[0:00:01] Emily: Hi there friend, welcome to this week’s episode of the R. F. W. P. Where we are seeking truth in finding God’s heart. So today it is just me, I’m going to be introducing an interview for your listening pleasure Lois and I both are feeling a little bit under the weather and have had some family things come up. We would love to ask you guys to partner with us in prayer over Lois is grand baby. You guys know if you’ve been listening to the show for a long time, you know that her son, Micah and daughter in law Haley are going to have a baby girl named Marlow in october but Haley has some health complications that make the pregnancy high risk and right now they are in the hospital facing Um a preeclampsia or toxemia diagnosis at 28 weeks and baby is also growth restricted at this time. So they are working on getting diagnosis and um care checking Haley into the hospital until baby comes. So that’s all happening. I’m recording this thursday um 12 August so if you guys can be in prayer for them that they would have wisdom in making decisions that um God would sustain them with peace and that baby Marlowe would be healthy and that Haley would stay healthy and um everyone would have wisdom and comfort and guidance and health in this, we would greatly greatly appreciate that and before I set up the interview I have for you today, I wanted to quickly shout out our patrons on Patreon guys, we are so so thankful for you and we could not be doing what we’re doing without you. We could not be transcribing the podcast and looking forward to getting some merch graphic design stuff set up and you know all the things if it wasn’t for you. So thank you ever so much. Also want to give a quick shout out to our amazing sponsor Kendra over at scripture flips. If you haven’t checked out scripture flips yet, I would love to describe them to you. Scripture flips are a small, convenient size that just make it perfect to keep God’s word at your fingertips in with you on the go. Every flip has a theme to so all of the verses inside support that specific theme. So there is so much value in taking a specific theme. Whatever. Maybe God’s working on your heart with, maybe it’s obedience, Maybe it’s focusing in on him. Maybe it’s focusing on who he says you are with the beloved flip. There’s just so much value in taking one topic at a time in scripture and saturating our hearts with it, I finally put my flip in my beloved flip in our van so that it’s with me all the time because you know when you have those little moments of you’re not sure what to fill them with and you end up scrolling on your phone or like, I don’t know, do nothing. This is a great way to incorporate that into your life and make it so easy for you to reach for your scripture flip, put it on your purse to put it on your keys, stash it in your car or leave it on your desk wherever you’re going to need a sweet reminder of the truth of God’s word to carry you through your day. If you do not have your own scripture flip or you need to grab another focus. Another topic of a scripture flip, go to scripture flips dot com and use the code R. F. W. P 20 to get 20% off of your order and when you get your scripture flips in the mail, make sure you take a picture, tag us and show us how you choose to keep God’s word with you all the time. Maybe you gift it to a friend, take a picture, show us how you use your scripture flip. And without further ado here is this week’s guest as we talk about deep polarization, unity, tribalism, all of these beautiful and powerful things coupled with practical tools. You know you’re going to love today’s episode and lois and I will see you back next week together.

[0:05:11] Emily: Mhm. Today I get to sit down with Chelsea andrews for a conversation around civil discourse and deep polarization and if those are new words to you, they are super fresh words to me within the last couple of years. So a little bit about Chelsea before we get started. She is a deep polarization expert and a digital culture strategist, she enjoys analyzing emotions and behavior as they relate to interpersonal communication in my opinion, she’s a powerhouse at helping people with different vocabularies understand one another, even if they don’t agree because she’s helped me learn how to break out of my own tribe inbox and speak and listen to people instead of like at people. So welcome to the show Chelsea,

[0:06:01] Chelsea: thank you so much Emily. Um I think you and I have a relationship through instagram, so this is really exciting to be able to see each other and chat and do the podcast this way um to the to the point of the bio that you just gave for me, I love that you pulled that together. It’s like that’s piece from different places, so I feel like you did your homework awesome. Um I think there’s a lot of buzz words around this stuff we’re going to talk about and I’m somebody who, this is a buzzword, We can even start here code switching, like which language and dialects, dialect is more applicable. Um do people use? Uh so as you were just kind of like framing this stuff, I’d like to give it may be an additional framing not um different but just other words to me deep polarization and civil discourse and I’ll elaborate all this this later, but it comes down to people exist in the world. People have different opinions, people have different beliefs and even if we think our belief or opinion is right, we’re inevitably going to bump into somebody who might disagree with us to find something differently and how do we exist together in a way that is mutually respectful, that’s kind of what everything goes onto that I care about and that I invest my time into. Um and then background context to, I went to Liberty University, that’s something that gives different reactions from different people, I feel differently about it often on different days too. But I was my graduating senior class president there in 2015, years old and from rural Indiana. Um I now exist in a lot of space is with people who are very, very progressive and talk a lot about diversity equity inclusion stuff, I define myself as being conservative, so that’s even something interesting we could get into. Um but in my last job, I was a co founder for a non profit startup and we took almost 10,000 christians over to uh to Israel to Israel Palestine whatever wording we want to use the holy Land um in about four years, so I specialize in jewish christian stuff and also this, like how do we talk to each other kind of stuff,

[0:08:04] Emily: right, Which I really appreciate because I think you have said that polarization could be the thing of our era, like if we look back and go, what was going on in The early 2000s, this would be the thing.

[0:08:20] Chelsea: Yeah, that’s something where I think, and there’s psychology terms and stuff for this. I don’t care to label them now unless it’s interesting, but there are ways to look back at how we remember and like the study of memory itself, and then also in retrospect, when we think about generations and time span. So when we look back at the civil rights movement now, I feel like and maybe others don’t, but I feel like we often don’t think about the people who were sitting in their living rooms and talking about the events that have happened like that day, and the different type of communities who are responding to all of that stuff that was going on, and it’s a lot harder to put yourself into that space and this is empathy right here. Like how is somebody else’s lived reality, what does it look like and how do they feel? Not just like, where am I coming from? So that’s something I’m curious about right now is like, there’s so much going on in the world And like, how are we gonna be talking about it in 40, 50 years? Very curious about that.

[0:09:15] Emily: Mhm. Right, Because how does this impact like us inside of our communities and how does this impact outside of my

[0:09:23] Chelsea: community? So

[0:09:25] Emily: we don’t I don’t know if we always think about, like you just said, even how it’s impacting us right now, how people will perceive that even

[0:09:34] Chelsea: Yeah, I actually want to elaborate on that before we jump into whatever other point you’d like us to go into next. But perception is something that that word particularly, it’s interesting that you used it because I’ve been kind of simmering on the last maybe a week or two and I feel like there’s either this this thought of, oh well, you know, I can’t control what other people think of me and there’s that kind of like individual, like liberty and like freedom kind of thought of whatever. But then there’s also this thought of, okay, well how do you treat someone, how do they feel like you treat them? What is their perspective of you and not that we need to adjust ourselves for everyone else. But I think that perception between communities is a you can pull all of that back into peace and like an equity and all the other things that we’re talking about,

[0:10:21] Emily: right? Really? So something you do, so so well, is defining what you’re talking about so that everyone feels welcome at the table and you’re so inclusive, I think is the right word. Um so can you go ahead and tell us what is civil discourse, what is deep polarization and we could even get into confirmation bias within our own group?

