Ep. 364 They Were Her Property by Stephanie E. Jones-Rogers — The Stacks Book Club (Tembe Denton-Hurst)

Written By Megan Caballero

It’s The Stacks Book Club Day, and we’re discussing They Were Her Property: White Women as Slave Owners in the American South by Stephanie E. Jones-Rogers with returning guest Tembe Denton-Hurst. We highlight the moments in the book that really stood out to us, from the brutality to the pervasiveness of slavery, and consider how white women have been protected by—and complicit in—the building of the American economy. We also reflect on the role of academic books and how we engage with them as readers.

There are spoilers on this episode.

Be sure to listen to the end of today’s episode to find out what our April book club pick will be.

 
 

Everything we talk about on today’s episode can be found below in the show notes and on Bookshop.org and Amazon.

To support The Stacks and find out more from this week’s sponsors, click here.

Connect with Tembe: Instagram | Website | Twitter
Connect with The Stacks: Instagram | Twitter | Shop | Patreon | Goodreads | Substack | Subscribe

To contribute to The Stacks, join The Stacks Pack, and get exclusive perks, check out our Patreon page. If you prefer to support the show with a one time contribution go to paypal.me/thestackspod.

The Stacks participates in affiliate programs. We receive a small commission when products are purchased through links on this website.

TRANSCRIPT
*Due to the nature of podcast advertising, these timestamps are not 100% accurate and will vary.

0:00

There's just, like, some vivid imagery in here where I was like, I will never forget this. I think that was really difficult about this particular book is they continue to get the best edit that's continuous. And I don't think that it's about vilification, but I think it's about lifting the veil and understanding that everybody has autonomy, regardless of how the society seems to be set up from the outside, that autonomy is very much there, very much within the grasp. I'm like, You guys would not be participating in this if it did not benefit you.

0:38

Welcome to the stacks, a podcast about books and the people who read them. I'm your host, Traci Thomas, and today is the stacks book club day this month we are discussing they were her property white women as slave owners in the American South. By Stephanie e Jones Rogers, with our returning guest author and journalist Tembe Denton-Hurst. this groundbreaking work of history challenges the long standing narrative that white women were passive bystanders to slavery, revealing the ways they actively participated in and profited from the institution. Tembe and I talk about the economics of all of this, the violence, the cruelty and the idea of slave mastery. Be sure to listen to the end of today's episode to find out what our April book club pick will be everything we talk about on each episode of the stacks can be found in the link in the show notes. If you love this podcast and you want inside access to it, there are two great ways to do that. You can go to patreon.com/thestacks to join our readerly community and or you can go to Traci Thomas dot sub stack.com to subscribe to my newsletter. Both of these places get you inside access, and they help me make this podcast every single week. Okay, now it's time for my conversation with Tembe Denton-Hurst about they were her property by Stephanie e Jones Rogers.

All right, everybody, it is the stacks book club day. I am joined again by the wonderful temby Denton. Hearst, temby, welcome back to the stacks.

2:07

Hi. Thank you for having me times two. Yes.

2:11

Thank you for coming back. Thanks for showing up for the second time and not standing me up. We are reading this month. They were her property white women as slave owners in the American South, by Stephanie e Jones, Rogers, I will say this up front to people. There's no spoilers here, because this is a history book, but we are going to talk about the book in detail. So if you didn't read it and you are worried about being spoiled about the 1830s 40s and post slavery days, go ahead and pause, but otherwise, let's, let's dive right in tambi. We always sort of start in the same place for Book Club, which is generally, overall, what did you think of the book? I

2:50

liked it a lot. I think that in some ways, and this is no shade to Stephanie, I think that she just was consistently reinforcing the same ideas throughout the throughout the book. So I will say that, not that it's repetitive, but it's, it's, it's, and it's not even dense, but it is just kind of a lot of her saying, here is my point in the first paragraph, and I'm going to continue to show you various instances of when this happened to back up and like, refute the scholarship that kind of speaks to the contrary. Beyond that, though I really liked it, I think it's, it's a very unflinching kind of book that does not pull back and shy away from the realities of what was going on at that time. And I think that it's something that people should be reading, or at least, at the very minimum, just be aware of, like, I'm like, even just read the intro, you know, I will say, I think in the point of it being, I don't like to use the word repetitive, but just the point that she makes in the beginning is the is a through line throughout the book. So I think that even knowing the through line, understanding the through line, would be helpful if someone didn't want to tackle the whole

3:59

thing, yeah, I think I agree about about that. So overall, I mean, I think this is, like, kind of a wow of a book, as far as, like the research and the detail of what, what Stephanie e Jones, Rogers like, puts on the page, she is digging deep. She is going to the archive. She is finding sources. And to me, it is a big wow. I do think it's a touch repetitive, but I want to talk about why that is. I think that's where we should probably start after this little bit. I think that, like, my big takeaway is just like, we really just don't know our history. We're not taught it. And by we, I mean broadly American citizens. I don't mean like, I know there are people who know this information. I know there are people who've had teachers who have taught them and all of that. But like, broadly, the fact that this book exists and she's refuting all these other scholars is just like, wow. So we were just teaching, and like, academics were just researching a history that maybe. Just wasn't what happened. And I think that's really crazy. And also just like how regular the institution of slavery was, like how every day the shit was was, I know that right, like, I know that's what society was, but reading about it really shook something in me of just like every the every day mundanity, of owning other humans who were the rock and center of the economy is just like felt crazy to me, absolutely. I

