Word. From the Nations Capital to wherever you are, because the opinion that matters the most is your own. This is what democracy looks like. Cspan, powered by cable. If you ever miss any of our coverage, you can find it anytime online at cspan. Org. Videos of key hearings, debates , and other bits feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights, these points of interest markers appear on the righthand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. This makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. Scroll through and spend a few minutes on our point of interest. Listening to programs on cspan through cspan radio just got easier. Tell your smart speaker, play c span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7 00 a. M. Eastern, important congressional hearings, and other Public Affairs events throughout the day, and weekdays at 5 00 p. M. And 9 00 p. M. Eastern, kept washington today or the stories of the day. Listen to cspan anytime, tell your smart speaker, play cspan radio. Cspan, powered by cable. Thank you so much and thank you as always to politics and prose for having us a thank you for sharing the evening with us. It is thrilling to be on a panel again with elizabeth cobbs. We had the great pleasure and i have the privilege of being on a panel with her five years ago in tucson where we both had books out at about the same time at the tucson book festival. Our panel was called women in war because elizabeth had written a wonderful book called the hello girls about women telephone operators during world war i who were the First American women to be in combat settings when they went to france during world war i and kept the troops in touch with each other. That was wonderful and i wrote a book about women codebreakers and one or two and katie moore was on the panel, i remember that elizabeth went first, the minute she started talking, i was like, this is going to be great. You are in for a treat to hear her speak about her wonderful work. I am such a fan of your book and look forward to talking about it and hearing you talk about it. So, i would love to hear you talk broadly about the book and its themes and thesis, and what caused you to write it. I thought i would start with, anybody who has read anything about womens history in the United States has probably heard the phrase Abigail Adams famous phrase to her husband john adams, remember the ladies. When you while in washington or in philadelphia writing the founding documents. We know that phrase, but, fewer of us know what he said in return because it is not quite as pretty as we would like to think. I wondered if you could talk a little bit about that exchange, the relationship, and the theme of your book, that feminism is part and parcel of the american story and was set in motion by the documents that were written at that time. This is womens History Month and i think there is a tendency to think, if you look at womens history, sort of like, here is the main dish and something that goes with it well on the side. You offer a little something. It is kind of fun. Rather than thinking of it as a driver of history, and, in the same way a lot of historians and authors have said, slavery was a driver of American History, this is an element of American History underplayed. We do not get how the Industrial Revolution was because of the women teachers, people whom Abigail Adams said, women should be able to go to high school and ladies academies were started, womens high schools which raise the basis for making a literate labor working class. So many ways in which women are the foundation of American History. If you said, lets write American History, we will start by taking out half the people. Then we will talk about the other half. You are like, or those of the people doing something . In fact, women were not only doing something, reproducing the human race, but also they were behind so many of the most important achievements of american society. If we rob ourselves of that story, it is not like we are doing it because, wouldnt it be fun to dress it up . It is because, how do we get Social Security . How do we get abolition in law . Not the emancipation proclamation. It was very fun. We were speaking earlier, when did you start writing womens history, i backed into it, i did not say that i was going to go right womens history. When you think about the drivers of American History in general, these women played such a significant role. With the hello girls, the other book, they feel that 26 million phone calls from the trenches between the commandant in the trenches. Getting orders conveyed, doing the things that made the war go. There are some stories where you go, why would we rob ourselves of that history . And be treated as a side part of history as opposed to an integral part of history . The adams couple, he said, no, i dont think so, not remember the ladies. Part of the interest of that story, two people who were married, one of them, was saying to the other, you know, honey, i would like to think about this. He said she is presuming upon the marital relationship, she is presuming is goodwill. She says, i would like you to remember the ladies when you are writing the laws of future loss will not allow bad men, not men like you, she says, diplomatically, but there are some men who will use the power they have as absolute tyrants with impunity. With impunity. If we are not a part of making laws, what right do you have to put laws over us . John says, i cannot but laugh. That is what he wrote back, i cannot but laugh. He says, it is also not nice, it is disloyal. This is the first antifeminist comment, somebody who should be sympathetic but is also concerned about what are the down the road consequences. He blows her off totally. This is not subtle. A month later, he writes to another