Language changes quickly, and some of the language that has been used in DEI work for years, has now been called outdated. It can be hard to keep up, but maintaining a critical lens on your own language, as well as the language of those around you is important to do justice to underrepresented communities - to which this language is often directed. How do we know where we're at? How do we know when we're outdated? This week on the show, Shaunna and Lisa discuss stale language and the ways we can work towards using more intentional language that represents inclusivity. Using phrases and words like authenticity, tolerance, safe space and civility as examples, Shaunna and Lisa dissect the problems with this language - giving listeners a reference point for how to critically analyze their own word choices. 

Support the podcast and use our sponsor codes!

InsideTracker: 20% off at insidetracker.com/feisty 

TriHard: FEISTY15 for 15% off at trihard.co

Orca Sportswear: 15% off with code ironwomen5 at https://www.orca.com/us-en/

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

people, authenticity, civility, language, juneteenth, thinking, piece, word, authentic, outdated, called, hear, white, black girl magic, civil, context, disrespectful, color, long

SPEAKERS

Dr. Shaunna Payne Gold, Dr. Lisa Ingarfield

So Lisa, every single day, I think I'm really following more closely, Lily zings LinkedIn account because Lily, they're really posting some powerful thought provoking posts. And the last one I read was really kind of calling out how the word authenticity or even the notion of authenticity is becoming outdated. It’s getting to a place now where it really is almost meaningless because people don't know what to do with it. And so, I said, Whoa, this is interesting. Some of the words that I've used for years in di work are now being called out as outdated. So, I know this is not the only word right? There's other words we need to consider.

Yeah, that's really interesting, because I do see a lot of authenticity, vulnerability or things like that in the context of business. It's like it has spilled over from social work and Human Services. But there are, it's a bit too simplistic right to just say, hey, yep, take in the workplace. So

absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. So, I thought we should kind of think about what language is becoming kind of stale and outdated. And what in the world should we do about it? Given that it's so hard to keep up as it is, right?

Yep,I agree. Let's do it.

I'm Dr. Shaunna Payne gold, and I go by she her hers pronouns.

And I'm Dr. Lisa Ingarfield. And I go buy she her hers.

Welcome to [Un]phased a podcast to disrupt your normal and challenge your brain to go the distance. So Lisa, I don't know if it's just telling on myself, that I've been in this field for way too long to the point that words are becoming outdated, right. So, it's like, you know, when I go back and read that literature about how people who are full time in diversity, equity and inclusion work, usually have a turnover rate of about three to five years, and you and I have been in it much longer than that. Obviously, we should kind of assume that some of the language that we were using in the beginning, no longer is applicable to our work. So, you know, it's got me kind of thinking, How do we know when we're at? How do we know when we're outdated? How do we know that? We're old news here? You know, I don't know. I don't know. But literally some posts really had me thinking about that. How can I make sure I'm keeping up? So I'm not embarrassing myself and, and not doing justice to the communities I'm trying to serve?

Yeah, this is a really interesting point, like, how do we know when we're old news, right? I was reading in Triathlete Magazine, there was a piece about triathlon gear. And, you know, of years gone by that is now in hindsight, or, you know, retrospectively funny, and kind of ridiculous. And one of the things on there was like the pointy arrow helmet, and that, that's all great if there's no wind, and you're going straight, right. But as soon as there's any kind of side wind or you know, curves in the road, and you're moving your head around, it becomes like a huge sale or something, right. And so, in the moment, it was all the rage. And then over time, you were like, Oh, actually, that's not really a great idea, and a number of other things. And so, it's only been the passage of time that has enabled people to look back at that technology, and realize that that probably wasn't the best way to be it quote unquote, arrow, right. And so, you know, is this going to mean that, you know, in another 10 years, Shaunna, we're going to be looking back at this podcast, in embarrassment and saying, why on earth did the terminology, why didn't we see that that was a problem? I think that in many cases, it is. It is simply time and perspective that leads there because I think that language, especially changes so quickly, I mean, technology less so. Yeah, maybe that's not fair. Maybe technology does change really quickly. But in terms of kind of the terminology that we're using in this space. I feel like it's ever evolving. And as you and I get further away from new generations, that developing terminology then yes, you know, we get more and more eyes rolled probably at the right use.