5:36

think what I found really interesting too, was that she, what I think she really gets at, and I really liked was that she by presenting the kind of opposite, not the opposite the preceding scholarship that kind of tried, tries to conceal the role of white women in the south, and they're, it's like the infantilization is always happening in this kind of presumed innocence, or crafting innocence is something that's happening at every single level, and so I do think it's helpful, because I think that reading this hopefully would make people more critical of the content that they're consuming, even outside the context of this book, and not just relying on certain narratives to define the way that they perceive A person's actions. I think I wrote in, like, I have so many notes in here. And one of the thing that I kept writing was just like, Oh, wow. Like, the Innocence Project has been going on for a very long time, like this idea of and like these kind of the patriarchal bias, which I think in works two ways, like, I think yes, obviously on the bigger in, like, a bigger sense. And the way that we talk about it most often is the way that the patriarchy kind of restricts and delays progress for women and, like curtails a lot of their ambition and all of those things. But then I think we talk about less often more now, but I think we talk about less often is the way that it protects and continues to refuse to hold accountable an entire group of people who are actively benefiting. And I think when we talk about, you know, we talk about the election and like, how white women broke for Trump, like, in this massive number and people, I don't think, I think black women were not necessarily surprised. We're like, we know that this will happen again. But I think that there were, like, a lot of white women, liberal white women, who were like, I'm so perplexed. And I think you read things like, you know they were her property, and you understand that these things like, not only are these women aware and intelligent, they understand that these institutions are set up to protect them, regardless of how it has to look outside to other people. Because so much of the book is about book is about the interior life of these slave owning women, and how even when their power kind of and there were times when the power was very public and people were aware, which I think is part of the case that she's making. But there were also instances that she pointed out where the power was like, a little bit more hidden, or she was using like various representatives in order to, like, do her business more public facing, but ultimately she was the one pulling the strings behind closed doors, or, you know, she had all of this interior power within the home. And so I think it really does blow open and refute that notion of, you know, like, well, like white women were too genteel, and like, We're just there, and whatever cruelty was happening was, like, not really, you know, doled out by them, or, you know, that kind of, right, that narrative, or this, this just kind of like they were innocent. And I think that this book really makes the case in the opposite direction, in a very compelling way. And I think should, I think it's required reading, if for only that, like, just for people to understand that like it it doesn't. It's not just complicity by way of silence or proximity. It's also participation.

8:52

Yeah, I think to your point. I mean, you made some really great points. One of the things is, like, this book really shows how systemic this is like in the sense that it's part of the system. The system has a caveat for white women to be able to be abusive masters mistresses, and also to have the cover of being a docile, gentle woman. And I think one of the sort of tricks of white American patriarchy is that it does carve out a space for women to perpetuate it and still be able to have like plausible deniability, because it is essential to the furthering of the patriarchy, right? Because women have to have white babies, and if you don't have those people on board with your system, you don't have new little patriarch monsters running around, right like if the white women decide we're not having babies, we're not continuing this. We're not teaching our children this, the system falls apart. It is contingent on. Women in the same way that slavery, as we find out throughout this book, and as we know, is contingent on the bodies of black women and their ability to have children. But the other thing that you brought up, that I think is really interesting and we should definitely talk about, is the inside outside of all of this, the what happens behind closed doors, versus what what is allowed to be seen outside, including what history is allowed to be continued to be taught, as opposed to what history is, what things are lost to history, what things we couldn't find. You know, we think this. We think that, and Stephanie is like, no bitch. I got, I got the quote for this, like this happened. This is what they said. But before we get into that. I want to talk about the academia of all of this, because as we were reading this with the stacks pack on Discord, there was a lot of conversation about the repetition in the book and how she would make a point six times, when maybe she only had to make the point two times. And I thought a lot about this. I also reached out to my sister, who is a professor of Ethnic Studies at Tufts, and I asked her some questions, because I wanted to make sure that what I'm about to say was correct and fair to Stephanie e Jones Rogers and her work. But one of the jobs of academic writing is that you have to further some sort of point. You have to have a point, and your work is beholden to a certain amount of citing and evidence. And I guess this is especially true for historians, and they have to have a burden of proof from the archive that is has to stand up to peer review so other experts have to read your work and feel convinced that your arguments are supported by actual evidence. It can't just be like I extrapolated this. It has to be like. They said this. They said that. I mean, they can extrapolate a little bit, but there is, like, a real requirement that you cite your work. And one of the things that my sister said, that I thought was really interesting, is that oftentimes historians now, who are telling the stories of oppressed people feel an extra responsibility to tell their stories in detail because their stories had been suppressed. And Stephanie Jones Rogers talks about that in the introduction about her choice to use the conversations that formerly enslaved people had as they were cat like cataloging and being interviewed throughout the 1930s and and I think that that point is really important to what she's doing in the book, that she's really saying, Okay, I've made my point, but I need to make sure that the people who were making this point in real time, who have been overlooked by historian X, Y and Z, that they also get their chance to make their point, which can feel maybe a little bit repetitive, but I think as far as like a history text, it's important because this book goes into some sort of archive, it becomes the next generation of history. And so I think like reading this book, just as like a person reading the book, and not thinking about the book as like a document for future historians to look at. It's doing two different things. And I think it's important sort of to just, like, call that, just to bring that forward for readers.