massachusetts legislator and says, because he is thinking about how to make the Voting Rights of massachusetts, should men of color vote . Should poor people vote . John adams says, be careful, who knows where this will end up and women will ask for a vote. He says that, in 1776. Before the declaration of independence. He knows that the meaning, the heart and soul of the document, is that, all men, women, whatever, are created equal. It is the internal logic that drives American History and women are so much a part of that. The cognitive dissonance is that, the surprise for me, to know that, they did actually talk about it. They considered being inclusive and thought, no, and it wasnt like they forgot, it wasnt like they were only looking at the men in the room, they really gave it some thought and discussion but thought, dont want to go down that road. I was taken by that. We often say slavery was wrong, maybe they didnt know. They discussed things carefully and i thought this was really fun and very interesting, a fact i didnt know, new jersey, 13 colonies, that became states, each has to decide and we let vote and who do we not, who do we write race into the constitution, et cetera . New jersey says, everybody can vote if they were over a certain age and they own minimum property. Which means that women and men of color who were Property Owners and not enslaved could vote in new jersey and they did this for 30 years. They went, no, dont like that law. Not feeling it anymore. At that point, without anybody raising a stink that we know, they disenfranchise women and property men of color. People knew. Exactly what you said, people knew this is where to go and they made a conscious effort to limit change. We have to remember, they could barely get agreement on declaring independence. Abigail is writing john, they have not declared independence, she is knocking on the door, why havent you declared independence . And the southern states, robbing enslaved people, how can we count on them to fight as hard as we are in massachusetts . Both of these issues come up in the same letter. On the flipside, the point that you make, if i understand it correctly, this fundamental idea behind our founding documents, that all men would be tyrants if they could. The idea that we must resist a monarchy, authoritarian form of government, because absolute power corrupts absolutely. That founding insight of the American Revolution and the creation of the country, then becomes the engine for what you layout in this fascinating book, which is, yes. The case has to be made, but we have to win back, or win back, period, the various rights in your book on principle, men would be tyrants if they could. This is an arab in which there was organizing against slavery. Could the american colonies have abolished slavery . We dont know. It is not like these things were a strange idea as we may now think, they just did not think of that. They didnt think about it. They thought they could not get it. People like abigail and john are two human beings caught in that. The notion of someone being a tyrant, that goes back to john locke, he was the person who articulated the rationale for democracy, representative government. What are famously called two treaties of government, never talks about the second one, men should choose the governors and change them as easily as they would their positions, no reason a man does not have a right to rule, that was the second treaty. The first is the treaties against patriarchy. The document was called patriarch, the argument where someone was saying, there was adam and eve, they blew it, eve blew it. God gave adam the right to rule his family and kings, from the lineal descendents of adam, but what was interesting, the first people to speak out against patriarchy were white men in the American Revolution. They said, it should not be the case that one man rules us. Why is it different from us . Is it a man made by his education . That is why Abigail Adams is demanding education for women. Talk about your Principal Organization for your book, the decisions you made in deciding how to lay it out and proceed, and who to include . The book is organized by eight chapters and in each chapter, it represents a rug in the latter. What rights did we get first and how does that allow us to get a step up so you can go for the next thing . Anyway, that is the organizational principle of the book. I think we do not know. When did women get to keep their wages . Because you did not for the first 150 years. If you are they wage, it belonged to her husband. At one point did a woman get custody of her children, fairly recent also. I wanted to put that in chapters i also, i always feel like, we have decided that feminists are whiners. Like, i broke my fingernail, oops, whatever, so we trivialize or diminish these issues, in each chapter, i have the face of feminism, she has a plan, like Abigail Adams, who thinks of something and says, i need to try to get other people to think about this and implement this thing that seems important. She is an organizer. The second person is the why we care. Why should we care . Wasnt that bad . The husband is not bad, you get to stay home, that you get to stay home part what happened in, for example, i have, that Abigail Bailey chapter, a mother of 17 and her husband is wonderful, veteran of the revolutionary war, esteemed military officer, also a predator. She lives in a world where, similar to what conditions are like in afghanistan. Women do not have the right to go out of the front door if their husband does not give them permission. The law gives them the right to keep a wife at home, to chastise her as he sees fit, it is in the law. Women do not have education cannot vote. So many basic ways in which law does not protect you. We all know law is in perfect. Think of