[0:10:43] Chelsea: Yeah, it’s something I packaged this in different ways as I’m kind of coming to terms with my own individual studies right now, so help reel me in. But I think I understand how I’d like to frame this now in my mind. There are a lot of different subcategories of deep polarization. So if we think of deep polarization as the umbrella civil discourse is like the tactical tools of how to like you Emily and I talked to each other like there’s there’s psychology terms like mirroring, am I repeating back to you what you just said to make sure that I understand it correctly. There’s there’s all these different things but deep polarization I think is this this broader umbrella and then under that you have civil discourse, you have de radicalization that is an aspect of this. There’s there’s a lot of different subcategories that we could get into. Um but deep polarization pretty much to me and I actually looked up on google, I was like I wonder if family is going to ask me to define this and I like that you didn’t particularly say like what is the mary wants for like, you know, definition of deep polarization in my words, deep polarization says let’s think about the rewards like polls like polarity, there’s like one extreme and there’s another extreme and then there’s everything in the middle. So, deep polarization says, what are the extremes that are going on and you can apply this to like other things than just like what you and I are talking about two. We can have you can have polarization within a very healthy environment just like difference of opinions. It’s just like where the polls and I actually had wanted to bring up the overton window with you at some point this conversation and I opened saying that I’m not a big person on terms, but I think this one actually helps us understand deep polarization

[0:12:22] Emily: go for it.

[0:12:23] Chelsea: The overton window, I’ll explain after this textbook definition, but I googled it and it says it’s the range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream population had a given time. So what that says is there’s almost this line segment whether it’s like an endpoint in a starting point um and maybe maybe that’s not even great framing it’s like like a one side and another side in America we often think of it as like the progressives and conservatives or it’s the right and the left or whatever interchangeable, like where do you want to use their but what is socially and politically normal In 2021 was not socially and politically normal in the 1970s. When we look at deep polarization in that framework, it’s constantly adjusting is constantly changing. Its something new. There’s never going to be just here is what it is period, it’s not like algebra, you don’t get a math problem, there’s always new theories and things being introduced. So in my mind when I talk about deep polarization to kind of answer your question, there’s a broad framework. There’s a lot of things underneath it. And again, everything is talking about how do we interact with each other.

[0:13:27] Emily: So when we are coming to the table to talk about these conversations, I love that you don’t just say be nice to everybody, you know, because I feel like when I bring up this in my audience or something just like be kind, but it’s beyond that because you help people understand why do we think this way or why do we get stuck? So there are so many different reasons why in this, whether it’s targeted ads and facebook and the social dilemma stuff from where you sit, why is deep polarization such an important topic right now?

[0:14:04] Chelsea: Great question. Um and everything that I prepared to talk to you with this is not one of those things that I love the authenticity of just rolling this conversation in my mind, it comes down to I don’t want to say critical thinking because that can be I think just interpreted like really like you can look at someone like you’re not a critical thinker, like finger away. Well that’s just not nice to say to anyone. So I’m calling it more in my head pluralistic thinking, which is a form of logic and rhetoric. Um so that I was actually a textbook that you can look up, but in my mind being able to hold two different like places of logic at the same time. It’s not something that at least my background as someone who again went to liberty, very conservative christian evangelical culture didn’t teach me it was absolute truth, moral relativism and it was this almost perspective of if you don’t believe the divine truth, nothing else that you’re saying is going to be valid, moral credible and all those things that when you said like how do we say this in a way that’s not just be nice, I could say hi, I’m Chelsea, I believe in jesus christ like I am born and like I could say all the things, someone could walk into a room with me who is muslim, maybe not religious at all, um maybe white presenting, maybe not like presenting and this is where like me hang out and progressive spaces is coming out, but some person could walk up to me and if I look at them and I my my definition of nice might be very different than theirs and I might come in with christian background and like very calm and like you know whatever language and that might be very alarming to them again because of perception like I don’t know what all the other christians that that person has bumped into have treated them like and maybe a word or a phrase that I’m using could be really hurtful in their eyes, so again this is where there is that like dualistic logic, it’s not to say you have to concede to somebody else, you can still think your opinion is true, which is the confirmation bias, so we can get into all that stuff too. I love that stuff. Um but it’s to say how is someone else interpreting what is happening right now? And can I hold my interpretation and their interpretation at the same nicely relative?

[0:16:14] Emily: Because I think especially in the christian spaces, particularly the conservative christian spaces that hold the bible as their final authority, it seems to be like, you can’t have your perspective and there’s a an abrasion towards my truth, your truth, her truth when we can actually learn from each other by saying, well, why does she think that’s her truth? Why does what gives her the authority to do that

[0:16:40] Chelsea: totally. Something that jumps out at me, as you say, that is that I don’t know, like we have to be able to bump into each other and maybe that’s me, like harping on a point and I’ll keep it short here, but if I have my absolute truth, which just being honest, I do, I have my things that I think are true and right, and I have reasons for those and I’m someone who has dug deep and figure those out. I think that you are, someone has done that too, just because I’ve does not work on myself doesn’t mean that I know the work that someone else has done on themselves and maybe they have or maybe they haven’t, but we still have to bump into each other,

[0:17:14] Emily: right? As somebody who grew up in like a legit go chamber. It is so important to me now that we are bumping into other opinions and ideas. Can we go into maybe I wasn’t planning this, but a specific example of something that christians say that is maybe a abrasive to other people. Um we can use this example where you can use your own, but pharisee is tossed around a lot in christian spaces as negative and rightly so kind of from the biblical perspective of somebody who is oppressing people with religion, can we take a step back and realize that that might be offensive to another community?

[0:18:01] Chelsea: Yeah, I know and tying in with this and also not like I said in the introduction that I specialize in jewish christian relations and there’s a very particular sensitivity that the, this is mainstream jewish community. I’m not pulling out of a particular denomination here. Um, and that’s our warning, not they’re working for how they would define themselves, but to say a lot of at least american jews, I can say it this way. I feel like christians that come from conservative backgrounds and again, they might not phrase it this way, but this is what my years have shown me a lot of jewish people in America will say christians talk about legalism and christians like almost make fun of jews like I’ve been in churches that do that, I’ll give it actually act out. I was in a church in Chicago and I was really excited about the church. It’s actually like a big name church. I’m not going to label it. And the pastor had formerly been catholic and he was up on the stage and he was talking about legalism, which cool. And he was talking about the sabbath and he said that for jews, if you spit on the ground and step away, it’s fine. It’s chilled. Like no big deal. But if it’s the sabbath and if they spit on the ground and if they turn their foot on the ground, they are suddenly cultivating the earth which is breaking a commandment. Which is is it this whole thing? And he basically said it in a way that made the entire church laugh. So like this is one of those things where like our context is not our own our context exists for other people in their context to mm No, I actually love that. You highlighted that.