13:10

Absolutely, I think people going into it should definitely be aware that it's an academic text. And, like, I got my masters in English, and so I'm, like, very used to reading kind of academic stuff, but usually in the English crit, like, space and so there is a lot more extrapolation in that environment. Because, yeah, we're gonna unpack beloved and, like, think about, what if a signifier, like, what does this signify? What does that signify? It? It'll be like, you know, you know, I love an academic title, because it'll be like, you know, for example, like with Toni Morrison's playing in the dark whiteness in the literary imagination, like that is, it's, I think it's like academic light, like, it's fairly accessible, but I think that that's like, a perfect example of a literary criticism text that could be used, like, in an academic setting for someone to understand, like, how things, how things are operating on the textual level. And even in there, like she's a lot freer with just she said, I'm gonna make my point one time, and I'm gonna say nothing else, but to your point, like, what Stephanie e Jones Rogers has to do, like you said, is essentially provide, not just make her argument, but also create, like, a bibliography for future people who would like to do deeper research or would like to expand this conversation, because there's A lot of ways that this conversation could have went. Conversation could have went. It could have, you know, you could be talking about, like, an antebellum time. You could be talking about, you like, if someone wanted to write about, like, white women and the way that they operated, post, like post the end like post, the Emancipation Proclamation, they could start here. Like, every chapter heading that she has could be its own. Jump off specialized research paper for a young historian, or just someone who was interested in the field that wanted to have, like, go deeper, think bigger, or just be more, not even go bigger, but just like, go deeper in the one specific section, yeah, yeah. Or use it as an opportunity, like she brings up so many names like you, there's a lot of stories that you could go investigate if you. Wanted to so, yeah, I I am. I'm, actually, I'm pro the fact that she was very repetitive, because it really drives the point home. But I just think for the average reader, it's like, I can so I'm like,

15:13

I understand, yeah. People were like, if I repetitive, I mean, not only does it drive the point home, but one of her big points is that this was common, so to make that point, she has to have 10 citations, not just two, because then you get like, oh, there's only two points. The other thing that I wanted to bring forward that Sarah, my sister, mentioned, was that this is Stephanie's first book, and so she was a tenure track and she's now an associate professor. So this book, also her career hinged on this book. To get her tenure, she had to write this book and had to be received by her peers in a certain way. And so there might also have been a sense of like, I'm going to prove the shit out of this so that I can get that job security in a way that maybe her second or third book, if she continues to publish in academic spaces, as opposed to traditional publishing, whatever trade publishing might might read differently, but that this first book is a huge thing for academics to get under their belt in order to make sure that they get tenure and have that job security. So in addition to, like, wanting the book to be good, she also had a lot of other pressures, like going into it that might have been like, okay, let's put that citation there. Like, I don't want Mr. Tenure track guy to tell me this or that. And then the other piece of the academic that is less, less of about the repetition, but more I was obsessed with how many people she named. And was like, you might think this As historian X, Y, Z, X, Y, Z did, but actually, that person was wrong. You know, let me tell you why. She was just like, shade, shade, shade, shade, shade. I love it here. I think also

16:48

it's important to note that she's not like a historical she doesn't like really engage in, like, historical fabulation, which is the process of kind of weaving in storytelling. I mean, she does a little bit of storytelling to kind of set the scene, but like, doesn't kind of evolve the narrative, not like a writer like Taya miles, who's brilliant and just incredible. But like, you read like, Taya Miles has that one book, I think it's Taya miles, correct me if I'm wrong, but she has that one book about, like, the knapsack that is like, where, like the artifact that she, like, kind of imagines worlds around the artifact. And so it's like, it's just like a different way of thinking about history that, yeah, like, this is very much like, you could probably line it up next to all of the documents and then have, yes, like, she's not, like, imagining anything in this. She's not get she's not sensing, like, she's not giving voice to anybody. She's like, No, I'm gonna let them say it, and you guys do with that information, which will kind of thing. So, yeah, yeah, I think that, like, it's high amounts, for example. I think she's, she, her work is very crossover friendly, because it's, yeah, you know, it is that kind of thing, whereas this is very academic, and I think it's good if you want to debate somebody on a Friday night, right? And be like, and I can actually point to this, and that's exact line and that and that and that, I liked it

18:02

exactly. Yeah, I did too. Okay, so let's I just wanted to make sure we did that pre talking about the rest of the book, because I wanted to make sure that people's like concerns or questions around the style were addressed. Now I want to talk about this idea of mastery. I To me this was like a real mind blowing word situation. I had never thought about a slave master or mistress as the master of anything like I thought of like the word Master is like the person who's in charge on the plantation, but not mastery like that they like, it was a talent or the art, yes, that it was a skill and a talent and something that you could improve. And the idea that there's, like, pamphlets and books of being like, do this magazine that and magazine like a junior, like they had, like a junior version of it. It's like Cosmo slave, Mistress. I'm like, wait, what? But like the idea, I mean, I think maybe if you had asked me, I would have been like, yes, some slave masters were better than others at the job of owning humans and running a plantation, but the idea that like these people, as abhorrent As it is, were masterful in their ability to abuse and exploit human labor to run a business like all like these pieces of it, that was really like perspective changing for me. Yeah, and like that. There could have been, as considered by the other people of the time, a skill to this, that some people are like, cut out for the job, and some people aren't or like and that you that you train your children from a young age to be ready to do this work, I don't know, like that shifted something in me.

