into loving families and are still sort of working through in adulthood what that means and what the impact of that was. I just think it is one of the best pieces I've read about this. And anybody has anyone out there that would be willing to come and talk to us about this, it's a conversation I still would very much like to have because I think it's huge. It's it's huge. But I think it's important because I don't think anyone is advocating, nor should they, that we're going to end adoption. It is a reality in so much of our existences that parents cannot care for children. But the stakes are high. And so I think critical analysis of past decisions surrounding this institution and how we can continually improve it is really, really important work. And I just appreciated this article for doing some of it, and the people featured inside the article.  

Beth [00:39:39] I want to continue to read about this. I have spent a little bit of time on the platform formerly known as Twitter. And I did see some people advocating for abolishing adoption. I mean, there are people who take it to that place. I think another theme I've noticed this year in many of the stories we've discussed and I think this is just going to be true for the rest of my life, in part because we're just reaching this age, it's stepping back and saying there are so many situations where the ideal is just not within reach and won't be. We can't create conditions where the ideal will always be available. And what do we do then? What do we do when we accept an imperfect world with imperfect choices and we see paths in front of us, all of which have tremendous pain associated with them? Long term, consequential pain that cannot be alleviated no matter how badly we wish it could. How do we choose among those options when all of them come with such suffering? And I think any spaces where I can learn more about that calculus, I want to. And especially the places that touch on our most personal experiences. Because I do think our families of origin, as we've talked about many times, so inform the way we interact with the rest of the world. We're going to take a quick break and then we're going to lighten this up a whole lot and talk about the content that just brought us joy this year.  

[00:41:22] Music Interlude  

[00:41:41] All right, Sarah. Outside of Politics, as far as you want to go or not, what did you love this year?  

Sarah [00:41:47] Okay, listen, I'm a content snob. I'm a TV snob. I'm a movie snob. And so I might start off confessing that something I watched this year. It's not elite. It's not highbrow. A lot of it's filmed on cell phones. Not a high production value. It's even reality television. And I blame our listener, Ashley. It's her fault. Here's the situation. I watched Sister Wives back in the day. When I had cable, I watched a lot of reality television, watched a lot of Supernanny. Wife Swipe. Remember that Jim? I miss some Wife Swap. Intervention. Hoarders. I watched it all, but I watched Sister Wives when it started, which was like 12 dang years ago, okay? Do you ever watch an episode of Sister Wives?  

Beth [00:42:32] I've never, ever watched an episode of Sister Wives ever in my life.  

Sarah [00:42:36] Let me tell you. Follows the family of Kody Brown, the husband, his first wife Mary, second wife Janelle, third wife Christine. That's how the show started. And then we brought on Robin. That was like the big development of the first season, the fourth wife. And let me tell you something. Only Robyn is left standing. Not so much Sister Wives anymore, just wife. And so this season has really been about the dissolution of set Sister wives and how they've all just been like, you know what, I think I'm out. I think I'm out. So I had to pick it back up. I had to find how the story ends, you know what I mean? I invested this time at the beginning, I kind of wanted to see what happened.  

Beth [00:43:14] Over what period of time did this happen?  

Sarah [00:43:17] Okay, let me just break this down for you.  

Beth [00:43:19] I wish you would.  

Sarah [00:43:20] In the beginning, even when Robin came on, even when I was watching back in the day, there was a lot of conversation about that Robin was the favorite. And I remember thinking at the time, it's like she just knew. But this conflict continued for many, many years and then as far as I can tell, basically Covid blew it up. He wanted to be more careful at this point. Now, some of many of these kids are grown. They're like basically adults themselves. They didn't want to follow the rules he did. He put it all on like protecting Robin. Meanwhile, he's just disconnecting. Now, he'd been doing this for a long time. He had basically not been with the first wife for like 10 years, and they were pretty much pretending for the show as far as I could tell. And there had always been a conflict with the first wife, I think, because she only had one kid. I don't know. Anyway, the third wife, Christine, this season starts with her being like, "You know what? I want a divorce." And because they're not legally married, it's like instantaneous. I've never seen someone so joyful and delighted over a marriage separation. She giggles happily every time she talks about it. It's freaking hilarious. So she was like, I want a divorce. And then Janelle, the third wife, was like, you don't ever come over anymore. You don't talk to our kids because of Covid. They have this big fight. Janelle curses a big deal. She's like, I'm out. I don't do this anymore. And then Mary is like, why am I hanging out? You have said repeatedly you do not want to have a relationship with me. And then he kind of starts acting like this villain. It gets more intense from there. I won't bore you with the details, but the point is I picked up Sister Wives again. I'm only slightly embarrassed about it because there are no sister wives and I just felt like I needed to see the finale.  