the so many ways in which law protects us. Abigail bailey is a crazy store where her husband, finds out the kids because that is his right and she has no custody. He also starts assaulting one of their daughters, previous to that, he attacked some of the service in the house. When that got out on the town came down on him, he was like, that is fine, and started praying on his daughter Abigail Bailey doesnt know what to do, here is the law, and in that time, if a person was, a woman was attacked, incest, it was proven in a court of law, she could have to where the letter i on her blouse for the rest of her life. You could even be sentenced to prison and even death if you did not reported, which we know all 10yearolds go out and do. The other problem, if she divorced her husband, he had complete custody, all husbands did, whites wifes did not own their children. People said, is that the people we want to be . You saw the breakdown of these laws. The lives of women who suffered , i mean really suffered, from the way the law was set up. She grabs a horse, rice 200 miles in the snow, i am not making that up, and saves the kids. You have to read the book. The stories are very painful to read, the suffering, it is history now and documented. Your book is wonderfully readable, but the suffering, and that prominent privilege with the people making the laws, they suffered as well. That in many ways, one of the things i took away from the book, how much all of these women endured in their private lives. Because they were so close, a lot being family related, loss of children, loss of a beloved husband, developing a mental illness, and that really comes through. Your compassionate treatment and your illustrating of how important their private lives were and how bad their suffering was, the second abigail, it is extraordinary that she was able to escape. Do you want to talk about elizabeth packer. I tried to avoid the utterly gruesome because i think that the facts do speak for themselves. You do not have to use more adjectives and adjectives, because these are simple people trying to live their lives in simple dignity. The obstacles that the law presents. And men as well as women sympathize with them. Abigail bailey, the sheriff waived his fees, the attorney waived his fees, the judge waived his fees to get the guy convicted. Also, they could have said, by law, the husband has the right to your daughters and by law, if you divorce, you get nothing because he owns everything. If you divorce this man, you end up in New Hampshire in the snow or something. I think that suffering as historians, our job is to be witnesses and not overplay it, but help us all with this, in a living way, which we care about, other people, help us see how they made it. You mentioned a woman who had a husband who was mentally ill, that was frances perkins, she was the first member of a president ial cabinet in the United States, the firm is the first women in high office, and she did not want the job, she was 52 at the time and well known as a labor person, defending the rights of working people, she had been a suffragist, one of the first women in government. Her husband was a mental patient and very seriously ill. She knew everyone would be going through her trash in washington and she did want that, she gave fdr a list of 10 names, all these guys would be great, he didnt want to hear about it, he wanted her. She said, okay, i dont want this job, i cant think of all kinds of reasons why i should be the one, but you have to let me do three things, fight for minimum wage, fight for Social Security, and you have to let me fight for the third thing, which i am forgetting, unemployment insurance. If you have ever collected Social Security or unemployment insurance, or minimum wage, i may have done all three by now, we can thank frances perkins. She did it at a great personal cost. If you have been in government, you know how hard that can be. One of her feminist friends suffered a former suffragist, she said, i dont want to do this, molly. Molly said, dont do do not be a baby about it. Another woman may not get asked for 40 years, i may murder you if you dont. Somebody is pushing her into it because it is an act of service. That is one of the themes of the book, feminism was a series of acts of service to the nation and still is. That is a wonderful way to look at it. The other thing that struck me as a longtime washingtonian, how many of the figures in this book were based in washington. Frances perkins. How much of the feminist movement or achievements was happening in washington . We think of the abolitionist, the suffragists, coming from the boston area. But, reading from the point of view of a washingtonian, could you talk about mary church terrel, she and her husband are wonderful characters in the book. Her husband robert was the first black judge in the district of columbia. Local judge. Which was interesting because she was always getting him in hot water because she was a feminist. Your wife over here, they said. Hard for us to support you. Booker t. Washington and others were, keep the lid on molly, her nickname. She was the spheres and beautiful, educated woman whose parents had made a fortune after reconstruction in the south. Formally enslaved and then became very prominent. She was this person who was welleducated. They sent her north as a kid, they did not want her to be educated in memphis, tennessee, which you can understand, so they sent her to ohio to go to oberlin college, and got a masters in germany. She is the highly educated woman. As she is leaving germany, by the way, three men in germany asked for her hand, one was a barren. May have been a pretty good deal. She was thinking, should i stay over here she could see people in germany were very anti semitic and she didnt understand why. She had to