Speaker 1: Hey, this is Annie and Samantha and welcome to Stephmon.
Speaker 1: Never told your protection of I Heart Radio's How Stuff Works. Uh,
Speaker 1: today we are talking about Scandal and not the show,
Speaker 1: which is a great show, though I never got into it,
Speaker 1: so I actually only watched that thing the first three
Speaker 1: seasons and then I was like, Okay, this is way
Speaker 1: too much, way too much. Yeah, I saw one episode
Speaker 1: and I thought it was a little overboard for me.
Speaker 1: I can see why people like it, but because it's
Speaker 1: got sex, politics, sex things we're talking about today, and
Speaker 1: we're looking specifically at women in political scandal and some
Speaker 1: gender differences in how female politicians and male politicians are
Speaker 1: able to recover or not recover or from a scandal.
Speaker 1: And we do have UM quick suggar warning, we're not
Speaker 1: going to get in too much detail about anything, but
Speaker 1: what we are going to be talking about, UM revenge
Speaker 1: porn briefly, and UM sexual assaults just in general sexual
Speaker 1: situations corruption. UM. Yeah. So this was in part inspired
Speaker 1: by the recent scandal involving Representative Katie Hill, which we
Speaker 1: will get into in a little bit UM, and it
Speaker 1: involves a lot of things, a lot of disparate threads,
Speaker 1: UM that are all episodes that have been done in
Speaker 1: the past are and we could probably revisit like revenge
Speaker 1: porn me to sexual harassment, but we're just going to
Speaker 1: touch on those things today, right right. Um, So, definitions,
Speaker 1: we like to start with definitions from a paper called
Speaker 1: Corruption and Sexual Scandal. The importance of politician gender. Political
Speaker 1: scandal is quote any action or event involving a politician
Speaker 1: that is regarded as illegal, corrupt, or unethical and prompts
Speaker 1: general public outrage. This can be something Mike violating the
Speaker 1: Constitution here in the United States, the crimes and misdemeanors
Speaker 1: we hear about abuse of power, our violations of socially
Speaker 1: established ethical and moral standards. These scandals, depending on their severity.
Speaker 1: Um and, as we're going to get into gender and
Speaker 1: skin color, can permanently impact a politicians electability. Political scandals
Speaker 1: can and have to stabilize the status quo and permanently
Speaker 1: altered history. We know this, we're seeing this actually, um
Speaker 1: they've added terms and phases to our lexicon. Corruption is
Speaker 1: a major obstacle for achieving equality. Yeah, so it's a
Speaker 1: pretty big deal. We're talking about it. It's hard to differentiate.
Speaker 1: There are two main types of scandal, corruption and sexual.
Speaker 1: Uh in our it seems to be that's the case,
Speaker 1: UM and in general, people are more concer learned with
Speaker 1: corruption scandals as opposed to sexual scandals. However, women are
Speaker 1: punished more severely when it comes to sexual scandals of
Speaker 1: similar magnitude carried out by men to a lesser extent.
Speaker 1: Women are punished more severely for corruption scandals as well.
Speaker 1: But let's look at some examples, shall we. Let's all right,
Speaker 1: So one thing I would say before we get into this,
Speaker 1: something I thought of at first when we were talking
Speaker 1: about doing this episode, is a difference I see a
Speaker 1: lot in political scandals when it comes to gender. UM
Speaker 1: is not only in the forgiveness or willing to forget,
Speaker 1: willingness to forget or not, or willingness to forgive or not,
Speaker 1: but also the public apology portion, because I feel like, dude,
Speaker 1: politicians always drag their wife up there and she's standing
Speaker 1: next to them, maybe slightly behind them, to show that
Speaker 1: she supports this male politician, her husband or whoever while
Speaker 1: he apologizes, which is kind of have you in the
Speaker 1: episodes of Parts and rec main corrupt sexual harasser of
Speaker 1: all you know that has all of those sandals. You
Speaker 1: see the wife every time in the final I think,
Speaker 1: the final corruption story that's made public, she just turns
Speaker 1: her back and just puts her head down. I'm done,
Speaker 1: I am done. Um. Yeah. It always feels so awkward
Speaker 1: and comfortable. And I mean the whole thing is awkward
Speaker 1: and uncomfortable, But I mean even the fact that women
Speaker 1: have to come out and make statements, especially in this
Speaker 1: era of social media. Um, Kavanaugh's wife, I think had
Speaker 1: made a statement, didn't she in regards to supporting her husband.