[0:19:34] Emily: I love that you just mentioned that like the context, it doesn’t mean that we’re wrong for using that term, but how we’re framing it. Are we making a joke at someone else’s expense or we just using it within the context of our community.

[0:19:52] Chelsea: Absoluteing 100

[0:19:55] Emily: moving on towards like why does this matter within your like Christianity and you’re how you’re representing yourself in the world when we are inside our own group. You use a word called like tribalism and how can we be aware when we’re in that, I don’t know, echo chamber or with lacking outside perspective

[0:20:20] Chelsea: totally. I think one way is to do, uh like an actual physical, like turn your head kind of a thing. How often are you physically in protestant video with someone who disagrees with you? Like if you’re walking into your church and everything, you say like you 100% agree the pastor, you 100% agree with how everyone was responding to the pastor. If you 100% agree with everything that your parents are saying. If you’re if you’re in this place of like not often questioning or challenging or bumping, not that everyone needs a challenging question, everything, but I think that is a, it’s a clear way to figure out, I’m like, am I in an echo chamber right now? And you had mentioned confirmation bias before? So I’m just gonna pull in some psychology lingo because I can and I like it. There’s a guy named Daniel Kahneman, he’s actually Israeli. Um I think it was around the seventies, I’m pretty sure it was in the seventies, but he put out a lot of research um in partnership with another Israeli guy, but common is the big name and all of his stuff was about heuristics and biases and heuristics that most people don’t use that word now biases, People will know once I explain it a little bit um heuristics are like a mental shortcut. The quick thing if you google it that pops up is a rule of thumb. And the thought there is if your brain can’t like Can’t spend a long time to figure out every single thing that you do as you navigate life. So that’s where like assumptions can happen and like quick determinations can happen and it’s the whole thing. And there’s there’s actually like a system once the system two thinking and little psych heavy. But I think for anyone that’s interested in this, I mentioned this to say there’s places to go next and to explore. Jonathan. Height is a name who is very very popular right now. H. A. I. D. T. Is how you as I spell it. He has three books that are really great. Um One particularly is called The Righteous Mind. I’m doing this on top of my head so I might mix his bylines. But I think it was The Righteous Mind why Good people are divided by politics and religion and then another. But as talks about moral foundations and an american context of the left and the right. And he basically asserts Canadians research. So Jonathan hi is this like trendy? Like I called like a pop psychologist. He’s on um he’s on the radio and he’s on Good Morning America and like if you look him up on you he’s everywhere right now. He says okay Conman said there’s a system one and system to which is like your quick thinking and you’re you’re slow thinking, but like very heavy, very academic height says think of an elephant, there’s an elephant and there’s a writer the elephant our is our emotional self and the writer which can kick the elephant’s ears if it’s on top of the elephant can steer it. Um that’s our logic. So just because our logic is telling us something that doesn’t mean that are quick response is going to be around that. So is this really interesting conclusion there. And then to kind of close out at this point, commons biases, you mentioned confirmation bias, that’s his most famous one. Most people at least I’m asserting that a lot of people can say it that way in America would know what confirmation bias is. Almost none of those people could name what heuristics are or whether they came from continent. So all that to say when we talked about the echo chamber conversation, confirmation bias tells us the story and this is my own Chelsea language tells us the story of I am going to self affirm and and that in and of itself is kind of this weird place that people trip up around deep polarization because the story that I tell myself as Chelsea is that I am a critical thinker. I like to hold different narratives. I’m a good person, I only do things that are going to be intentionally kind to others. It doesn’t mean that I’m not going to mess up, it doesn’t mean that I’m not going to bump into someone and say something insensitive or hurt someone’s feelings or or emotionally respond in a way that is not contained because I’m a human being. So those are the things I tell myself, but that’s also confirmation bias. So if I can’t recognize that not everything that I think is going to be absolutely correct, or everything that I feel is going to be absolutely correct, we’re kind of in a messy place. And not to me pulling all of this back to like, the Church is where I don’t feel like the Church’s allowing people to do critical thinking. This pluralistic thinking, especially conservative Christianity. And again, I’m speaking from an evangelical background, and then we also say, okay, well, we’re not allowed to question and we’re not allowed to hold, like, different perspectives and viewpoints or even entertain them then as the church just not this confirmation bias, like feedback loop and also, who’s making the decisions in the Church? And are those people open to feedback or are those people all just like perpetuating something too? So, it’s a very weird and interesting thing, We’re like, yeah, these these words sound great confirmation bias is bad, but it is actually really hard to figure out if you are in a final or not. And again, all that to say if you can’t hold multiple perspectives at one time, that’s I think an indicator.

[0:25:13] Emily: Mhm. I once heard a professor say about the bible because he wrote a book misreading scripture through Western eyes and he said that we need to actually approach the bible almost subjectively so that we can be objective about our subjectivity.

[0:25:31] Chelsea: Yeah, that makes sense to me actually like that a lot. And when I mentioned before that I’ve taken a lot of christians over to the Holy Land. That to me like I’ve worked with the Syrians who are from Iraq, I’ve worked with christians who are from Lebanon. I’ve worked with christians who like indigenous christian communities in the Middle East. And for me to have brought thousands of of american christians with a Western context to the Middle East. One thing that baffled me in my earlier days was that a lot of non denominational christians that I was taking, we’re looking at the churches in Israel and they were very like I can say this now I don’t work for the company. I feel free to be able to speak this way. They’re very snobby towards the churches. They were like well this church has a lot of like iconography, this church is you know all of these things that I don’t like but like where are we going to find a church that’s 1000 years old that looks like a modern day gymnasium for your non denon like so this is this thing of like christians are so judgmental of each other each other. And then when we look at like the global body of christ, how often are we saying like Hey Syrians, like what perspective do you have that I’m not currently holding.

[0:26:40] Emily: Yeah, like never.

[0:26:41] Chelsea: Right. Seriously.

[0:26:43] Emily: So when we’re in these constructs, how do we break out? Like you said, turn our heads and then we’re asking questions and realizing that our context is actually quite small. Yeah. And then we can move forward once we’ve recognized that we even have confirmation bias, right? Even if we can’t see it all, at least we can recognize and be aware that I’m viewing the world from a limited perspective.