decide, do i stay here . She is walking down the street in berlin, she walks, not thinking much about it, walking by the American Embassy in berlin, she sees the flag snapping in the breeze, the red, white, and blue, she said, that is my flag. I am going to go back. She said, i guess i am patriotic , a revelation to her. Talk about her achievements. Mary Church Terrell , my gosh, she is one of those people, she keeps going and going. She met with every president in the United States, other than woodrow wilson, we wont go into that. By the way, interesting story in itself. She was a person who was steadily advocating for womens rights and racial uplift in terms of her time, lifting as we climbed was the model of her organization. The first person to organize a nationwide coalition in support of black civil rights. Most of the National Groups were religious groups. The church groups. The idea of a group just focused on, lets Work Together to make the world a better place. She was president of that for a number of years, made president for life, a suffragist who picketed at the white house. She is down there with alice paul. She gets a call, come on down. She brings her daughter, they have to stay in our bricks, heated bricks because it was very cold. She was doing things all the way through the 1950s when she picketed segregated restaurants in washington, d. C. A lifetime of dedicated service to everybody. She and her husband are my favorite married couple in the book. There are other great ones. The way they supported each other, even when she created problems for her husband, he was so supportive of her. And have another friend who said that, he loved it when somebody would stand up and say women should not have a vote because of this and that, he said, i would sit back in those moments, there would be nothing left of him but he grease spot when molly was done. He was so proud of her. They were it was a pleasure to know them. As you point out, she was not able to cast a vote. For washingtonians, there is that problem. The other thing that struck me about her story, compared to other stories in the book, thinking about the immigrant experience, and your character who is an immigrant from italy, how, when mary Church Terrell goes to europe and discovers a world, as did other people like james baldwin, or you can move freely and not have to confront racism to that extent, she found in some ways more accepting society in europe. For the immigrant italian woman who comes to the United States, she finds much more opportunity and much more of a sense of equality. There is that interesting juxtaposition, what one person finds is sometimes very different from another. My editor was like, how does this immigrant women go with mary Church Terrell because the lights are different . For rosa , she found that, becoming an american, was a big deal, but becoming an American Woman was a bigger deal. In italy, the men got first in line and everything and the women were last in line and everything. The women were there to be beaten. She accepted it and understood. A sad story where she, when she was 11 or so, she was working for nuns in a thread factor in italy, one of them said, you are getting breasts, that is not very nice. I am sorry. She gets a long dress. Her mother, adopted mother, she marries her off to a man, i want to see keep you safe for christ and i want you to marry a man who can rule you. Coming to this country gave her a vision, like, for example, if she were here right now, she could walk up to that question stand and ask a question. In italy, she couldnt. When she went back for a trip, i like to ask you questions to prove i can still ask questions. She had this whole thing about a hat, in america, you can get a hat. In italy, she had a hat. These small, symbolic ways, in someones life, it meant a whole lot. There is a real decision between what mary Church Terrell saw in europe and the europeans saw in america. The immigrant experience, it feeds into her central thesis, those freedoms that were denied at the beginning to women and so many other citizens, the promise was there. When she comes from italy to the United States, she sees that and can experience it. Experience the potential freedom and realized it to a certain extent and improve her situation. She could not believe you could ask a question. If a man was dressed well, he must be the president. She couldnt understand you cant succeed here and dress well. Those were basic kinds of things that were interesting to see how that changed peoples lives and they took those promises. In some ways, that is the central dynamics in American History, you make this promise, all men are created equal, so the weird thing is, in almost all, should women be able to learn . A lot of people said never that women learn, i guess it wasnt so bad. How about if women speak in public . Not that. Women start speaking in public to great opposition, but they do. People are like, i suppose that is okay. Should women keep their wages that they earn . There was always this dynamic, early on, we were talking about property rights. Should women, if they are married, that was the big distinguish feature, married or unmarried, a women in the earliest 20 century is dead set against marriage because she know she loses all kinds of things. Not just custody but in law, she would lose her job, a married woman could work. Could not work. People accepted this, that is the american creed, fine. It is this interesting dynamic but some people say it is too much, some people say it is okay, and feminists are caught in the crosshairs you dont want to remember the people who brought that issue up. They are obnoxious. Such a funny story, with Susan B Anthony, they got the vote through , she was alive, there was a statue carved for the rotunda of the capitol, no women in the rotunda