19:58

Yeah, I think it's interesting. Thing, I think I kind of had a little bit of a different thing going in, because I understood especially, okay, so what? Because I read playing in the dark, whiteness in the literary imagination. One of the things that Tony talks about, Morrison talks about in that book, is how, like these Manifest Destiny style novels that exist. And there's this one, I can't remember what it was called, but she was talking about how he was, like, you know, he went to England, like, did all this stuff. Like, was very, like, learned and whatever. Like, basically, was like a gentleman, but never really felt like a real gentleman, or, like, really, like, nobility, until he came to the south, owned slave, started plantation, and, like, then he really felt like he was civilized, or he was like, better. And so because of that, I was like, Yeah, I mean, there had to be an entire economy around this, or this idea of like, there is a class and status thing. One, with being land owning. Two, with the amount of like, you know, slaves you own. Because I think in our minds, as perverse as this sounds, the only people that we they kind of venerate the people who own the biggest plantations, in a way, yeah, like, even if they try to pretend that it's like, not, they're not, like, proud of it. Like, these are the things that get turned into historical sites. Like, these are places of, like, immense wealth, and I think they're similar to having a kingdom. Or, like, you know, it's like, to me, like slavery in the South feels like the most resemble, like, resembles most closely these, like mini fiefdoms or like these mini kingdoms, I don't know. I think people kind of frame the slave owners in their minds, especially now, as this kind of, like, where people, the way people look at the south, and, like, look down at the south, is like, backwards, or whatever it is. Like, this was the economic engine of America, of the country, and so because of that, I'm like, yeah, these people. I'm like, I'm not surprised that they had a whole entire culture around, right? Like, right, the business, because we, I mean, it's like the Wall Street Journal, you know, like, you know, we have all these, like, they make, they make plunder and all this stuff sexy. Like, yeah, you know. So like, I'm not shocked, because I'm like, that's kind of just like, it feels like a just like an earlier version of certain things that we have now. I mean, like, yeah. And like, for example, like, I'm a meat eater, for sure, but like, there's people who would look at like, animal husbandry and the various ways around animal husbandry. And they're like, I don't like slaughterhouses. I prefer like, this grass finished cow, but like, the Cow dies regardless, right? Like, right, right, right. And so I think it's kind of and I don't think that they're exactly comparative, because obviously humans versus animals and things like that, but I just think that, like, there is an entire like, there always are, I think not only rituals, but like culture around

22:45

right? Well, they had to build an entire economy around the thing, yeah, like, not like a whole or a entire industry around the economy or whatever. Like, there's like a tertiary economy, yeah, like, you could be employed in the world of slavery, but like, you're, you're a slave, you're beat slavery journalism or whatever, right? Like you don't necessarily, I mean, you don't have to own anybody. You don't have to be an overseer. You could just be the guy or gal who finds hot tips on how to what, nurse or whatever. And like, I think, I think, like, that piece of it was shocking to me, but also just I had never thought about the word master as implying that you could be masterful at the job, if that makes sense. Like I just hadn't thought of that second meaning of master. It just was like Master is what they call people who own slaves. I don't know why. I'd never thought of that, like it feels so obvious to me now, but her talking about not the mastery of the whole thing was a real like, mind fuck, because I just was like, right, of course. And they would talk at the dinner table about, Oh, I heard this guy's doing this thing with his with his slaves, like, I gotta do that? Or, like, no, they're fucking up over there. They're not doing this. Or, like, what? Like, the whole, I don't know. I mean,

24:07

even the people who felt, I think what's interesting is like, and it really makes me think about like, liberalism, people who are like, Oh, I just don't, I don't want to, like, don't be beat. Don't be horrible to the slaves. It was not abolish slavery. It's just be nice to them. Do you know what I mean? Like, it's like, this weird, like, and I guess for me, I'm always like, but it's just the same conclusion, either you're for it or you're against it. I'm really, I'm one of those people where I'm like, you're either an imperialist or you're not. You're either kind of like, right? You know, you're either a fascist or you're not. Like, it's not like you can't do like, friendly Fascism is there's no grade scale. There's no yeah. Like there's Yeah. Some of these, some of these things are not, like, morally gray, you know. And I think that, like, yeah, like, so that's what I'm saying, like, and we can look at slavery and think, like, that's not a morally gray thing, like, slavery is bad. But there was a lot. There was a time not that long ago, and there's times right now, like, if you talk to people about prison labor, they're like,

24:54

right? You know, it was committed a crime in the early 2000s prison

24:58

labor was not objective. That was the way that people made their money. You know what I mean? Like, right, right. Talk about, like, firefighters who are prisoners and like, you know, they do, like, feel good stories on them, but, like, but then they can't get jobs. When they come out of job, it's very it's one of those things where it's like, you're either 40 or against it. Like, what are we what are we doing? Yeah,

25:16

and I think, like, she makes the point in this book of even, she's like, even the most, like benevolent slave owners. It wasn't about the people. It was always about the economics of it. It was like, you know, she has the one woman who the husband, used the cow hide to to whip the enslaved people, and she used the nettle whip because the nettle whip didn't leave scars. So when she went to sell people, they wouldn't have scars on them. And it's like, oh, maybe this is the nicer way. Like she was so nice, she used the nettle whip, but babe, she was always worried about the check. It was never about how it felt on your body. It was always about how she's gonna resell you, how she's gonna turn a profit. And I think, like the piece of the benevolent slave owner, or, like, the nice people who didn't hit or whatever. Is oftentimes like it stops at the punishment, or it stops at the violence. But I think this book was one of the first times that it ever connected, for me that it was never about that piece of it. It was never about being nice or not. It was always about the check at the end, absolutely. And I think she draws that point really well throughout the book.