Speaker 1: Is just there's something about it feels really dicky, and
Speaker 1: I don't feel like I have seeing that kind of
Speaker 1: public apology with a male with the female politician and
Speaker 1: her significant other rail right her. Um, okay, But examples
Speaker 1: one is the eating affair from eight to thirty one.
Speaker 1: Early on in Andrew Jackson's term, his friend and Secretary
Speaker 1: of War, John Henry Eaton got married to Margaret Peggy O'Neill,
Speaker 1: and Peggy had a reputation for being promiscuous, and apparently
Speaker 1: it was quite the reputation. It eventually led to the
Speaker 1: dissolution of Jackson's cabinet. A lot of Jackson's cabinet and
Speaker 1: their wives, because yes, all the cabinet members were men
Speaker 1: at the time, did not approve of Peggy and her behavior,
Speaker 1: and by association, they did not approve of Eaton for
Speaker 1: being with her. Jackson stood behind his friend Eaton, but
Speaker 1: eventually tensions boiled over and became apparent that things couldn't
Speaker 1: be solved. Jackson forced cabinet members to resign. Peggy was
Speaker 1: perhaps a more emotional lynchpin members of the cabinet against
Speaker 1: Eaton's protective terrorists could use to force them out. They
Speaker 1: were really against that thing, right, and they pointed to
Speaker 1: her from a msculous woman and used that to kind
Speaker 1: of take him out. Yeah. During the eighties and nineties,
Speaker 1: member of Parliament and a wife of Northern Ireland's first Minister,
Speaker 1: Aris Robinson was discovered having an affair with a man
Speaker 1: forty years older than her. The press dubbed her the
Speaker 1: Celtic cougar and she had to step down. Wow, of course,
Speaker 1: what a nickname. Former Home Secretary of the UK Jackie Smith,
Speaker 1: resigned after it was revealed that she claimed the purchase
Speaker 1: of pornographic films as part of her parliamentary expenses. She
Speaker 1: claimed the purchases were her husband's but she still resigned,
Speaker 1: reasoning quote, she I was the one who did the
Speaker 1: wrong thing, for claiming it, for not going through the
Speaker 1: expense forum closely enough. And then again, we want to
Speaker 1: talk about Monica Lewinsky. I don't think we could bypass
Speaker 1: any conversations about politics and scandal without talking about her.
Speaker 1: We've already talked about her doing our women in Sexuality episode,
Speaker 1: but this was the scandal of Bill Clinton's presidency. She
Speaker 1: was a White House intern that ended up being recorded
Speaker 1: and being the main witness for Clinton's impeachment. She was
Speaker 1: of course ridiculed, slut shamed and scapegoat and guest lighted
Speaker 1: throughout her career, as in um she actually apologized to
Speaker 1: the Clintons during a Barbara Walter special, which says a lot.
Speaker 1: And then she moved to London to try to stay
Speaker 1: out of the spotlight. And I don't think it was
Speaker 1: until the Me Too movement and her powerful essay that
Speaker 1: she wrote for Vanity Fair that she started to become
Speaker 1: recognized as not the slutty temptress, but perhaps a young
Speaker 1: night girl who was groomed by the most powerful man
Speaker 1: in the country. But we see that she was really
Speaker 1: vilified from jump and even now she still has moments
Speaker 1: of being made fun of and all of that, and
Speaker 1: and there have been several people who have apologized from
Speaker 1: their reaction, but you know, she's a prime example of
Speaker 1: women in politics. She's become the main source of ridicule
Speaker 1: as if it was all her fault, which is a
Speaker 1: whole different standard in itself. And then coming into Katie Hill,
Speaker 1: who was the inspiration for this specific episode. In October
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, California Representative Katie Hill resigned after a committee
Speaker 1: investigation into her alleged sexual relationship with her legislative director
Speaker 1: and staffer from her campaign. She told the Ethics Committee,
Speaker 1: I know that even a consensual relationship with a subordinates inappropriate,
Speaker 1: but I still allowed it to happen despite my better judgment.
Speaker 1: For that, I apologize. I wish nothing but the best
Speaker 1: for her and hope everyone respects her privacy in this
Speaker 1: difficult time. And then she released the statement about it.