other than pocahontas in a formfitting white down, probably what she was wearing when people got to the side of the water. It was a beautiful statue in Congress Assembled and roses were laid at the foot of the statute. The very next day, somebody pulled it out and took it down to the basement, scraped off the inscription saying the names of these women, it sat there until i think 1997. You dont want to remember those people. We have this weird need to put down these women that we dont have with our other founders. That is a depressing insight. Striking insight. You mentioned we gradually get these rights. You talk about public speaking. One of the many things i loved about your book, you talk about antifeminists who benefit from these rights. Like the right to speak in public. In order to proclaim the antifeminist message. We see to the present day, and, it is helping us to know, think about that, why did you include some of the women in the book who represent that strain . I will take advantage of these rights and i will proclaim against your message . One of the face of feminism is Phyllis Schlafly. Some say, if you can see the beginning of the far right push of the rope at the party, it starts with Phyllis Schlafly. She uses gender as the bogeyman. It is not the russians, it is the feminists. It is always that interesting dynamic, the same dynamic where a woman will say, the rights we have up to now were part Phyllis Schlafly says, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prevents discrimination on the basis of sex thats cool, equal pay act of 1963 that kennedy signed, that is okay. Even read vs. Read, the first sex determination case in 1972. It was over the question of, can women read contracts as well as men back should we presume men can read contracts better than women, that was the law in idaho. She said, i dont think that reading a contract is something related to your reproductive equipment. There is that thing, the antifeminist in every generation, i look at the revolutionary generation, the women who, by that time accepted the idea that women should be able to read but please dont give us more than that. The next generation set women should be able to go to school, but not more than that because that would be terrible. Women would become men and men would become women and we would fall apart. Each generation has Something Like that. Ida, she wrote an expose of the standard oil company. She wrote a book saying that, this vote thing , we cannot do that. There is a woman who went to college, got the education, she speaks in public, she got that part, she lobbied his government, up to chapter before, ida tarbell, she is not on board. You are happy when you find something that support your argument, she goes back to john adams, ida tarbell says that john adams had a right when he put down Abigail Adams. She said they put too strong a yeast in the revolution of 1776 and those effects are causing trouble today. You come up with someone like Phyllis Schlafly who is more adamant about these things. We see it today as well. It is helpful, so helpful to have your context and understand this has been a struggle all along. The clash of, what, the clash of ideas is the sound of the work. Lady bird johnson, she said, the clash of ideas is the sound of freedom. She was wonderful. One of the women i interviewed, two people still living who are a part of the book. One of them is a woman who wrote a book called the chicana feminist, and another indigenous woman who was sentenced to 20 years in prison because a man who was known to be a predator assaulted her son the day before, broke into her babysitters house at 5 30 the morning, she was wearing a cast and 52 and he was 62, she had a gun because she was worried, and the police said, come on and on monday, she called on a friday, they said to come in on monday, we are closed. He breaks in, comes at her, he is so close when he comes to her, the tip of her gun touches his shirt. She fires. She is convicted because there is no defense for battered women. So, those women are just, to this day, they moved my heart. The striking, to me, one of the striking things about your book, okay, all of these rights eventually, hardfought, or won , and the last chapter is about bodily autonomy. That is a thread throughout every signal chapter. That is the last it takes that long to get more progressive, to get the me too movement. That gymnasts who suffered sexual abuse. How shocking that that is a thread throughout the centuries and is the last battle in your book. Isnt it funny that the last battle is about the right to life, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, if the government cannot defend your life, what is it doing . It is an interesting thing. You all know, when women got the right to vote, but this right to physical safety is bodily autonomy, as you put very well, were still not there. Cdc put out statistics that showed, rape statistics have not changed since we started collecting those statistics in the 1990s. The number, proportionate number of children, and most rapes are under 18. The time when people are most susceptible to abuse, 17, 18. I would like to think, i would love to think, in 50 years, someone will be sitting here and saying, we got that one licked. We have to care about it to want to change it. We dont care enough. I would like to open it up to questions and your book opens it up to new problems or persistent, longstanding problems. It was implicit all along. Please, come up to the microphone and ask a question. If you cannot come up to the microphone, please, raise your hand. Hello, elizabeth. It is hard to see you. A signal Corps Officer , so good to see you. We go way back. Back to Phyllis Schlafly and how you explain her. I read something , i cannot remember where i got it, it goes back to the