Beth [00:44:55] And is it over now?  

Sarah [00:44:57] No, they're going to keep dragging this stuff out. Next year I think they're probably going to do it with Christine has gotten remarried, but I will not be watching it next season. Sorry, Ashley. It's just I forgot how much filler there is in reality television. Lord, have mercy. Everything we learn this season, we knew basically by like the second episode and then they just stretch and stretch and fill and fill. Like, one whole section was about him loading up a car. I was like, really? This is my one wild and precious life. I don't want to spend 15 minutes on watching Kody try to fit a car in a trailer. You know what I'm saying?  

Beth [00:45:30] I think all that filler is why the Office was so groundbreaking and hilarious when it came out, because it just said, "Look at what we're doing. We're just watching regular people be regular people." And that is weird. It's weird that we find this entertaining at all. So let's dial it up a little bit.  

Sarah [00:45:50] Yeah. So I won't be watching it again. But it was kind of a fun pastime. Although, Nicholas would watch a couple episodes with me and he was like, "This is not fun. These people are miserable and they hate each other. Why are we watching this?" And I'm like, "I don't know, because I need to see those how the story ends," which is basically Robin crying about how she wanted to sit on the porch with her sister wives and now they've all deserted her with Kody.  

Beth [00:46:11] I don't have anything comparable to Sister Wives in my list here.  

Sarah [00:46:14]  It is a shame.  

Beth [00:46:16] It is a shame. But I guess maybe on a like domesticity connection, I have lived the New York Times cooking app this year. I just want to tell the world. I was hesitant to upgrade my subscription to have all the other things because as you mentioned, there's so much news that The New York Times is doing that you can't even keep up with all of it.  

Sarah [00:46:34] So true.  

Beth [00:46:35] But I really enjoy having the athletic access and I love the cooking app. I love getting the email in the mornings saying, here's what you might want to make today maybe. I love saving it in my little recipe box.  

Sarah [00:46:47] I do love an online recipe box, even though I don't cook. That doesn't make any sense.  

Beth [00:46:51] I love organizing my meals within the app. I love the feedback. Like it's just smart reviews in the app, smart suggestions to the recipes. It's just been a tremendous amount of fun for me this year. Well worth it.  

Sarah [00:47:07] I love it. On the other end of my TV watching and much less embarrassing, I had a great time watching Succession with all of our listeners. Also, watched The Righteous Gemstones, which is just another version of Succession only televangelists know that was a very strong season. But Succession in particular, I think I just loved watching along all the analysis like that experience of breaking it down, all the memes appearing instantaneously when we all thought, oh, that's a-- when Kendall said, "I think if I might get this, I might die." Like you just do it in your head. Like almost see that on 1 million reels. And it's just fun. I just loved it. They're all brilliant. It's like, again, the opposite of Sister Wives, very high production value, brilliant writing, incredible performances. Especially doing it along with our community in the premium spaces was so much fun. I had fun doing the Succession, More to Say every week. It was just great. Good times all around.  

Beth [00:48:03] I love Succession. In that the Zeitgeist category, I'm just really enjoying Taylor Swift. I know we've talked about it many times and I keep talking about it. And I'm sorry for those of you who feel like we're over-saturated with Taylor Swift. But here's what I want to tell you today.  