Speaker 1: I know that as long as I'm in Congress, will
Speaker 1: live fearful of what might come next and how much
Speaker 1: it will hurt. And she was right to be fearful. Obviously,
Speaker 1: this all was a result of a post on rest
Speaker 1: state about the affair, um, complete with intimate pictures, one
Speaker 1: in which she and the other woman in the photo
Speaker 1: are naked. Hill claims this is the work of her
Speaker 1: abusive ex husband, who, in her words, is determined to
Speaker 1: humiliate her. And actually there was a statement released by
Speaker 1: the ex husband saying that his phone had been hacked.
Speaker 1: So that makes you wonder mania things. Yeah, this is
Speaker 1: a really murky situation. Sexual relationships with underlings or those
Speaker 1: who are your subordinates is bad. Abuse is bad, revenge
Speaker 1: porn is bad. And because of the complexity of the
Speaker 1: story the number of threads, Democrats were accused of having
Speaker 1: somewhat confused response. When asked, Kamala Harris committed, let's also
Speaker 1: speak the truth that men and women are not held
Speaker 1: to the same standards. Um, I mean, look at who's
Speaker 1: in the White house. Katie Hill was one of the
Speaker 1: first openly bisexual representatives, something that drew a lot of
Speaker 1: I are from conservatives. Some people call this electronic assault
Speaker 1: or digital exploitation, and others call it revenge porn. As
Speaker 1: the victim of it, I call it one of the
Speaker 1: worst things that we can do to our sisters and
Speaker 1: our daughters. And that was a quote from Katie Hill.
Speaker 1: And I think that does bring up a lot of
Speaker 1: questions about what should be allowed, what isn't allowed. What
Speaker 1: is again, um, the law with revenge porn or publicizing
Speaker 1: someone else's photo, how does that work? I mean that
Speaker 1: even comes into talking about Instagram photos and although it
Speaker 1: is public property after you do publish it on Instagram,
Speaker 1: which is weird to me in itself. Um, when someone
Speaker 1: uses that to profit off of it's such and it's
Speaker 1: not yours, it's such a weird conversation to have. And
Speaker 1: this is that same well even worse idea that as
Speaker 1: an act of revenge or because you're mad, you take
Speaker 1: something that was consensual. And yes, using like any relationships
Speaker 1: with people who is a subordinate is very very inappropriate.
Speaker 1: But again we've never really seen that this level of
Speaker 1: intensity as she had been drawn. Katie Hill has kind
Speaker 1: of been pulled into and all of the conversations about
Speaker 1: her sexuality was the question. I believe there was a
Speaker 1: conversation that she was her her husband or an a
Speaker 1: polyamorous relationship. So there were so many things about this
Speaker 1: that people were uncomfortable with and used against her. Yeah, Um,
Speaker 1: and I can only imagine. Uh. I did some research
Speaker 1: into this for our episode. We did around sledge shaming
Speaker 1: journalists in India. Um. When something that intimate is posted
Speaker 1: without your consent and then shared, and it's so hard
Speaker 1: to prevent it, to get it taken down, it just
Speaker 1: keeps popping up. And to get the notifications and to
Speaker 1: know that your your friends and family maybe have seen
Speaker 1: these things. UM, it's just devastating. Uh. It makes my
Speaker 1: heart hurt thinking about it. And and the problem too
Speaker 1: that now that we're in this electronic age, you could
Speaker 1: it could not even be your body. They can photoshop
Speaker 1: your head right, someone else's body. They did that with
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren and I can't remember, Oh my goodness, who
Speaker 1: was the journal and I say that in quotes, who
Speaker 1: was the person who tried to say that Elizabeth Warren
Speaker 1: had an affair with a very young man and me
Speaker 1: and a cougar. And then they looked at the photo
Speaker 1: and the dude was really bad. Photo shows bad or
Speaker 1: like it was so outdated that it was unreal. Um,
Speaker 1: and they're like, and that's kind of but that's feel
Speaker 1: What if they had taken that seriously? What if someone
Speaker 1: was actually really good at photo shopping. What do you know?
Speaker 1: What if that had happened and her reputation was marred completely?
Speaker 1: And because people are dying to see a scandal, they
Speaker 1: want to believe the worst. Yeah, people believe what they see. Um,
Speaker 1: if we look at Hillary Clinton's presidential run, she was
Speaker 1: regularly vilified for the sexual infidelities and transgressions of her husband. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump was on tape admitting to infidelity and sexual
Speaker 1: assault himself. Um, so that brings us to gender differences
Speaker 1: and political scandals. What do those look like? You probably
Speaker 1: have some idea, But first it brings us to a
Speaker 1: quick break for word from our sponsor, and we're back,
Speaker 1: Thank you sponsor, And we're back with gender differences and scandals.