26:24

I mean, I think also the nettle whip of it all, like, I mean, to that point, like the nettle whip, it would, it would burrow deeper into people's skin, and then it would sing. And so it was secretive in a way, like the pain was the pain exacerbated over time, like it got exponentially more painful the more they tried to treat it. And I think that that speaks that, to me, was like, one of the most powerful metaphors in the book of like, the difference between brutality as exhibited by men and brutality as exhibited by women. It's that it's the like, it's insidious and it's painful and it's deep, but it's like, but it's hidden. It's hidden. You know what I mean? And I mean, for me, it really so I don't know if you've ever been to the African American Museum in DC, yes, I have, but I think it blew my mind, and we were on the bottom floor. I mean, the whole thing was just a lot, but we were on the bottom floor, and they have, like, a little they had, like, in the case, like a white woman's whip, like the Mistresses whip, and it was like, tinier, and it was, like, just smaller. And they were like, This was always like, really pain, like, it was a, like, a kind of a more painful whip, in a sense, but she would, like, keep it on her and, like, hold it at her hip, like, for any kind of, like infractions, like throughout the day or whatever. And so to me, I was like, oh, you know what I mean, I was just very like, yeah, got you heard, you understand, you know, like, yeah, either they're working in tandem or she's working alone. Like it wasn't. But I was like, No one gets absolved. No one gets absolved. And I'm even if it doesn't look to be something I think, and I mean, if we look at now thinking about, like, the ballerina farm of it all, and people are like, save her. I'm like, she does not want to be saved. She's fine. Don't save her. She don't want to be saved? No, like she did call new not only is she not saved, like, she will go to the ballot box and make sure that you will be subjugated, like, you know, yeah, I think that, like she's

28:10

not trying to save you, that's her, damn sure. No, the power is, in a lot of ways, the most important thing internally, inside, but the performance is the thing that allows the power to exist. So the outside performance of what it looks like, what other people see, is as important as the power itself, because without it, you can't have the power like if people knew what happened inside, if people knew who was doing what it gets the whole thing gets blown up, right? That's like when she talks about the like doctrine of coverture, where women, technically, legally, they don't have any power. Legally, they belong to their husbands. Legally, they're not their own person. But then internally, we find out that the power structure is like, No, babe, I have a an anti nuptial. I loved the anti Nup. She said, No, baby, I have this first. This is mine. This works under the law. I don't care what the coverture shit says. That's fine. Like we can pretend like I'm the Mrs. But these are my humans that I own, that were given to me at birth, on my when I got my period at my wedding, just because and like that, the performance of white woman ness is can be at odds with the with the actual interior power of white womanness is. I mean, it's scary. I think

29:36

what was interesting too about the COVID tour thing is that there were provisions and exclusion specifically for slavery, which I think speaks to the way, like white women were not really going to bat over land, you know, like that really wasn't the thing. It was really just, it was really more so the currency was human people. The currency was people. They were her property, so to speak. Right? And with that in mind, I think it really speaks volumes about how intimate that violence has always been, because they've always been human beings. And I think that as much as even in the book, where they're kind of talk like, you know, they have the little like snippets of people's correspondence with one another, like even in the attempts to kind of separate themselves from a in create hierarchy. They're aware that these are people. They're aware that, like, you know it's not, it's not confusion, like everybody's everybody knows what's happening. Like, it's at at best, at my most generous, a willful ignorance

30:38

and waiting to hear you at your most generous.

30:41

It's a will for will for ignorance, and at worst, it's a intentional performance of, you know, this psychological separation, that kind of It must take a lot of mental energy, I'll say that, to pretend that you don't own human beings. But I think it's really, I don't know. I think there's something very intimate about the violence.

31:07

Yeah. I mean, I think the mental gymnastics of this whole thing become there were moments in the book where I was like, like, do you remember the quote the woman had where she was like, well, there's always going to be a subservient race, and if we were this observing race, like, I would be fine, like, I'd be totally fine if people own me and did to me what I do. Like, would you like? Let's, let's try it out. Megan, let's see. No. I mean,

31:32

I think there's always, I think the idea that, like, slavery is inevitable. I mean, we've seen that ideology kind of just creep and exists through the generations. This idea that somebody has to be the winner and let it not be and like, it has to be us. It has to be you. Like, if you're very Ricky Bobby very, if you're not first, you're last. Like, yeah. And this kind of totalizing, there's no gradation. Someone has to be dominated. We know who should be dominated. All of this language, you see the the most expressive version of that in this book. And then you also see just how honestly at odds that thinking is with how people live in every day. Like I think we think about slavery, that era, and think that it I don't know it all feels very flattened into one, and because we weren't around, I think that's part of it. And obviously the brutality was there, and, like, consistent, but it's like, like you said, people live normal lives around the brutality. It was normal. It was normal for them, and so they probably passed judgment upon people who were killing their slaves. But that wouldn't necessarily stop them from spending time with them that wouldn't stop them from breaking bread with those people. That wouldn't stop that. You know, they weren't shunned by the community for that, right?

32:48

I think like the to the point of like the punishment, I guess, like, one of the things that this book, like it makes hard for me, is, on one hand, I fully understand how we got here and where we are now, and on the other hand, I'm just like, so we really just said White women can do whatever the fuck they want, and we're gonna say that they're lovely, demure, kind people, you know, like, they just got, like, the best edit ever in the history of human beings, yeah, like,

33:14

because that's the thing. It's like, that's the contract. And I think that we have, I think as black women and as black people in general, we have to stop thinking that we factor in at all, because, again, it's always been a drama of the domestic sphere, and everybody else who is not within the domestic sphere, everybody who's not human, aka non white people, they don't really factor in To they're not consequential. So like, the slave dies, that's loss of wealth. That's not like, oh, a human being is gone. If the husband dies, then a person died. You know what I mean, like, and so it's like, of course, they get the best edit, because the subject, like them being equals is negative for the man, like, you know, for maintaining the patriarchal structure, for maintaining that, but, like, that's really just between them, like they have always been in fighting that has very little to do with the rest of us. And so I think that's why, like we saw, like with the feminist movements, it only gets to a certain point, and then it's like, oh, well, you just extracted the labor from black women and, like, black feminists, and use them for your aims, and then eventually abandon them, or we see the I will cut my arm off before I let the nigger vote. Like we see all of that stuff, because it's like, it's not about us, even it's always about the only, like, it's like, a it's an infighting, like it's not really so for me, I'm always just like, I never really see myself as, like, being in deep alignment with like, people. I'm like, I can't trust that you are not low key. You got the best edit in history, and you're not even right, you like, play into that still, and you're