[0:27:12] Chelsea: Yeah. My mind immediately jumps to academic language and then not after my mind immediately jumps to like psychosocial treatments. So what that means is like if someone goes into a therapy session, there are several different types of approaches a therapist might use with someone. Two examples that I like to use because I think they’re easy to understand is D. B. T. D. As in like your day to day life. Like DBT. Um and then CBT season Chelsea. So there’s cognitive behavioral therapy and dialectical behavioral therapy. And this is like my Chelsea definition, not textbook, but this basically says one approach. DBT does not argue with the patient in the room or the person if we want to call him, not a patient. Um So if someone walks in there talking to a therapist and DBT is the approach that is being used, therapist is not going to challenge that person. They’re going to affirm recognized trauma and they’re they’re they’re they’re not in like a challenging role at all. CBT though the reason that I like this approach better and this is how I frame all of my deep polarization stuff. So I’ll pull it back in a moment. CBT says it takes the approach of a person walks into a therapist office. They sit down, they start talking to the therapist. The therapist is there to help that person realize what is going on in their head. So for example, someone might say, um just speaking quickly within like free thought, this is like all talk therapy. They’re working with a therapist and they might say, well this morning I woke up and making stuff on top of my head. But this morning I woke up and I bumped into this guy at the gas station and he was the biggest jerk in the world and go on with the story. The therapist then might say, okay, well, can I, can I repeat back to you what I heard from what you said or they have some sort of framing there and then they’ll say, so you went to the gas station this morning and some person was a jerk and because they were a jerk because whatever example I might have given and that is mirroring saying the exact same thing back and then that person doing cognitive behavioral therapy can say well they weren’t a jerk and maybe I called him a customer and the customer instead of a jerk like that. They wanted that you know they were actually this and you give them this moment of being able to re clarify what they mean, being able to hear externalized what was in their mind that they just said out quickly. So CBT does this approach of giving the person the opportunity to grow and reflect and do it in a safe space where no one is trying to catch them or proven that they’re wrong and you can also validate and stuff too. But CBT I just think it’s such a such a healthy approach and the reason that I apply that approach to all of the framing that I do around. Um De radicalization, deep polarization like like uh civil just like all of these things is to say when I’m talking to somebody in a conversation and maybe we seriously disagree with each other. Like the Humanly even like I’m a pro lifer and I talked to a lot of pro choicers and don’t get too deep into that kind of the triggering thing for a lot of people. But if I’m talking to a pro choicer they might say something challenging my response back to them, might be hi friend will say their names Ashley, I’m making up a name Like, hey Ashley. Um when you talk about being pro choice, I noticed that you use these words, um I might not use those same words. Can you tell me why those are the words that you chose? None of that. That I just said is conceding any ground at all. It is asking that person to define their own terms, to associate their own relationship with the conversation, is giving them an opportunity in a safe environment to answer me authentically how they want to. And none of that is me trying to prove to them that they’re wrong. Catch them in them doing something morally unethical any of that. So that’s why again, like CBT to me is just a really healthy framework for people to use.

[0:31:07] Emily: I think that that example is really interesting when we talk about therapy and you said like a non threatening space, it’s just a space for somebody to say something and have repeated back to them. And then what comes up to me when you’re talking about the pro life versus for pro choice? When our position on something is question we can feel challenged and threatened.

[0:31:31] Chelsea: Absolutely. Can you talk about that? Yes, I can. Okay, so identity, We’re getting into some identity stuff. So, and I’m just going to name something because I want to I feel like a lot of conservative christians here identity and then we hear identity politics and we start hearing these phrases and we’re like no, that’s a leftie thing, I don’t want to touch that. And there’s a lot of depth and things I could say to make that both credible and challenge like the phrasing that I just did. But um all of that to say there’s there’s I don’t I define identity as a story that we tell ourselves about ourselves. Again, I tell myself I’m a nice person, I tell myself all of these affirming things the way that someone else might define me and like my identity factors, quote unquote might have a lot of words that have very negative connotations because those are the connotation, like those are the words and experiences that they have with people like me. So when we when we talk about big feeling threatened the second that someone like I’m a pro life for the second that pro choice or is looking at me and making an assumption or making a judgment call or or speaking into the things that I have told myself are true and honest and moral and I have values for why I think these things, that person is functionally challenging my identity, That person is saying, you Chelsea don’t think women have a right to choose you Chelsea don’t think like all of these things, again, not getting too deep into that, but I don’t want my friends to think bad things to me because I don’t think bad things of me and I think that I have good reasons for thinking what I do and at the same time I have to know that my pro choice friends also have reasons for thinking what they do, logic for thinking what they do and experiences for thinking what they do. And I can still think that I’m alright than them and have a civilized conversation with them. But yes, being feeling threatened is what happens when we’re in a challenging conversation and when we were just talking about like a safe space, this pulls everything back on the onus of the person who is wanting to have a hard conversation or is wanting to explore this stuff. This is the really hard, not comfortable reality is it’s not going to feel good and it is going to feel really hard and it’s entirely and this is a personal opinion. Others might disagree with me as long as you are in a space where you’re not with someone who is going to like physically emotionally harm you. Like acknowledging all those like safety importance is too. But if you’re like a good faith conversation with someone and it just really hard conversation, you don’t know how to do it. That’s the point where it is my responsibility. So if I’m talking to a pro choicer and they become a motive like they become reactionary, it is my job to make them feel like I’m sitting on the same side of the table as them. Some negotiation theory stuff here is that we need to make sure that people see a future that is collaborative in nature. And if I’m talking to a pro choicer as a pro lifer and we can’t end the conversation with mutual respect and in a world where we could somehow talk to each other again collaboratively, then I failed doing the conversation that I was trying to do and not every conversation has to be the end goal, but I know for a fact that oftentimes I need to have several conversations with someone who thinks differently than me before, then I can assert my point because this is also a negotiation theory, people need to feel heard before they will listen and that is so hard, we want to express ourselves, but it is like tactical and is smart, it is strategic to say, I’m gonna sit this out for a little bit and I’m just going to be here and I’m going to listen authentically and then when I do speak later I will be heard more.

[0:35:00] Emily: Mhm One of the first things that that stands out to me as one of the first things that I remember you saying when I started following you, just when we’re talking about that, what is your final authority, what is your basis for what you’re basing what’s the foundation for what you’re basing your opinion on and then like you said, somebody else can be moral without agreeing with me and that’s so hard when we, we’ve come to these conclusions and we’ve wrestled and somebody disagrees with us and we’re like, you can’t possibly be right.