Speaker 1: We do judge male and female politicians, and we do
Speaker 1: judge them differently. You can see the episode I did
Speaker 1: with the folks from the Daily Zeit geists around women
Speaker 1: in the question of likability for for more on that,
Speaker 1: because that is the question that follows female politicians, Are
Speaker 1: you likable? Right? And I think that's already been a
Speaker 1: campaign for a majority of the wacause I just don't
Speaker 1: like her, and it doesn't quite make sense. Yeah, a
Speaker 1: lot of my friends when they were saying I'm not
Speaker 1: going to vote for Hillary, and I'd ask why. That's
Speaker 1: almost always they say, I just don't like her, and
Speaker 1: that was it. And I love one of my favorite
Speaker 1: slash horrible things about the that is that people at
Speaker 1: the time they're they're numerous reports Elizabeth Warren is way
Speaker 1: more likable. We should have gone with her. And now
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren is right, and she's not likable. She's bed,
Speaker 1: weel at you, right, she yells at you, she tries
Speaker 1: to be too cool, all these things. There are two
Speaker 1: prevailing theories when it comes to public perceptions of gender,
Speaker 1: scandal and electability. Expectancy violations theory involves the various expectations
Speaker 1: we have when it comes to people and how they
Speaker 1: should act, behavedors, speak, what have you. Violating these norms
Speaker 1: generally results in a negative assessment, uncertainty, and lowered perceptions
Speaker 1: of credibility. This theory primarily evaluates communication, either verbal or nonverbal,
Speaker 1: but canon has been applied to political scandal. Gender roles,
Speaker 1: of course, play a huge part in how we expect
Speaker 1: people to behave right and shifting standards. Theory is more
Speaker 1: focused when it comes to predicting how reactions and judgments
Speaker 1: will differ given similar situations, factoring in specific aspects of
Speaker 1: a person's traits, including gender. Uh. These theories are often
Speaker 1: used in conjunctions to get to the root of our
Speaker 1: societal differential reactions to political scanals and men and women
Speaker 1: basically uf stereotypes and violating or reinfor see stereotypes and
Speaker 1: double standards. Pretty much what we're talking about. So stereotypes
Speaker 1: because of the stereotype that women in politics are more
Speaker 1: honest than men, which surprised me honestly, Um, but that's
Speaker 1: what the research is found, or perhaps that people expect
Speaker 1: women to be more honest. Um. They Women are then
Speaker 1: judged more harshly and held to more richard standards when
Speaker 1: they are found to be dishonest as compared to men.
Speaker 1: We use a different set of criteria when judging female
Speaker 1: politicians we as in the Royal we not me and Samantha,
Speaker 1: and these standards are stricter. Therefore, given a similar transaggression,
Speaker 1: women will be judged more harshly than men. Women have
Speaker 1: further to fall. Essentially that results in a significantly higher
Speaker 1: loss of support when it comes to the vote. This
Speaker 1: does depend on the perception and acceptance of gender stereotypes
Speaker 1: of the voter in question. Another piece of this whole
Speaker 1: thing is women still make up less of our politicians,
Speaker 1: and men far less so their watched watched more closely
Speaker 1: in the US. Specifically in the US, yes, perception of
Speaker 1: corruption is generally lower when more women are present in politics.
Speaker 1: If this is true, which a handful of studies have
Speaker 1: suggested it is, it could be a handful of reasons
Speaker 1: women being excluded from male networks of corruption, female candidates
Speaker 1: being overqualified, and female politicians being more risk averse. It
Speaker 1: could also be that women know they are being watched
Speaker 1: more closely and being held to a higher standards. This
Speaker 1: means that more women in politics might decrease the levels
Speaker 1: of corruption and scandal. Other researchers have questioned at this finding,
Speaker 1: or at least pointing to the other reasons governments with
Speaker 1: more female representations may have lower levels of corruption. Freedom
Speaker 1: of press, for example, has been shown to have the
Speaker 1: greatest impact on corruption, which makes a lot of sense,
Speaker 1: And I guess that's even harsher with the fact that
Speaker 1: we have so much access to social media and so
Speaker 1: many people spreading whatever opinion they like, right when it
Speaker 1: comes to sexual scandals, um, these are more in line
Speaker 1: perceived male stereotypes boys will be boys, um, while women
Speaker 1: involved in sexual scandal is violating all kinds of stereotypes
Speaker 1: and brings in fears of women's sexual agency and pleasure.