Sarah [00:48:15] Well, they not mad at us. They're mad at everybody. It ain't just here at Pantsuit Politics where Taylor Swift reign supreme, let me tell you.  

Beth [00:48:23] What I really want to focus on as I reflect on the gift that Taylor Swift has been this year is how I think she is showing that there is a version of excellence that we can embrace. I feel like hard work and capitalism and a pursuit of near perfection has gotten rightfully reexamined over the past couple of years. But the pendulum swung pretty far.  

Sarah [00:48:53] Yeah.  

Beth [00:48:53] Too far for me, honestly. And I love that Taylor Swift is showing if you want to be great at what you do, it will pay off. It will matter to people. You can make something unusually important if you want that. Now, it's not for everybody. It's not for me to perform in the rain or in 140 degree heat. Okay. I look at some of what she does and I think that is extreme and very far. But I think it's exciting to watch a young woman pursue this level of excellence and diligence. I think it's exciting to have people happy that she's a billionaire when we've had years now of people being like all billionaires are a policy failure. Do you think Taylor Swift is a policy failure? Do you look at this and think, this is really bad for America? She's generous. She seems to try to operate very ethically. She encourages people to vote, which I think is the single most important social contribution someone with her opportunity can make. She shows the importance of building a business and owning your own stuff, like retaining the pride in what you made and the value of it. I'm just all in with her right now for so many reasons, but especially the way that she has pushed on some of the things that I think we have just kind of lost the plot on in our attempts to have a healthier relationship with them.  

Sarah [00:50:22] Well, I do think Ticketmaster is a policy failure, but that's a show for another time. As far as where some of that money came from. And, look, I think for me when I went to the Eras tour in April, it was again, same with Succession, same as the next thing I going to talk about, just the communal experience and the effort. Her effort breeds other people's effort. People showing up dressed up, people showing up with the friendship bracelets. And remember since outside Cincinnati, they had like a massive tailgating where people were just there to hear it through the top of the arena and be together. I just think that is beautiful and is important and people need it. And to wrap that up in artistry that is so intimate and makes people feel seen is really, really incredible and important and impactful. And I won't hear anything. My kids like to say they don't like Taylor Swift. And I say everybody is a Swiftie, they just don't know it yet. And so I love that. I love that sort of Taylor Swift effect I agree. And I think for me, too, I've spent a lot of time on this show talking about artists who meant a lot to me, who lived really painful lives, who fame stripped bare. The same year where we're having Britney Spears memoir come out. You know I love Whitney Houston. I think her life was tragic. I love Amy Winehouse. I think her life was heartbreaking. And so to have someone say, show doesn't have to be that way. It doesn't have to be that way.  

[00:52:02] I think she carries a lot of burden with her level of fame. And I'm sure it's heartbreaking at times. And I think there are a lot of things different about her. She started with an enormous amount of privilege. She has a very supportive family. There's a lot of pieces there, but it feels so good to enjoy, specifically pop music, something that's massively popular and great and wonderful and just-- I feel back to Claire Dederer's book, just not feel any guilt surrounding it. Just feel like she's thriving and we get to thrive along with her. And that's just a really great feeling. Now, look, could 10 years from now we learn there's all this darkness contained within it? I guess. But I just feel like she's been at this for a long time and maybe it would have come out by now. Maybe that's just my optimism. But I just really appreciate that it just it feels like a gift to say, "I'm here, I'm doing this massive thing. We're all in it together and I'm okay." And on the pink sparkly theme, I really loved Barbie. I went to a lot of movies this year and I feel like it kind of started with Barbie, the sense of like we can go back to the movies. Isn't it fun to go to the movies?  

Beth [00:53:15] I love going to a movie.  