Labor Movement and how women, protective laws, laws to protect them before amended, the politicians were more willing to have Labor Protections for women. Women felt, if they had equal rights, they would lose that privilege. And be treated like the men used to be treated. I wonder, do you have any theory or idea about how women like Phyllis Schlafly, who have benefited from the womens movement, then turn into the antifeminist . That is a good question. We need to grant her the logic of her argument. Phyllis schlafly was in the same camp as Eleanor RooseveltEleanor Roosevelt opposed the equal rights amendment, as did frances perkins, they thought these protective laws to women, equality means a quality, and the protective statutes have to come down. Whenever mndot something, considered fair, like the fair labor practices act, if women got something it was considered protective. The final legal theory that made that stick was that, women should not make choices for themselves because we need to preserve their utility as wombs. As people who will produce the next generation and society could say, you cannot work after 7 00 p. M. That is where these protective laws came in an interesting philosophical question. Phyllis schlafly , it is interesting, the left and the right, which often happens, they did a sideways move. The Republican Party endorsed the equal rights amendment before the democrats. By the time of Phyllis Schlafly , it flipped around, like the issues of race. I would like to make a comment and ask a question. A number of you and the almonds may assume that a lot of these equal rights Financial Issues were longago solved before our lifetime. I just want to mention, i graduated from law school in 1974. At that time, still, a married woman could not establish independent credit. In other words, a married woman could not get a credit card on her own, could not take out a loan, et cetera. I remember being shocked and not aware because my mother, who was divorced and had worked almost all of the life i knew her, was able to do so. I was married at the time when i graduated from law school and it was a rediscovery that i could not take out a credit card in my own name. My question is, it must have been difficult to decide which women to discuss in the book and focus on. Can you mention at all some women who came close to being included but you decided not to cover them . Are there any of those situations you could mention . Yes. There are a lot of choices. What about Elizabeth Cady stanton . Susan b anthony, so obvious. She turned out to be so funny. She was so funny and so interesting. I am ready to marry her. She is just so cute. At odds with our picture of her, kind of grim. She was a good cook, she loved children, and she was very funny. I did not do Elizabeth Cady stanton, people would say she is the more obvious choice. She was supposedly the brains behind the operation, which i think is a disservice to Susan B Anthony who got out there and did things. She was the feet, arms, hands of women suffrage for decades and decades. Later, okay, all right. Beyonci versus dolly parton. Beyonci is the better choice. My editor was like, are you just pandering to young people . No, that is such a rude dismissal of beyonci. I did not listen to her, i more listen to beethoven. She is so frank and such a moral leader, putting forward her moral thoughts and her bailiwick. She sang, women, stand on your own feet. This is important to pay your own bills and pay your own ticket to the movie. By the way, Alexander Hamilton said, if you give someone control over my financial destiny, you have given up everything. Beyonci has been a purveyor of that notion in her music since she was a kid, since her first songs, and body positivity. I didnt think about dolly parton. She is also kind of funny. Funny is high on my list. I am a huge fan of dolly parton. Does she make feminism a point the way beyonci does . She doesnt. Working women, the question is, what is feminism now . In the 70s, i will never shave under my arms . People like dolly parton and beyonci, they have said, no, feminism is about your right to say who you are and not let others define you. The mrs. Carter tour after she married jc. It sounded retrograde. On the backdrop, on the stage, she had the word in giant letters, feminist. What a wonderful statement. I am going to define myself as mrs. Carter antifeminist, do not tell me i cannot be both. That is what freedom is. If there is one thing, or one of many things i can take from the book, the word of progress, the hope of progress, the expansion and challenges of that. Is one of the lessons for the reader today, who have grown up thinking, hold on, i am underprivileged because i only received three credit card offers and my friend has five . I dont know if inspiration, what insight would you like them to have taken away from the book . Thank you for the question historians are notorious it wasnt as good as you thought, it was bad, it was just miserable, okay, i am done, it is like reading the newspaper. The real story, we start out with a king and we end up with a Vice President who is a woman of color. That is the narrative arc. How do we go from this to that . There is so much to treasure. If we dont treasure progress, we are more likely to lose it, i want everybody to call themselves a feminist. If we say, this is our value, Thomas Jefferson said in 1801, on his inaugural speech, we are all federalists, we are all republicans, he was saying we all hold the same values even if we disagree on other things. I want the next president to say we are all feminists. The word has changed meeting. Otherwise, when somebody says, feminists are not even women and you can punch them. Roger ailes, he infamously sexually harassed Gretchen Carlson and other women at fox news. You know how he got them to