Speaker 1: The paper we mentioned earlier, Corruption and sexual scandal The
Speaker 1: importance of politicians gender found that female politicians involved in
Speaker 1: scandals were assessed less favorably on all dimensions like electability, morality,
Speaker 1: and competence when compared to male politicians. For male politicians,
Speaker 1: involvement in scandals did not affect competence assessment, contrary to
Speaker 1: what was found for the women. So Another twenty seventeen
Speaker 1: study out of Durham University titled Corruption, Accountability and Gender.
Speaker 1: Do female politicians face higher standards in public life found
Speaker 1: that women punish female politicians involved in scandal more harshly
Speaker 1: than men do, which does not surprising because yeah, you
Speaker 1: do kind of put yourself on a different standards, so
Speaker 1: therefore you would expect to have such a high standard
Speaker 1: of yourself and you wish to be a better person.
Speaker 1: The u N has looked into questions around women and
Speaker 1: coruption as well, not only perception and the differences in
Speaker 1: how women go about corruption, but also the impact corruption
Speaker 1: has on women specifically. According to their data, poor women
Speaker 1: are hit hardest when it comes to petty our retail corruption,
Speaker 1: which is basically when services are sold for a bribe
Speaker 1: instead of provided its services that are basic and should
Speaker 1: be provided for free. This type of corruption is often
Speaker 1: sexualized when women and girls are forced to do sexual
Speaker 1: favors as bribes. And on top of that, since globally,
Speaker 1: women are more likely to be barred from work or
Speaker 1: education and make up a majority of the world's poor,
Speaker 1: they are disempowered when it comes to changing the status
Speaker 1: quo and therefore more disproportionately hit by corruption. Their data
Speaker 1: found that women have been forced to pay bribes even
Speaker 1: in life threatening medical situations and pregnancies for services that
Speaker 1: are supposed to be free. NGOs have been perpetrators of
Speaker 1: sex for food scandals as well, so this is a
Speaker 1: pretty widespread problem. Numbers from two thousand one out of
Speaker 1: Botswana found that sixty seven percent of female respondents reported
Speaker 1: having been harassed by a male professor and ten percent
Speaker 1: agreed to sexual favors out of fears their grades would
Speaker 1: be negatively impacted if they didn't. If this results in
Speaker 1: pregnancy these sexual favors, the female student will most likely
Speaker 1: be expelled, while the male professor will incur no consequences,
Speaker 1: which is gross. So these systems of corruption were to
Speaker 1: keep women out of political office, not having access to networks,
Speaker 1: to money or property to bribe other officials, being asked
Speaker 1: for sexual favors to secure the opportunity to run. And
Speaker 1: these are all barriers that women face at much higher
Speaker 1: rates than men, and studies have found one way to
Speaker 1: address this problem is by having more women in office.
Speaker 1: Similar to the study we mentioned earlier, un also found
Speaker 1: that women worldwide not only more accurately perceived corruption, they
Speaker 1: are also less tolerant of corruption. So that thing that
Speaker 1: you mentioned earlier, Samantha, perhaps women are her your judges
Speaker 1: of female politicians embroiled and scandal, but they might be
Speaker 1: harsher on everyone. Yet another study out, and I wonder
Speaker 1: what could have inspired all these political scandal studies around
Speaker 1: that time. Read quote. We theorize that both hostile and
Speaker 1: benevolent sexists are more likely than non sexist to punish
Speaker 1: women for involvement in a sex scandal, but each for
Speaker 1: different reasons. We posit that women politicians involved in sex
Speaker 1: scandals activate traditional gender norms and challenge men's dominant position
Speaker 1: in the society. Thus provoking hostile sexist to punish women
Speaker 1: more severely than men makes sense to me. Yep, we
Speaker 1: do have some more for you, but first we have
Speaker 1: a quick break for word from our sponsor and are back,
Speaker 1: thank you sponsor. So conclusion, corruption impacts women more. One
Speaker 1: of the ways to combat this is by getting more
Speaker 1: women in office. Female politicians are punished more harshly for
Speaker 1: scandals like corruption and removed from office. Not that people
Speaker 1: who have done wrong shouldn't be removed from office, but
Speaker 1: the consequences should be equal regardless of gender. Otherwise we
Speaker 1: are trapped in this vicious cycle. Right. The UN has
Speaker 1: partnered with various organizations around the world to better measure
Speaker 1: and fight corruption with particularly regards to women and girls. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and you can, um if you want to look that up.