Sarah [00:53:16] I didn't even think about getting dressed up for a movie. I don't know who thought that up. I don't know who started. I don't know if it was just the natural results of the Era's tour and the Renaissance-- mad shout out to Beyonce. I'm only not talking about that because I had tickets and I didn't get to go. And I'm sad about it. Now, that's the second time in my life I've had Beyonce tickets and I've not been able to go. So just everybody feel a little sorry for me. I think it'll make me feel better. But this sense of getting dressed up and making it an experience, I loved the balance of Barbie with Oppenheimer. I went to both. I went to see Killers of the Flower Moon. I just love it. I love going to the movies. I grew up going to the movies. And I just feel like with the concerts and the movies and even the TV events like Succession, the sense of like, isn't it fun to do this together? Yes, it is. It is very fun. And there was a room and a space in those pandemic years to back off what you're talking about, that sort of productivity production. We can all go home and rest. But I'm ready to swing back a little bit the other way. I'm ready to be out and to try and to try together and to have fun together. And I just love it. I love it so much.  

Beth [00:54:31] I thought it was a super fun movie. We did a whole episode about it. If you haven't listened to it, you can go back and hear our Barbie takes. It is a movie that I have thought more about since seeing it than other movies I've seen this year. I don't think I could make a complete list of all the movies I've seen this year. We go to the movies a lot. Chad and I really enjoy going to the movies together. And most of it is not memorable, but Barbie was memorable and Oppenheimer too. I continue to think a lot about both of those movies. On the music front, the last thing I wanted to mention is my favorite podcasts other than ours, of course, 60 Songs that Explain the 90s. I have enjoyed this podcast so much. I have enjoyed the people in my life who enjoy it as well. It's a fun thing to talk about. It's a fun thing to listen to. I will be so sad when it's over, as it will be this season according to Rob the host. I just got the book 60 Songs that Explain the 90s so I can at least have it live on in that way. But what I wanted to say about it here is that I had gotten in a rut with my work for our premium channels. It can be a real grind to make something every day, and I felt depleted around that work until I started listening to this show. It has nothing to do with what I do there, but it just motivated me again. Like the excellence of his writing and his focus and the way that he tries to put different ideas together and keep it engaging and surprising, it just really inspired me. And I don't feel in the rut anymore. And it's been nice to have that bit of creative spark come from such an unexpected place.  

Sarah [00:56:06] That's really beautiful. I'm in a little bit of a rut podcast listening-wise. So maybe that will be my task before me in 2024, is to find something really appealing that meet me where I'm at. I'm going to manifest that right now.  

Beth [00:56:17] It's a gift to have something that you're excited to turn on, and we hope that we are that for many of you, and so appreciate you spending your time with us. And would love to hear your reflections on what you've engaged with this year that has been significant in your life. We know you are readers and listeners and watchers and your suggestions are always wonderful and things that enhance our thinking too. So please keep sending those along. If you're a premium member, don't forget that we'll be talking all things book club next week, and we'll launch sales with the first book box of 2024 as well. We'll be back with you next Tuesday to talk, among other things, about how the presidential primary is going and about this weird Ron DeSantis-Gavin Newsom debate. Until then, have the best weekend available to you.  

[00:57:04] Music Interlude  

Sarah: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. 

Beth: Alise Napp is our managing director. Maggie Penton is our director of Community Engagement. 

Sarah: Xander Singh is the composer of our theme music with inspiration from original work by Dante Lima. 

Beth: Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers. 

Executive Producers: Martha Bronitsky. Ali Edwards. Janice Elliott. Sarah Greenup. Julie Haller. Tiffany Hasler. Emily Holladay. Katie Johnson. Katina Zuganelis Kasling. Barry Kaufman. Molly Kohrs. Katherine Vollmer. Laurie LaDow. Lily McClure. Linda Daniel. Emily Neesley. The Pentons. Tracey Puthoff. Sarah Ralph. Jeremy Sequoia. Katie Stigers. Karin True. Onica Ulveling. Nick and Alysa Villeli. Amy Whited. Emily Helen Olson. Lee Chaix McDonough. Morgan McHugh. Jen Ross. Sabrina Drago. Becca Dorval. Christina Quartararo. Shannon Frawley. The Lebo Family. The Adair Family. 

Sarah: Jeff Davis. Melinda Johnston. Michelle Wood. Nichole Berklas. Paula Bremer and Tim Miller. 

Maggie Penton1 Comment