Right, right, exactly. Now, the reason why I couldn't keep myself together here giggling at the aero helmets as I literally have one of Sega Henry's old aero helmets in my closet right now with all my bike gear. Literally, she gave me one of hers that she only used a couple of times. But I'm gonna keep it and have her sign it. How about that? I'll keep it and have her sign the thing. But you're but you're right, though, it's like, are we going to look back at ourselves in, you know, almost 80 episodes of a podcast and think we were ridiculous, right? But I do think it really, it gives us an opportunity to be really intentional about the words that we choose, even if we look back and think, what were we thinking, at least we thought about it, you know, at least we weren't, you know, using words that we knew had deeper meaning in ways that weren't thoughtful, weren't ethical, weren't inclusive, I think we can always grow to be more inclusive with language. But our intentions have never been to exclude individuals. But you know, think about at least look, we can go all the way back to when, when I was first getting into any type of diversity, education type work or role. We were pushing our way out of language, like tolerance, for example. And I'm thinking to myself, that really never made sense to me in any shape or form. Because I wouldn't want someone to say I'm tolerating Shauna, you know, it's like I'm putting up with it. I'm because my hand is being forced, I'm dealing with Shauna. So why would we save that for entire groups? Right? So that's one that really, you know, rubbed me the wrong way from jump. I mean, for years, I'm like, no, let's not do that. But we know that entire curriculum, entire nonprofit organizations use tolerance in their, you know, vision and mission and how they did things. And now we know that not so much, right?

Tolerance is interesting, definitely, because I certainly remember organizations that had tolerance, I remember mission, and values of organizations that were committed or all committed to social justice, having the word tolerance, but you're right, like if you actually deconstruct the word and think about what that means. It's a, it's a poor choice to use in the context of inclusion and equity. And I knew, I think, certainly, you obviously understood it to be inappropriate at the time. And, you know, it's probably white people really, that took that took their sweet time recognizing that it was a problematic word, but we've gotten there, and what damage was done, right by the proliferation of the word tolerance, and then thinking back to authenticity, if you have a bunch of majority white majority male workspaces, who that are committed in thought to being more inclusive, and they're talking about folks being authentic in the workspace, they're able to have some authenticity because of their power, right? Their identity power, or perhaps their positional power, and so Right, right, workplace, I write it down, contingent on where you sit in social identity hierarchy.

Right, right. Well, and that was my thing, even with the authenticity piece that kind of leans into what we know as safety bias, you know, you can only be as authentic as you feel safe. And so, you know, right now, I mean, I'm coming from my own identity. But we can think of other identities. For example, where, you know, we're still having legislation pass concerning the crown act in regard to people in women who look like me, who don't feel safe showing up to their workplace, or other places where they're employed, with their authentic hair, the way it naturally grows out of their head. And so, if you're having to legislate authenticity, what makes people think that certain groups can come in and be authentic without some type of, of penalty, at least, or some type of exclusion, at most from being authentic there. We could ask everybody to be authentic, but they're naturally going to be some groups that are more safe while they do that than others. And usually, women, people of color, LGBT folks end up being on the less safe end of that spectrum, even in their full authenticity.

We know this to be true. How do we define authenticity? Who defines authenticity? Right? So, what does it mean for a white guy who's the head of an organization saying, we all need to be our authentic selves? Is he conceptualizing that in a certain way? So then when, you know, you show up in their full authentic selves, it's at odds with what that person is thinking about as authentic. Right,

right. Right. And it made me reassess like even now these are usually when I start with difficult dialogue trainings, for example, where we start because authenticity, vulnerability, candor is all fundamental to really dialogues that are about difficult issues or topics. Well, the majority of my curriculum that I've been using in the past, and now I want to reassess it all has been based on Berne Brown's work on vulnerability and her research on vulnerability, I have to consider, okay, thank you, white woman for your research on authenticity. But I now need to add to that to say, what are BIPOC and other folks of color saying about authenticity? Because I guarantee you, they will say something different, then a white female researcher. And how do I add to that? Because authenticity for Berne Brown as a white woman, who is, you know, now fairly affluent, is going to be very different from a woman of color, LGBT person, etc. So, authenticity needs some more lenses through which to understand it. Right. Right. Yeah. So now I got to go back and rewrite my curriculum now.