Speaker 1: I highly recommend it. They're just very specific in countries
Speaker 1: and um all over. So yeah, that's our look at
Speaker 1: women and scandal. UM. If there's any scandals that we
Speaker 1: didn't touch on that you would like for us to
Speaker 1: please send them our way are or if you want
Speaker 1: us to expound on one. Um and yeah, just be
Speaker 1: clear again, bad things you should get removed from office,
Speaker 1: right absolutely. Anyone who uses power against someone who is
Speaker 1: um not a power should be pushed or at least
Speaker 1: you know seen. Yeah, justice, And I guess sort of
Speaker 1: related to that, we did want to touch on the
Speaker 1: e r A for a little bit um Equal Rights
Speaker 1: Amendment right alright, So recently we had some elections here
Speaker 1: in the United States led to some pretty significant wins
Speaker 1: for Democrats. Particularly wanted to look at Virginia, which turned blue.
Speaker 1: It flipped, as they say, and this could be a
Speaker 1: big deal for the Equal Rights Amendment and it very briefly,
Speaker 1: this was a constitutional amendment that would give all Americans
Speaker 1: equal legal protections no matter their sex. It was passed
Speaker 1: by the House Senate in nine two, but then enthusiasm
Speaker 1: for it sort of fizzled out. Also was sort of destroyed,
Speaker 1: thanks in part to the anti r A efforts of
Speaker 1: Phyllis Schlafley, who played Ding Dong the which is Dead
Speaker 1: at her party the day the deadline for the ear
Speaker 1: A past. But there's renewed attention to it because in
Speaker 1: becoming a blue states, Virginia might ratify it, and it
Speaker 1: would become the thirty eight state to do so, which
Speaker 1: would bring the e r A up to the three
Speaker 1: force it needs for federal ratification. Another thing that would
Speaker 1: have to happen is Congress changing the deadline for ratification,
Speaker 1: which was originally set for which the Judiciary Committee just approved. Um. Also,
Speaker 1: some states are doing a whole like we ratified it then,
Speaker 1: but we don't want to do it now. So I
Speaker 1: don't know what's going to Tennessee in North Dakota, I
Speaker 1: think so. Yeah. Um, if ratified, the e r A
Speaker 1: would touch on all kinds of things protection against pregnancy discrimination,
Speaker 1: pay equity, maternity and paternity leave, and domestic violence laws. Right.
Speaker 1: It's definitely something to watch as the House has two
Speaker 1: sponsors with them voting by the end of the year,
Speaker 1: and does have actually a couple of Republican sponsors from
Speaker 1: Alaska and Maine. So that's cool. And the likelihood of
Speaker 1: it hitting the Supreme Court is very very high, So
Speaker 1: that's kind of tedious in itself and something we all
Speaker 1: need to pay attention to for sure. Yeah, I'm certain
Speaker 1: we will be talking about that again in the coming months. Right.
Speaker 1: So I just wanted to put that update in there.
Speaker 1: Keep I guess keep any are out or an eye
Speaker 1: out for any news I like it out. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: gotta keep your ears out and we will be keeping
Speaker 1: an ears out for any news from you. I guess
Speaker 1: it would be eyes out. Now I'm confusing myself anyway,
Speaker 1: just beyond the well on the account. Well, that doesn't
Speaker 1: make sense either, does that? We have confusers pay attention?
Speaker 1: How about that? We'll just pay attention? So what will
Speaker 1: excitedly wait to hear from you? Listeners? You can email
Speaker 1: us at stuff Media, mom Stuff at iHeart media dot com,
Speaker 1: and you can find us on Twitter at mom Stuff
Speaker 1: podcast or on Instagram at stuff I've Never told You.
Speaker 1: Thanks it's always to our super producer Andrew Howard, and
Speaker 1: thanks to you for listening. Stuff owner told you. The
Speaker 1: production of I Heart Radio is how Stuff works. For
Speaker 1: more podcasts from my Heart radiovi is the I Heart
Speaker 1: Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your
Speaker 1: favorite shows