[0:35:37] Chelsea: So actually, I think a really great anecdote that is consistent with everything else we’ve been talking about with the pro life or pro choice like paradigm and for me that’s adoption reform and to make it very distinct, it is difficult for non christians in America to find adoption agencies where they can adopt a child and I have friends who are jewish, maybe religious, maybe not. Um and it’s hard for them to be able to adopt a child, I have friends who are people in and this will be hard for the conservative christians listening, but I have friends who are in the LGBTQ community have been married for like someone that comes to mind has been married to their partner for 20 years and not to jump into that kinda, that’s an entirely like, that’s a hard space to be in. But these people who in my mind are in loving relationships, they’re healthy, they have an income, that, that makes it all of the things are there minus maybe the faith part, they might look at me as the christian and say, why can’t I adopt a child, I really want, we want to be able to give a child a good home and to them, they’re trying to do something that is moral, that is fulfilling, that is all of these things and they look at me as the christian and they’re like, well you’re just being judgmental because you think I don’t believe in God and now everything else that I do is not up to your part. So that’s like a tangible point where our morals might be different and we’re judging each other and yet all of us and I again, I’m a pro lifer saying this, I want babies to be adopted and yet this is where I will give credibility to my pro choice friends where they say, well you guys are just pro birth and that’s the whole thing, but just to highlight that as like where they might go in their mind, consistent life is something that I’m very big on. And for me, consistent life means that I again have to be able to jump out of my own logic points because the world is a big world. Mhm

[0:37:25] Emily: Right. Yeah, those examples are really hard, I think because they call us they almost, I can’t think of another term, but they almost call us on the carpet like yeah, here now you have to wrestle with this.

[0:37:39] Chelsea: Yeah. And that’s that’s the thing of forced empathy is a phrase that I talked about, empathy a little bit earlier. So empathy, being able meaning just being able to jump into someone else’s mind set experience reality. In other words, forced empathy is where you say now solve their problem or now how they would act in their own framework. So if you and I am putting an assumption on you, you don’t have to confirm this or not. But like as pro lifers, am I able to jump into a pro choice person’s mindset in good faith and also imagine the way that they their brain does their logic. I don’t think christian to do that.

[0:38:20] Emily: Mm And it comes back to recognizing our own angle that we’re viewing things at and saying this while I believe this is the right conclusion. Let me figure out how you reached yours rather than assuming I know how you reached your conclusion.

[0:38:40] Chelsea: Totally tribalism actually comes to mind now as a maybe transition topic. Is it okay if I jump us there?

[0:38:47] Emily: Yeah, go ahead.

[0:38:48] Chelsea: So I think since we have this background that we’ve talked about, that kind of covers the CBT approach of like safe environments for people to authentically show up and all that, we’ve talked about empathy. We’ve talked a little bit about like the heuristics and biases with um with Daniel Kahneman, um we’ve kind of given this framework so tribalism and actually this is kind of fun, I think because there’s really easy ways to explain it and people make this out to be something that’s really, really complicated there. How do I want to frame this with you Emily and I are placed into a room together, let’s say it’s a it’s a it’s a big room, let’s say we’re in walmart, no one else is in walmart, You and I get dropped off into walmart. Maybe we know each other, is there? Maybe we don’t, I don’t know. Then say five people are placed with me and walmart and they’re told you’re in like Chelsea’s like community and five people are placed with you after like a year long time. We’re going to have different cultures, have different things that we care about and there’s a study, I can’t think of the name of it off top of my head, but they did this um there’s actually a lot of counterpoint to this. I’m still mentioning it. Anyway, there’s a study that was done where kids were put out into the woods and they basically have these kids create cultures and like almost like a little government system, they were out camping and then the kids bump into each other and like what happens And there’s, there’s a whole lot that’s asserted in that study, I don’t want to bring to this conversation, but all that to say tribalism is it’s the ways that I confirm community and this is my own child. So your definition of making up all the top of my head right now because again, I like authentic conversations, it’s the way that like I’d create community. So maybe I’ll maybe I’ll do another book definition because nothing is jumping the top of my mind. There is a book that I think that it’s negotiating a non negotiable with Daniel Shapiro, it might be out there, but it’s a negotiation book and this guy opens up the book and he said he makes it very dramatic, It’s exciting. It’s the way he narrates is really fun and he says I was at the international conference and there’s like all these big scholars and impressive people who are there and I was asked to facilitate a room with everyone on tribalism. Okay, so then these people come in and they sit down and this guy gets up in front of the room and no one really knows what they’re doing there. But they were told to go there. And this guy says, he creates this framework and he says, you guys are all at circle tables, everyone in the room or at circle tables, boom, there’s an alien invasion. And then this person walks in in a funny outfit and they’re pretending to be a little alien just to be like an ice breaker and get everyone to laugh. And the guy who is running the room then says, alright, well aliens are going to blow up earth unless we can have one table create a culture and a society that everyone else agrees with. So humanity is now on y’all. So one table is really focused on equity and inclusion. Another table is really focused on religion. Another table is really focused on all of these different things and his end point is to say Within like an hour of him telling people or maybe it was 15 minutes, I don’t know, but within a very condensed time frame, these people started yelling at each other and screaming at each other and it was like, because it was a height like 10 situation, people were getting really passionate about it. That’s tribalism, like one table versus another table. It can be, I like Pepsi and you like cook, it can be this, it can be that. But in America where it gets to be like scary and something that really needs attention and I use those words intentionally when we play so much of our identity and being a republican and in being a democrat and judging the other person and not being able to do that forced empathy, that critical thinking that that understanding of where they’re coming from, that’s where we get into an unhealthy place. So tribalism is just like a big word that means we all like siphon off but like ken tribes coexist and that’s where there’s a lot of research around like in group and out group work. So something that I noticed and I’ll close out maybe with this in a moment, but it’s something that I started noticing early on in in my last job that I was in, I took christians to jewish conferences that had gone over to Israel with me and I escorted them, I guided them through, I was very big into acclimating and culture and all of that, but usually I would bring the only christians or non jews, they were at a conference when I did that all of a sudden, these christians were like, oh my gosh, I’ve never been a minority before or oh my gosh, I’ve never existed in a space where everyone else is something that I am not that’s in group and out group, that’s also tribalism, that’s all, that’s okay.

[0:43:20] Emily: Can you talk a little bit more about in group and out group? That was really interesting. So like when we’re in the religious context, in group, being the group that we most aligned with an out group would be anyone that disagrees with something that we hold as a core value.