Yeah, and I think there's so many words that are thrown about in the corporate and indeed, nonprofit field that yes, yes, yes, yes. Reconsider or think about, I mean, I used to work for a higher education institution who a department there had civility, as one of its kind of pillars, I guess, if you will. And in one, Bill, I went to a training around social justice, that this concept of civility was identified as problematic in the sense of people of color can never be civil in the, the eyes of white power. Right. And so, I'll get our option. Why on why then would a predominantly white institution that is striving to be its racist? Have civility is kind of this core pillar, right? Oh, yeah. I think that a lot. Right. Be civil, be respectful. And isn't that that's a little tone police-y. And also, kind of taps into some of these historic pieces in the United States, especially about who can and cannot be respectful, respected, and civil. Right.

Right. Right. Right. Right. And exactly. And you're right, who gets to determine what protest is, right, what civility is and what protest is because, you know, what's that quote that Dr. King says? He said something to the effect of protest is the language of the unheard. So, it's like, you know, at what point do you get to a place where, okay, we've been, quote, unquote, civil, we've been the white version of civil, we've been the white male version of civil and that wasn't heard, it was ignored, it was devalued. And so, once you get to a place where you're tired of being civil, because civil civility doesn't allow you to be seen, as a full person, I mean, for me, as a black person to hear civility, it makes me feel like, okay, you want me to stay in the three fifths of a person, mindset mentality, and I'm a whole person. And so, in order to be a whole person, I may not be as docile as you would like me to be. Because when black people were docile in this country, it didn't get us very far. And so now we can't be docile, we have moved to a different place. Right. So, and I would say that for in any non-white non-male group, being docile doesn't get us very far, which is why Dr. King talked about this protest piece. So, I think you're right, that civility piece is tone police-y. And again, we got a question, who civil are we talking about? Like, you know, we've seen in the research, Lisa, about communication styles, for example, and people of color usually prefer very candid communication styles, which flies in the face of the white definitions of civility? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. It's not compatible. It's, it's just not so. Yeah.

Then it begs the question when I'm thinking about employee handbooks and policies and non -discrimination policies, often in in there now today, right. There are clauses related, maybe not using the word civil, but certainly respectful. And based on what we just articulated, what you just articulated, even that is problematic, because if you don't really define what respect means, then it's really a it's an assumed shared understanding. But my guess is that assume shared understanding is one of the leadership and we know in most corporate and bio ship is white, right?

Yeah, that's right.

Go, you know, like and then certainly In my experience, women of color have been called disrespectful more times than I can count. Right, right. Right. Maybe their communication style is more direct, more candid. Or, you know, they're pointing out discrimination and therefore, that's disrespectful, which is kind of Colin Kaepernick piece, right. So

15:19

Oh, yes, yes.

Um, which seems very docile in a way, right. Like, there's no noise. There's no banners, just kneeling. But that was uncivil disrespectful, right. It's like the whole system is in a way that doesn't allow for a proper or deep understanding of the words that we use and the impact that they have.

Right, exactly. Well, you know, you made me think about it. So, I remember especially being here in the DMV area, that at Johns Hopkins University, there was the entire Johns Hopkins Civility Project. And it was on the research of civility and how it shows up or not in the workplace. And I remember that was one of the books that I read, when I first started in a higher education role. And what's interesting, when, you know, I look back at the gentleman who kind of founded the research and the center. Well, you know, he was not, he's a native of Italy, was not native to the US may or may not have understood some of the deep seaded oppression that happens in the US. And so, civility, from a European perspective may and I'm assuming is completely different from a US perspective. So, you know, all of that really helps me to think through So, for example, some of his books were, for example, choosing civility 25 rules of considerate conduct, or the Civility solution, what to do when people are rude. Well, who gets to determine what rude is or how rude is defined, for example, and I have not read those books. But it just makes me kind of query down into the language. Well, who gets to determine what's rude because a candid woman of color has been more times than not, as you mentioned, labeled as rude, as inconsiderate, as disrespectful as unprofessional, even as we might have a huge smile on our face when we tell someone something they don't want to hear. that's seen as unprofessional, rude. uncivil, all of those words. So again, that's telling me that BIPOC Folks, women, women of color, aren't the ones defining rudeness or civility.