34:47

Yeah, and you're not even trying to change it. You're just like, No, literally. It's

34:51

like, the white women tears thing. It's all of that stuff, of like, now I'm crying about, you know, like all of these, it's like, we it's all a learned. It's all. Learned, and it's also right

35:00

between them. Yeah, yeah. Wait, let's take a quick break, because I want to, I want to stay on this point. Okay, we're back. The something that you were saying that I just like, is connecting dots in my brain is also like this, as you were saying before, like, this is all about them, it's nothing to do with the rest of us, and also how it's like a learned thing. And in this book, she talks, in the early chapters, like about how it's learned, and the ways that, you know, enslaved people had to say master or sir or miss to like a three year old child or that that someone could just sell you away from your whole family to get a wedding dress like that. You are taught from an early age that that if you're a white person, those people are here in service of your life, and if you're a black person, that you are, you are not a human. You are a chip for a dress you are. You are here to to make me feel good about my three year old being master or whatever. And like, I don't know, those are some of that early stuff, of like, how it was done, how you build a system like this, and how you perpetuate it through generations. I mean the passing of enslaved people from generation of generation of generation of a family, different households. Like we read, husband, slave master, what master slave husband, wife. And they taught that's like a big piece of the story is like Ellen craft, she belongs to one, to the dad, but lives with the daughter, and then to the husband and the uncle and uncle and this and that. And it also happens with Frederick Douglas, like he's passed around throughout a family when he's enslaved, like brother in law and this and that, but like that, that there are women who belonged to the the mother, then the daughter, then the grandchild, all in their lifetime, and were passed down at weddings and stuff like, I mean, I mean, like,

37:05

there's so many ways that they, like, there has been a way to civilize, like, kind of what, like, whitewash and gussy up to brutality. I mean, having a ceremony for the slaves to be passed on is quite literally insane.

37:18

Yeah, it's and, like, the wedding where it was like, 50 and 50, yeah. I was like, This is crazy. I was like, I was like, what was the fucking dowry? I mean, she and at the end of the book, she gives $1 value of, like, someone said, I just bought this. I just bought this right before that, like, right before the Civil War. And the woman's like, I just bought this person for $1,200 and she says that that person in today, that in today's money, would be $36,000 you're telling me you have $36,000 times 50 times two for

37:51

your wedding present. But also it's like, I mean, to that point, though $36,000 one time, you never have to make it again, especially if you have like, you know, got to pay that again and then, like, the labor then belongs to you forever and ever and ever. Like, the extraction of that labor. I mean, also just, I don't know, I kept drawing so many modern parallels, like, I was, like, thinking about the black best friend and like, how she kind of exists just to, like, help the white character navigate, you know, herself, or she gets to be the mess, and the black girl is the one who's all together, and she's always this constant, like sounding board, like, I just feel like we're always helpful self development, in a way, in all in the in the book, it's like the always a resource, never a human being. And so that's kind of and we see that play out even up till right now. You know what I mean? Like, yeah. And I think that yeah. And so I just think that that was really interesting. But to your point about the children, I mean, the kids getting to beat this beat the slaves. Was crazy. The brutality of it all, the one where they were like, they were like, rocking over the lady's face and broken face, that was insane. I was insane. No, there's just, like, some vivid imagery in here where I was like, I will never forget this. And I don't know, I think that was really difficult about this particular book is that, like you said, they continue to get the best edit that's continuous. And I don't think that it's about vilification, but I think it's about lifting the veil and understanding that everybody has autonomy, regardless of how the society seems to be set up from the outside, that autonomy is very much there, very much within the grasp. Like they could have revolted. I mean, like the women, the white women, yeah, they could have revolted. And I'm like, You guys would not be participating in this if it did not benefit you,

39:37

right? And I mean that to me, that's the thesis of the book, white ladies own slaves because it was good for white ladies. Yeah, like that. Not, not to, not to diminish the years of work that Stephanie e Jones Rogers did. But it's like they own white women owed slaves because, you guessed it, it was good for them. It was so good for. Because the second it was the second it wasn't good for them. They wouldn't do it right, like this. Like, that's what we've really learned, is like the second things don't benefit white people. It's done. We don't need

40:13

it, and that's why you will not see me marching in nobody's street, I said, and not today.

40:21

I saw the craziest thing on threads this morning. I, like, opened my threads, and it was this white lady who was like, of course, we're boycotting McDonald's, but my kid found an actual four leaf clover. So I said, we have to get Shamrock Shakes for everyone. And I'm like,

40:39

Excuse me, that's fine, you know, I'm like, that's fine, whatever. I think, Okay, right? I also wanted to talk about the that weird law that they had where it was, like, if you caused a slave Dev, but you said, I didn't really mean it, they were like, Oh, you're so

40:55

malice. Yeah, you had to be like, express, like, malice, yes, of the punishment for it to be. And

41:02

I, I will say this, I think one of the reasons why I think that this book is required reading is because it shows how institutionalized brutality is and how like, like the law is also crafted upon mental gymnastics, like the fact that there are provisions to explain they were like, but what was her intent when she decided to kill the girl and then they were like, but if the other, if we had other slaves, kill that slave on your behalf,

41:33

right? You they could, then the murder slaves are in trouble, not the murder order, yeah, and

41:39

we know, and we know about that. We know that the person at the very top, very rarely, is the one who gets held accountable for the things,