[0:43:40] Chelsea: I’m gonna use a very personal example because I feel comfortable enough with you to do that today. My college, that I went to Liberty University was in like a headline in the new york Times, not bringing up all of that stuff like that’s not the point. But they were in like a new york Times headline. I have a lot of very difficult feelings about the school that I went to based on like the institution, not the mission based on the people, not the goal, I can put it that way. And when we look at like in group out group, I am someone who still is holding on to my evangelical title, I don’t want to be ex van jellicle, I don’t want to leave my denomination. I’d rather reform it from within. And if I start talking about my school in a way where I’m also not cementing myself in with the evangelical community, all the people that are that I’m in community with who are evangelical, they’re just going to think that I’m always trash talking our denomination and they’re gonna think that I’m either turning into like an apostate, a traitor, someone who’s not like fam team crew, like whatever we’re we want to use. So when we say like in group out group, I think that criticism that is constructive goes way further when you were inside of a community versus outside. So if I’m all of a sudden decided, oh, I’m Chelsea, I’m like mad at my college. I’m ex van jellicle, which maybe I will do, I don’t I don’t know, I don’t plan to, but if that happens, I’m no longer going to be in group and that means that my voice is going to carry different weight. So there are a lot of in group out group studies that came out of the civil rights movement, I’ve seen actually none that are related to the stuff that we’re talking about that is like something that I’d like to develop out someday. Um but a lot of in group out group stuff goes back to two then, but we can apply it to anything.

[0:45:23] Emily: So what do you do then, if you’re perceived as out group, but you are, you identify as in group because that would be lot of, especially the spaces I grew up in, I’m perceived as like the enemy now, the out group.

[0:45:43] Chelsea: I mean that’s kind of like the question that I’m wrestling through right now too and like, there are like, I will and there are answers to give you. Um there’s, I don’t have the study on top of my head, but there’s some, some number that has been studied where affirmations versus challenging, like you need to cement yourself in a firm, like if you and I are in a conversation and every single time you and I speak to each other, all I’m doing is challenging you. You’re not gonna want to be in community with me, I’m just gonna be like, again, threatening, I’m just gonna be threatening you all the time. So if we want to be able to speak credibly about a community, we also need to cement that we belong in that community and a personality like tone that I am currently trying, I don’t know how it will go. But something that I’m trying is I am growing into the place of not being insecure about challenging because it’s really hard to do and I’m more, I’m intentionally framing that’s growing into a place of saying other people don’t get to tell me who I am. And also if I want to be in community with them, I need to appreciate how they see me. So that means that my languages. I am absolutely a conservative Republican. I have spoken with Huckabee. I have given ted Cruz’s team tips for his presidential launch. I can, I can do these things when I say those things like you’re nodding your head with me right now as we can look at each other, I need to find those head not points whether they actually happen or not within someone’s mind. I want to critique my community. They also need to be a nodding their heads at me.

[0:47:14] Emily: Mm Yeah. You just said that really, really well thank you because uh that’s the that’s the fine line that can feel so exhausting to walk. Especially as we began practicing it. How do I like hold space for who I am while holding space simultaneously for how you see

[0:47:37] Chelsea: me? Yeah, there’s something um, I’m pulling it out because I can my my therapist, I just started seeing someone this week and I’m really, really proud of that. She framed something to me and I don’t wanna I’m going to misquote because I didn’t have like a pen and paper to write it down at the time when she said it, but it was something along the lines of identity and belonging being these two words that have a relationship with each other and I have a friend who self identifies as a democratic socialist in my mind like the furthest left you can go, she actually also went to Liberty. She’s a social worker now, she was talking to me and she framed it in a different way than I thought of it. And you can basically look at these two terms, and I’m not an expert on this, this is just what I like figure it out from some friends within the last day of talking about it, there’s there’s you can have your belonging at the expense of your identity, you can have your identity at the expense of belonging. And this keyword there of belonging is what just humanity in general, whether an organized religion or not, is seeking, and because I can assert this and I want to this friend who is very, very, very left who I love and adore she when she came on to my I had a facebook post about it and she said um just like I love you pose this question for some people belonging literally means life and death. And to me at that point, I’ve heard a lot of people from the LGBT community who because of judgment, who because of hurt, there’s also a lot of the security culture, there’s this point where belonging can also hurt and be uncomfortable. So like at what point is our identity, like the words that were holding onto the labels that we hold worth it almost, and these are all things people have to figure out for themselves. The belonging identity, I think is a is a really big part of all of this, because deep polarization, it’s basically a question of what identities are you bringing and how are you bumping into other identities and if your identity is wrapped up together with belonging, that’s messy and complicated, and people are human.

[0:49:42] Emily: Mhm. So the other community that I seem to intersect with is like, pretty constructing, I don’t know if they’re evangelical or not, but a lot of the complaints a C. R around belonging, whether it be the LGBTQ community feeling like they can’t belong or if you have a disagreement, you can’t belong. So that’s a really interesting thing to think about when we’re walking that line, like, this is what’s most important to people, so making that space for them to feel like they belong, um whether or not we agree.

[0:50:22] Chelsea: Yeah, and I’m going to touch on something political, but being mindful of like, your platform and in my voice and who might be listening the last election that we just had, I feel like it is fair to say no matter who you voted for, people didn’t feel like they belonged entirely. Mhm. And maybe that’s not everyone with a lot of people and that I think is a huge part of deep polarization, like, people keep saying headlines keep saying our country is more polarized, and then it’s over bin and then I don’t care to mention that, like an existential way. But if our country is in this much of a hurt place, that means people are not feeling heard, and again, people need to feel heard first to then listen, people are not feeling hurt, people are feeling hurt and people don’t feel like they belong. And to me this this this whole conversation you and I are having doesn’t have to be like heavy psychology words and having negotiation words and whatever, it can just be like people loving people, which christians are supposed to do anyway.

[0:51:26] Emily: Yeah. Yes. So outside of like the one on one, because that would probably be the answer you give. Like the one on one, listening loving people, how can the church, like the greater Evangelical Church do this impact the change and make people not feel like they’re outsiders for having a different lifestyle, making them feel welcome for voting for a different party?

[0:51:55] Chelsea: Um, I think when you had asked that you said evangelical doing any answer to broader questions or particularly to