Oh, no, absolutely. And here's a point around language. Um, the term native is interesting in the context of the United States, it's different it would, it's perhaps different in some European countries, perhaps. Right. But yeah, in terms of, you say, I'm a native blankety blank state, well, then they're white, right? Or they're not they're not indigenous. They're not Native American. Well, you're not right, right. Right. And Right, right. I hear that all the time. I don't necessarily hear that in the sense of business, per se, but in introductions, right? I'm a native Coloradan. Or I'm a native Misha, Michigonian. I think, you know, yeah. Yeah. So that curious to me. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And that cultural context matters, right? Like the Italian guy. I don't know the history of Italy. So, I don't know what that was sense, or what or how misogynistic, sexist, racist Italy is. I mean, I could make some assumptions, but that probably

wouldn't. Right. Right. Exactly.

Then, you know, so then what does get considered?

Right, right, what is considered here? Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Well, and then my next question would be kind of, you know, what is if you had to choose like a word or phrase that you no longer use, or would encourage people to no longer use in the future? What would yours be because I'm sitting here thinking about mine. I'm not sure. Because it's like a moving target. It is. I think we've talked about moving from diversity to representation a lot on the spot, so I would definitely use that as a default. But any other words you would kind of?

I think, um, there has been a big movement of late around girl boss

yeah

The last couple of years, right. And I don't love that. Because I don't love one that we have to put agenda in front of it like so. It's what boss and Girlboss right, like, I hate it when we all like Oh, man. Yeah, that's a good one pair or you know, whatever. So with that, Hey, but this bill boss thing, I don't find that to be particularly empowering. And then have you ever heard boy boss, and men ever call boy bosses? No. Right? Unless, because it's the default. Yeah. racialize that probably then the boss would go away. Right? It would just right. So right, right. Um, yeah, so I think girl boss, you know, is not empowering. And Right, right. People probably disagree with me on that. But I find any kind of like, reduction of adult women to girls is a problem.

Um, well, that's true. That's true. Like, you know, girl power. You know, those those types of words? Yeah. Oh, goodness. Well, you know, I think I've been a proponent of this one for a while Lisa and I would love to hear how you feel about it. Given that, you know, we, we share, we share the the womanhood identity, but I have been thinking about how we should completely abandon black girl magic as language. And part of it is kind of connected to that whole. That that confidence porn piece that we were talking about in a previous podcast, where it's like, of course, we're confident, but also to it's like, yeah, we're human beings. We're not magical beings that we have magic wands under, I guess, like, there are people actually doing this work and doing very hard work that they rarely gotten credit for. So that one to me is a stickler, even though I know lots of populations really like that word. And see it as a compliment.

Yeah, I mean, I've, I've heard it here and there. But I have mostly seen it in the context of wine because I believe that there is a wine brand called Black Girl Magic I'm sure is. That's right. It sure is. Then there's another African American woman owned winery that has some varietals. That's called black magic. So.

Oh, wow. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm starting to slowly but surely abandon that language. I didn't use it that much to begin with. But it's a catch 22 Because of course, I'm, I find a lot of pride in that group. But I also don't want people to assume that the things that we do, you know, there's no effort, energy sacrifice. Yeah, anything to do what we do, like, you know, would you, you know, like a lot of people have said, you know, Stacey Abrams is like the epitome of black girl magic. Yeah. And y'all haven't seen all those late-night hours and all the community organizing and all the stuff that, you know, you get to look at Wolf Blitzer's, you know, magic map to see the outcome of it, but you haven't been tracking her for years. And all that she's done, you know?

Yeah, that's interesting. So, it's a minimization of Black and African American women's contribution. But it's wrapped in a compliment. And yes, yes. Yeah.

Yeah. And it's, um, I won't say it's a backhanded compliment, because I do think people are sincere when they say it, but it's amplifying the outcome, but really not delving into look at what all went into this to make this happen. Let's, let's not ignore that. So, it almost feels kind of what's the language? It feels like that invisible labor and Office, Office housework folded into one, right? That's what it feels like for me with that back-end piece. So, you know, absolutely. I want to celebrate what she's accomplished. But very few people go like, until she was a major powerhouse with the most recent presidential election. People weren't really going back into her history, what she's accomplished, what she's done, what she hasn't done, it took something big for people to go back and see all the smaller micro actions that resulted in this major thing.

Yeah, she's running for governor, right?