41:46

yeah, and your to your point, like a lot of these, the laws that were made back then, around shit like this, like those laws still are impacting our laws now, right? Like we have manslaughter, which is different than murder one or murder two, or whatever it has to do with like intent, yeah, and like, I mean, I don't, I don't know shit about law, so who knows if that was already there. But the idea that like, you could just be like, it was an oopsie murder and not a like, I fucking hate you murder, and those things are different because there's a dead person who was accidentally deaded, or, like, was deaded without malice,

42:23

like so it's like. South Carolina law stipulated that if a slave died as a result of mattress punishment and no other white persons were present to witness the incident, the slave owner could exculpate him or herself by claiming that the violence had not been afflicted maliciously. And I'm just like, that is crazy. They said if a white if a tree falls in the forest, AKA a black person is the tree, and no one white is around to hear it, because they're like, even if all of the slaves on the plantation were like, we watched it happen. We watched they literally, it was brutal. It was horrific. They were like, and why would we believe any of you?

42:54

And why would we believe you? And to further that, historians, for years since then, have said, well, we actually can't use the accounts of slaves or people who were enslaved, because, like, what did they know even though they were there, even though it was their fucking life? I mean, there's a, I think it's on page 39 in this book, where she talks about how enslaved people knew the laws, like, inside and out, because they needed to, because there was an urgency and a necessary necessity that like benefited them to know what the fuck was going on, and that historians after the fact are like they did. They couldn't read. What would they know? And it's like that, even that piece of it of like the erasing for of the enslaved people from being part of the narrative or having any value to add to these stories. And as we talked about the inside and outside of it, the inside part is crucial to the telling of these stories. And the people who were inside, the black people who were inside, we are told, are not reliable narrators like because it is not in service to the outside piece, absolutely. And

44:00

I think what's really interesting too, is like they talk a little bit they talk a little bit about another person, her name was, like, a woman named Fanny, who was killed by her, like, the slave mistress or whatever, and basically that she was never held accountable. And like, even if it was a white woman who killed the slave, like it was very rare, or, like, didn't happen, that that would be who was, like, listed on the suit because of that whole COVID tour thing. So it's like, you could own the property, but like, if you were to damage the property, then you would not necessarily be held accountable publicly. And I think like that cover, like that innocent, that level of innocence, is quite literally insane. Like that is, again, you get the best edit because, like nobody, it was hidden from you. And I think also, too, when we think about how a lot of the people who fought for the South, and, like, fought for slavery were people who benefited, probably from the tertiary economy, like, maybe they worked in the jail. Because, like, what was also interesting to me, too, is that, like, the police essentially functioned, really, as just like a support staff for the plantation owners. Yes, like they were just like their whole. Whole job was to, like, like, sometimes round them up, round them up, and then also you could, like, hire them to beat your slaves for you. Which was crazy, yeah, which is crazy, you know. I mean, we're not like, class piece of it. We don't gotta draw the parallels. They just kind of speak for themselves. However, what I found really fascinating about that is that, like, just like, how hegemony and like nationalism and buying into the story of the elite class is one hell of a fucking drug. Because, and I do think too that, like, if women did not see themselves represented in that story, why would they also have, like, been okay with it, and, like, wiping their husband's brow when they came home from war? You know, I'm like, Oh, this served everybody. Like, I'm sure that the girls who were reading Rosebud their little, yeah, weird TV Magazine. Like, yeah, literally, like their predecessor, predecessor to Evie. People who were reading Rosebud are, we're not just the women who own slaves. Like, I'm sure that it was also little girls, yes, who were aspirational exactly, because the girls who read Vogue are not only the girls who have money. Because otherwise Vogue would be defunct or Right, right?

46:00

You don't mean, I'm like, why would you read Vogue if you had money, you just have the clothes. Literally, I don't need to read about the clothes I am wearing them. I can tell you what it feels like. One of the things we absolutely have to talk about is the chapter on the wet nursing. We talked earlier a little bit about mental gymnastics. I think this is a chapter that required, certainly, some mental gymnastics from from the white folks. Because, you know, morally it does, this becomes quite a conundrum. If you believe that black people are subhuman and stupid and lazy and all of these things, and you also believe that the essence of a human is passed down through their breast milk, it becomes complicated for you to tell me that it's okay for this black person who is beneath you in every way to provide literal nourishment for your child who is apparently better than that black person, like, I mean, I mean, I don't, I don't think they really believe that. I don't think that's that, yes, I think they believed this is convenient for me and this is useful, and I don't want to breastfeed, because, as a person who has breastfed, it is fucking hard and it fucking sucks. Like, I'm not saying that I would own a slave, but I'm saying if there was a ethical way to have someone help me, like, I don't know that. I mean, my breast pump helped, but I also just quit after a while. Like, I understand why you would want someone else to help you with that labor, but I think the idea of like, this and this and like, making it like, just, just fucking say that our milk is the same as your milk, like you don't have to make us worse than you just fucking take the milk and do the shit. And then how slavery works,

47:33

yeah, because it's like, if we then start. I mean, what's really fascinating to me, too, is just the like, how, you know, the whole like, it's always darkest before the dawn. Thing is how I think darkest before the dawn, if we think about time, kind of in a broader sense, like, not in human like, not in human years, but like in lifetimes. It's like when they outlawed slavery elsewhere in France and things like that. I think things were bad for slaves before that, of course, absolutely. But the focus was not, and I think we talked about, like, this kind of came up in like, I've learned a lot about like, slavery outside of the US, and so far as, like, in the Caribbean, and like, you know, the Middle Passage and the triangle of like, you know, the various stops that it made, or whatever it is. But like, there was a lot like, before it was kind of like, we don't want pregnant slaves because we are useless. Literally, do shit, yeah, kill them and kill them and bring another batch, you know? And then it shifted to now we have, like, an entire, it's like the it just evolved and adapted, right? Like,