[0:52:01] Emily: evangelical,

[0:52:02] Chelsea: those

[0:52:03] Emily: both maybe, yeah,

[0:52:06] Chelsea: I have an entire rant that I will not let myself go down, but that I can try to summarize quickly in my doing research on liberty. Like my college, I have questioned so many things and again, I was my class president, like I have all the things that I can say to cement myself in that community that I don’t care to spend time on right now, but I’m very deeply part of that community and also a lot of research around the moral majority. I’m gonna quick framing on that and this is my own Chelsea like paraphrasing of it. I’m actually not even gonna say this super sensitively. A whole bunch of really big televangelist white dude pastors came together in like the 70s and the 80’s and jerry Falwell, Sr who founded my college was the head of the moral majority. Like he founded it and I know like I’ve actually talked to Newt Gingrich like in person, he was old speaker of the house, like a big deal for people who know politics, a bunch of these guys and I know lots of people who are like Children of these people even came together and said, how do we make the right the party of religion? It was not like that before. And there’s a lot of other contextual things that were going on. There’s also a lot to say with like Nixon to Reagan to all of these different people, there was definitely a trajectory that was happening before then, but there was a very clear distinction, we’re all of a sudden the right was the religious party and I think that that to me coming to like what can the church do better? Maybe not framing everyone who doesn’t agree with us as being someone who is unethical, immoral and bad, right? I mean it’s kind of like a fluffy thing to say, but it’s true and like I bump spaces with the people who run this stuff and a lot of people who run this stuff are not the people who are interested in doing the stuff that you and I are talking about. So to me, we can say like what should the church be doing? And to me, the way that like my my Chelsea self wants to interpret that is like big c church, like collective communal body. And I talked to so many evangelicals who think like, I think, but no one says anything and I don’t mean that in a bad judgmental way, it’s scary and it’s hard and it is hard for me to do it and I have the personality type that wants to and it’s still hard. So in my mind, I’m gonna bring up another current event like beth and more leaving the Spc and southern baptist convention, there’s so many things about that, but in my mind, I was like, wow, is she the first woman to do that or other women going to start speaking out? Like I actually have an op ed written right now, that is addressing all of the things that I wish conservative christians, particularly evangelicals could recognize that we are not doing well and I haven’t put that out yet because it’s hard. So I think that we need to start uplifting voices, we need to start as a community as a capital C church saying, what do we think? This isn’t okay, our norm is not going in a good direction, and also I’m going to add another layer onto it. I don’t think especially for non denominational christians and particularly evangelicals, I don’t think we do church history very well, and this is something I talk a lot about with my jewish friends to bring another anecdote in. Is that a lot of nondenominational evangelical christians will come and sit down if they have an opportunity to with someone jewish and they might know about like certain types of theology and if you jewish people in a certain type of way. So a lot of us are like, oh, this is a cool opportunity when we get to talk to someone jewish and the jewish person, like in this analogy that I often uses, the christian comes and sits at a table and there’s a blank piece of paper in front of them. They’re excited to write down some notes. They’re like, cool relationship is about to happen. The jewish person walks into the room and drops a whole bunch of really heavy old old books that talk about the Inquisition that talks about all of the times throughout history that they as a people have had christians not being nice to them, and to me when we say, what can the church start doing, we need to do better church history and we need to do better uplifting of current voices when people have thoughts that are challenging.

[0:56:20] Emily: Mhm Thank you for that answer, appreciate it. We go back to the religious right and the moral majority because that hearing you talk about at this time, like all kind of clicked into place because I think it was just less than a week ago, I was thinking about the moral majority and how offensive that actually that actually is to call our opinion the moral majority. Yeah. Um can talk about that and maybe the nuance of was kind of acting like we want a christian nation, a religious nation when we don’t want that dictated. A friend of mine just said that a couple weeks ago on the podcast.

[0:57:03] Chelsea: Yeah, I’d love to hear your take so many things that you know, the first thing that jumps out in my mind is almost every single government course that I took at Liberty University and I was a government, major politics and policy. Almost every single class that I took talked about moral relativism because every class outside of this government did that. But the government classes particularly talked about american exceptionalism and I had this like, very proud, I don’t even want to say past tense, but I’ll phrase it that way for now. I have this very like, wow proud. America is an incredible place. Then the american dream and this and that, which absolutely is a narrative and then all of a sudden when I bumped into people who are like the american dream is actually really hard to pursue, like everyone should be able to and everyone is able to pursue that, but that’s, that’s something that’s hard and also like there’s a lot of stuff about american history that we don’t include in our history books and then we don’t talk about and to say that like american exceptionalism, America is a great country, I believe it is like one of the greatest countries in the world, if not the greatest country in the world and also where is the humility in our narrative of ourselves? Again, confirmation bias? Like where is there room for America to grow, Where is there room for America to have hurt people? Where is there room for America to be a place that is more inclusive, more, all of these things? And then we add on top of that, that a whole bunch of christians are trying to say America needs to be a christian nation, which is in a christian inspired nation, we have all of these things, but something hard for me that has been a personal challenges that it was framed to me that our country is great, moving on and I met a whole lot of when he said, but what if I don’t believe what you think, what if I grew up in a, in a different context. So maybe I’ll jump in with two examples, there’s a whole thing was like education like prison pipelines in the black community where the type of education and the type of classes you take math classes. For example, when you’re in middle school, predetermine the math classes you take when you’re in high school and then the way that your classes are set up for you in high school can be a determine of if you go on to do um like further education, whether it’s trades or not. And there’s also correlations and this is something new for me. But I’m starting to research it. There’s also correlations between kids who get kicked out of school. Um, there’s a word for it. What’s the word expelled? There’s a there’s a correlation between, especially for inner city people, how many times someone gets expelled can correlate to their optimism about their future. Mm So, so, so bigger picture looking back at the more majority, what’s going on and all of that stuff to me. I am looking at the Republican Party right now. And this is again, I am a Republican and a very proud Republican. I look at the leadership and I wonder like when I watched the last Republican national convention for the last election, how were guns being talked about? How is race being talked about? And then outside of just like the hyper politics? Like today I woke up this morning and I found out that yesterday, eight people died in Indianapolis out of shooting and I lived in indiana and I’m a Hoosier. So that to me is like, that’s hurtful and yet also the cognitive dissonance, like the mental separation of not being able to hold that our country is really not okay right now and then to have like a podium in a stage that doesn’t even acknowledge that one of the things that I teach a lot when I when I do civil discourse training that the tactical skills, skills of how to have these conversations is I always teach, you do not ignore someone expressing pain, you don’t have to agree with them. You don’t even have to affirm them. But you can say like, wow, I can’t imagine what that must have been like, that is a neutral statement and I feel like the church, the Republican Party, the moral majority, all of these types of groups, when they say if you don’t think like us, you don’t belong. Well, what do we do when we are a country that is a democratic country that is not forcing religion on people, we we pride ourselves in being a country that is here for religious liberty. And yet what does it mean when someone has a religious liberty, that doesn’t agree with us? So to me like this is where all of this depressurization stuff comes back together because we are not going to have a healthy democracy if we don’t have room for people to be able to disagree respectfully. That was a whole tangent don’t need to pull anything back.

[1:01:29] Emily: I think what I want to pull in is just how the, it’s kind of the same conversation within the Republican Party and the church that we are uncomfortable with the questions and we need to get real comfortable with the questions. Be secure in our identity, be secure in our beliefs enough to say, hey, why do you believe what you believe? Um how can I love you better? What words am I saying? That might hurt you without getting? Um, it’s a word not triggered but sensitive. Yeah. About somebody else saying, hey, that was hurtful.