Yes, yes. Yes. Oh, and don't forget on on Star Trek, she was –

I know, I saw a planet. Yes, President was great. I actually I saw the clip, I need to watch the whole thing. But yes, another word, you touched on it earlier, was safety, you know, big, mid 2000s in both nonprofit education and corporate was this idea of safe zones. And, you know, people would slap a sticker on their door and, you know, present themselves as being safe, particularly to the LGBTQA community where they may not be and it became like, well, who determines whether someone is safe or not and does like our 60-minute training really create safety. Right? And safety is going to be different based on your identities, right. And so, I still here in the context of business Not necessarily safe zone, but we want to create safe spaces. We want this to be safe so that you can be authentic kind of going back to our earlier conversation. And I've really moved away from using the term safe. Because I don't get to determine when someone else feels safe. Right?

That's right. Exactly. And, you know, really naming it as a point of privilege that if you are saying, we unequivocally, we create safe spaces. That's the point of privilege. You can't say that for someone else. So yeah, that's a really important one. But people are moving from the safe spaces, to either safer spaces or brave spaces and even brave spaces. I'm still and I've used it. So, let me I'm speaking of myself here. Brave spaces, again, is contextual, because is your cultural context in your organization, positioning the most disenfranchised groups to be as brave as possible. That's systemic. You know, that's not just oh, Lisa, you must be brave. It's does the system also allow the person to be brave in ways that are not punitive?

Right? Yeah, both of them? Yeah, that makes me think of strength. And I'm thinking about context. But if I were to apply that to a sporting context, right, and the ways in which we use strength, or we bestow the compliment, oh, my gosh, you're so strong. It's often in reference to someone who's done kind of a long endurance event and has finished. And I think meaning the implication, through absence, right, is that if you don't do a long course, a ban, or you don't finish that you are somehow not strong. And so, you know, in what ways are we defining strength and his strength defined in a multitude of contexts through kind of masculinity and masculine strength?

Oh, yeah. Well, you know, what I remember? Gosh, I have to look back and find that article, it was an article written by I believe it was a pro triathlete. That usually, you know, we're in somewhere in the the four hour range for a 70.3. And talking about how much stronger back of the pack people were, because they were out there for 678 hours, doing the very same race and how much more effort that takes than the three to four hours fast. And I was like, wow, that's a good reframe. I mean, it's, it's, it's a good reframe, because a pro athlete doesn't necessarily have to say that. But yeah, it's like, it's, we jokingly say, in my, in my tribe club, is a full workday. And it is a full workday for those of us who are mid-level or back of the pack. It's a full workday for us. And so, you know, given that, you know, how do we position it in a way to recognize that strength comes in different levels, let's put it that way. But at least, I am trying to stay up to speed and trying not to be a washed out di educator with the whole conscious style guide that I've been trying to keep up with that newsletter I forwarded over to you. It's tough to keep up with it. But I'm glad that someone has taken it on upon themselves to keep a website that's really devoted to staying up to speed with options of language, what's appropriate, what's appropriate in certain contexts, and so forth. So, yeah, I think this conversation is going to be one that we're going to have to keep, you know, we're going to have to keep pushing the pace on this to make sure that we're up to speed on things even as things change.

Yeah, and I think that it can be frustrating. If you're beginning your DEI journey, you're pushing better inclusion and equity practices in your place of employment in your, you know, whatever. And the language is moving and the ground feels like it's never very stable. Yeah, I understand that. That's frustrating, but I think it's on us, really, to try our best to stay up to date, and this website will include it in the show notes. It's going to be one guide that can assist you there. Yeah. And, you know, as we just identified in this conversation, things change, norms change, new generations come through and identities shifting, and how one identifies themselves and others. You know, they do change. And I think one of the problems that we have is that we think language is fixed. We think that there is Yeah, meaning that is attached to a word. Like dog could not mean anything other than you know, a furry, four legged friend, but there's some arbitrariness around that right And I think that the same would be true for any of this language. And then we also have to think about in the context of business and sport, a lot of that language has been created and by one group of people and so that's right. That's right. Your diligence of kind of deconstructing that and reforming the way that we talk about certain issues and certain groups.

Mm hmm. Absolutely. So, Lisa, I hear that we have both a Hell yeah, and a hell not this week. And what we got here what we got with hell nah, hell, yeah. Hell no. Okay,

I think you're doing the hell no, no.