[1:02:16] Chelsea: Yeah. And there’s this whole thing. Um one of my friends that I do a lot of this training with, he has a whole thing. He calls it the vicious cycle. I don’t have it exactly memorized off the top of my head, but it starts with the second that someone has challenged, we become self absorbed and become defensive and that is actually something that is a physiological trait that we can feel inside of our bodies when we start to get a little stressed out, when we start to feel a little bit sweaty when we’re like, oh my gosh, like that, that knee jerk reaction when we lean away, that is a moment, we’re feeling challenged and whenever we are in a conflict point and a quote that I love to throw in whenever I can is that I believe that conflict is often not about irreconcilable differences again, like I can sit down and actually have a civilized conversation with the pro choice or as a pro lifer conflict is often not about irreconcilable differences. It’s about our ability to actually speak about those differences if we can actually talk about it. That’s what our country is doing right now. Our country doesn’t want to talk to each other, right? And that is not an okay place to begin. That’s not an okay place for the church, not okay like this in the country and something that you had said to this is kind of a hot take. And I’m recognizing that I’m saying and I mean no like ill will in it. There is a very particular because I talked about the radicalization studying cults. There is a particular thing with cult mentality when you are not allowed to question and challenge And any space now that I find myself in that tells me that I cannot question and challenge. I don’t want to be in that space.

[1:03:46] Emily: Mm hmm at all. Just this week I said to my husband, it’s taken me a while to record or it took me a while to be able to say what I grew up in. Many people would describe as a cult and I know that not everyone can identify with that and that’s fine. But what’s kind of been shocking is listening to others coming out of non denominational churches and other evangelical spaces that our stories are so similar. This is not isolated.

[1:04:21] Chelsea: That’s the thing that that where I said before that, like how the church can can heal and move forward, like uplifting those voices. One of the things that I didn’t really expect, but that I now have seen with my instagram is because I run a forum for the people that are listening where I’ll pitch a question on my instagram story, I almost do nothing in the grid itself. People will then reply back to me, I black out their names and share so there’s almost an anonymous conversation that is going on. And one of the things that I have seen is women tell me that because of purity, culture, they’re not able to sleep with their husbands. Like there’s a public, there’s a whole definitional thing. I’m not gonna get into that just for the graphic nature, but there’s something called the pelvic floor or something something and women are not able to relax physically to be able to be intimate with their husbands because there is this like, anxiety around intimacy. So that’s like a very particular like thing the church could work on. And I think that’s something where like what to what you’re saying, there’s a lot of examples around things that like a lot of us are feeling really hurt by and the thing that is frustrating to me to to add another layer on to this is that we know there’s so many people who feel this way, and people are still struggling with speaking up, and what does that say about our own system that we’re in, where we can’t speak up, and yet when we do speak, it’s almost never a singular experience. And that to me means there’s a collective issue that is not being allowed to be recognized as not being taken seriously. And then that’s a point to me, and, like, I have a great individual relationship with God, I feel like I do not have a great relationship with institutionalized religion, and that is one of my big issues with the Evangelical church right now, is there is almost no humility in it.

[1:06:13] Emily: Mhm. That’s really interesting. You bring up that specific example about intimacy. I just um as of recording this this week, I really said interview with Sheila Ray Gregoire, and she’s talking about that. It is so frustrating to me that we can’t acknowledge issues, like, I don’t even get that,

[1:06:35] Chelsea: that’s the thing. But if we but to our own point of confirmation by something like spin the table on us. So, when you say it’s so frustrating that we can’t even talk about this stuff well, to talk about this stuff is to threaten someone because we’re gonna throw quality and that’s the thing, and this is going to sound a little feminist e I still want to say it. There’s a lot of conversations that I have been in the last few days where people are saying, okay, well what what does culture teach women about how they show up and what does culture teach men about? Like how they like to hold space? Like so to be more pointed, a lot of people will say, and I’m actually starting to get on this train right now, that women are conditioned two give up space and to listen, whereas men are conditioned to take up space and to speak. So one of the things that I do whenever I’m in professional settings again, I co founded a company I’ve had high titles like all of those things when I am in rooms, something that I always am intentional about doing is finding the person who has not yet spoken and saying like, hey, hey, I just want to ask like, if you have a thought like that, that is inclusive. And I think that that to me is like when when a lot of people from the conservative christian backgrounds here like diversity, we hear equity, we hear like inclusion that can feel super lefty and I understand why like those words in and of themselves are not lefty words and they are concepts that are important. And there could be a conversation about what christians think about inclusion and about equity and about diversity and diversity could even mean women sitting at a table like the ghastly thought, and if a woman finally sat at a table where decisions were being made, maybe she would bring up the security culture and the guys couldn’t ignore it?

[1:08:20] Emily: Sure. Yeah. I think we just covered a lot to think

[1:08:24] Chelsea: about. You keep going for forever. And also maybe we shouldn’t. I don’t know.

[1:08:33] Emily: I would love to know if you have anything else that’s on your mind, that you want to take a a thread together or you have a final thought. Um I think we’ve given a lot of action steps and practical things too. But what do you think?

[1:08:49] Chelsea: Um off top of my head, I would like to give a quick summary because again, I like things to be digestible for people. We use a lot of psychology words and we use a lot of sociology words and we talked a little bit about like physio, we talked about a lot of things. Everything comes down to the point or to the to the fact that the reality, I’m gonna walk out of my house tomorrow later today. And so are you there are going to be people outside of our house and we cannot control what is in the mind of those people. And if we want to have a democratic country, we have to respect difference, which puts the pressure on us to be able to have those conversations. I can’t just be a finger wiggle again saying everyone else needs to be better. This is something individually that all of us can work on. And also, collectively, there’s a lot to um but that’s what I would boil all of this depressurization down to. It’s like, are you as an individual able to self monitor enough to have a conversation with someone that prioritizes their well being as long as you’re safe and secure and all that. Um that’s kind of my summary and then I thought just because I want to be creative and fun, I don’t have anything. But the first thing that comes to mind right now is I just, I think exploration is beautiful and I think that I have been in a lot of spaces that have told me exploration is not okay, so if I confirm to anybody who is listening from any background at all, it is a good thing to explore.

[1:10:19] Emily: Thank you. Where can people follow you? Where do you want to clubhouse instagram?

[1:10:25] Chelsea: Yeah. Um my instagram is at Chelsea, C H E L. S andrews and then it’s also my clubhouse and those are honestly the two that I’m the most active on a kind of lockdown, my facebook and I only do twitter, So let’s be good.

[1:10:38] Emily: Thank you, awesome. Thank you for the work that you’re doing. You make a difference.

[1:10:42] Chelsea: Really. Your, so, so that’s nice and thank you and all sort of flip it back, which is the cheesy away that all the podcasts and talking about how people don’t speak up and you’re someone who’s speaking up so I can be the person that comes on here and says interesting things. But you’re the one who is facilitating a platform. You’re the one who has people that follow in trust you. And I think that is really beautiful and I encourage you to keep doing what you’re doing.

[1:11:04] Emily: Thank you. We’ll do.