Is this let's we have we have so many No, that's the problem. We have so many more hell no-s than hell. Yes. I think again, look, you know, I usually go with my home state, right. There's so much to choose from. But Senator Mike bond, what are you doing, sir? Senator Mike Braun is now trying to somewhat reverse Loving versus Virginia. And so instead of the Supreme Court ruling, standing, Senator Braun wants to say that this should go back to the States. Interracial marriage ruling should be left to states. And he, I'm like, how many? What are you doing? You're taking us back like 30 years? Come on. Are you serious? Like, this is one of those issues that I was hoping was all buttoned up. And we don't have to redress again, but it's like, some folks just have an axe to grind that they're going to be grinding forever. That's what I'm feeling with. This one is just like enough already. You lost. You lost. I feel like this is like the whole Civil War conversation you lost. Let it go. You've lost. So yeah, he wants to, you know, wants to go all the way back to 1967. Loving versus Virginia. So yeah, that hell nah, we're not going back to that. Because then, again, not to play oppression Olympics. But to see how all of this is a systematic web. If we do this, in regards to Loving versus Virginia, when it comes to race, we know that similar things may happen to same sex marriage and other issues that have had a parallel trajectory through up to the Supreme Court. No, we're not opening that can of worms ever again. No, thank you. So go, go sit down somewhere. Senator Braun, go sit down somewhere.

Makes me think about Justice Kavanaugh’s comment related to reproductive justice and the recent Mississippi light in front of the court in there, wouldn't it be the best scenario if the courts just stepped out of the issue? Because it's really something that should be legislated. And back to the states, whereas I think there's Justice Kagan or sort of my all that said, but that's what the court system is here for. Right is to protect those rights. Yes, yes, we are the remedy, because if there is a right, that's written down, but there's no remedy to address the fact that that right has been violated than the right. Right. So that's right. That's right. It's that kind of this idea that well, the court should just stay out of it like Supreme Court should never have ruled on that versus Virginia because it's a quote unquote, states rights issue. Yeah. It's I agree with you and that is a US senator is quite depressing to me.

Exactly. Right. And you know, I'm It's so frustrating because I'm thinking okay, again, you still have an axe to grind. This is far gone. Why are you going this far back? Let it go. Let it go. Please let it go. So yeah, I think this is going to be interesting one and I'm hoping that you know, even those that agree with him don't want to rehash what's already been settled. So anyway, that's my helmet for this week.

It's a good hell nah, so I can with a good Hell yeah. So a few days ago, it came out that a civil rights activist name Opal Lee, who is the young age of 95. In 2016, she walked for two and a half miles from Fort Worth, Texas, to then that copyright there. I'm reading an article here and it says two and a half miles from Fort Worth, Texas to Washington DC, which is clearly not two and a half mile.

I think that's 2500 miles it should. Yeah, that's a huge.

and she collected one and a half million signatures along the way to symbolize the 2.5 years that it took for the emancipation proclamation to be enforced. So, if you remember Juneteenth, the holiday that is now coming up, it'll be in its second day. was the date at which the information about the Emancipation Proclamation made it to Texas. And so her campaign during the war collecting those signatures served as a call to action to make Juneteenth a national holiday, which as you may recall, last year under the Biden administration, so she has been affectionately named the grandmother of Juneteenth and has been nominated for a 22 Nobel Peace Prize. And so, there were a good number of congressional members who put in her nomination. So, I think that's pretty darn cool to be recognized for that.

Oh, that's big. That's huge. That is, so I mean, just to be a nominee. That's, that's pretty huge. And, yeah, I just looked up the distance about 1300 miles, but that's a long way for 80 Something person or any person to go that far. That's a pretty long way. But I so appreciate you got all those signatures and that she's being considered for this because this is huge. And Lisa, speaking of Juneteenth, we may have some really great developments leading up to June teeth about some really good programming. So, I'm excited about that. But well done. Miss Lee, we are so proud and happy that you're being recognized on a global scale in regard to this very distinct, US holiday. So that is very cool.

It is an important recognition. Right. So even if she doesn't win it the fact that congressional nominated her and that she has this platform, and I'm sorry to hear about the work that she did is special, I think.

Absolutely, absolutely. All right. Well, we've wrapped up another one Lisa, I don't know that I've come to any concrete plan on how to keep up with language but no, we have we have our work cut out for us, right?

Yes, we do so just against paying attention. Un[Phased], a podcast produced by Live Feisty media and supported by the outspoken women in triathlon Summit.

Edited and produced by the fabulous Amelia Perry .

Email us at info@unphasedpodcast.com and find us on social @tritodefi @doctorgoldspeaks or @outspokenwomenintri. I'm Lisa.

I'm Shauna thanks for listening. Stay Unphased, folks. See you next time.