48:38

well, when they outlawed the bringing of actual new people from Africa. Then it had, you had to rely on the stock that you had. And so all of a sudden, women became incredibly more valuable because they could have more children. They could increase your investment. One woman could give you 12 kids, if you were lucky, when it also meant that you had to take care of pregnant women and value their pregnancy, because if you didn't, you don't get new stock. But

49:09

it was interesting, though, because it was like, the child, like, the fate of the child was never really, you know, we don't know. I mean, to talk about the wet nurse thing, it was like, a lot of that wasn't. It wasn't like, Oh, we're just dual feeding. It's like, no, like, that baby is gone for whatever reason. Some

49:25

cases the baby was gone. Some cases it was dual feeding, but just the violence of, like, the loss of children and the loss of connection with your own children, and also the fact, okay, so this was another moment where I was like, Why did I never connect this dot for myself? All the pieces were there. I just never put it together. But that, actually, that's not true. I did put this together. I think it's just a reminder. Because, as I'm saying this, I'm like, wait, I fucking but that that the raping of enslaved women was also a, like, a good business decision, absolutely, and that you knew. To keep your wet nurses pregnant so that there was a supply of of breast milk. And like the I like, I think, I think sometimes, like in popular media, the the ways that, like, the rapes of enslaved women are portrayed as, like the master is attracted to her, and, like, wants to get his kicks off. And I think that there's, like, there was a much more calculated version of that, that this book drove home. I mean, well, and it might have been both things, but also it was a financially, I think what's the word chooses? A lot, pecuniary. Yeah, pecuniary is the word of this book. But like, yeah, sorry, go ahead.

50:44

I mean too, like, like, yes, raped by the master of the house, but also raped by the, like, various slaves, yeah, like that. Like, like, forced Yeah. And also the intentional separation of people who seem to be too, like, chummy with each other, you know, like to kind of if they were like, oh, like, it looks like these two, because slaves can be married. So it's like, it seems like these two, like, have an interest in one another. Maybe I will. Because, again, like you said, it was like, there is this mastery element. There is this because it's like, if you allow two people to form an emotional connection with one another, parent, child, whatever the case, anything, you then introduce not only humanity. And then people start to think, like, I actually have family, I have something to protect, I have something that I'm willing to kill for, something I'm willing to die for. Like, you can't allow people to have to like, to really build emotional bonds. But then also, if there's love, people understand like, love is powerful as a it's a powerful motivator in any direction, right? And so you see two slaves who are like, looking like they might be in love, maybe they'll run together, possibly, that's a that's an option, or maybe they will like, or like, I mean, there's just a lot of things that could happen. I think that they're like, that's not a good idea. So it's like, I'm sure it was not uncommon to be like, okay, so you're a woman of an age, I'm going to cut whatever you have off going, I'm gonna sell him away, or I'm just gonna have, you have a baby for somebody else to ensure that this is like that we're severing this kind of cons. And also, white women are known to be, we're known to be, like, incredibly, like, jealous and violent towards slaves who seem to catch the interest of the master, like, the way that the children of the like, like the mixed children, or the like, mixed kids running around were treated was not well. They were not treated better. Like that was also a whole thing. And I think too, like, I mean, even the misgenation laws of like post slavery, of like, banning, you know, interracial couples. I'm like, laws are really usually reactionary, and so those things, like, any a law that is saying you can't murder your slave is because there was a lot of slave murdering going on, people are too hot, yeah? Like, a law that's saying you can't, like, we don't want people to be mixed is because of the fact, like, we don't want like, biracial children. Is because there's a lot of biracial kids running around. And that's because of, like, me,

53:02

biracial ass. They were like, No, Traci, go home.

53:05

You don't even know. It's like those things are always so reactionary. And so I just found it very fascinating to like and to your point, like you were saying, like they they had to be good enough to nurse the child. It's like everybody knows that they're human. Everybody knows this. We're all aware, right, right? This is also just, this is a performance of the highest

53:26

you can tell me it's sub human, but you can't, but if we're sub human, explain to me why you don't take your baby to nurse on the cow in the barn, right? Like we know that that black people are humans, because we know that they can nurse our children, we know that they can be impregnated by us, like, so, I mean, it's all, I mean, it's just the, again, the convenience of like, the lie, um, we're running out of time. Oh, yeah, there. There is one thing I want to touch on about the about the the fall of slavery, yeah. And while I am not particularly sympathetic to people who owned and abused other humans. It is fucking crazy to think that there was this entire economy, Rosebud magazine, like, had a whole industry, and then there's a few years of war and the shits just like gone. Like, obviously it wasn't fully gone. Obviously, like, sharecropping, all of these things, you know, whatever. But the idea that something this big and massive existed for so long, and then they're just like, No, it doesn't, is crazy on two reasons, for two reasons why? I mean, ask

54:33

people from Detroit, you know, say, who lost automakers? Like, it's kind of like, that kind of vibe. It's like, it just the industry kind of dries up. Like, you know, yeah, I mean, I mean, talk to talk to Wells Fargo about their original where mortgages come from, you know, right? But a lot of people, the most richest ones, were, like, made whole in a way, like they got their money.

54:52

They did, they did. But it's just like a crazy thing to be like, this is just gone. And I think the other thing that really. Out to me about, sort of like the parts about the Civil War is, you know, the North always is like, this was a war about slavery, like, this was a war to free, free the slaves, and then the South is like, No, this was a war about states rights. And I think what's really interesting is that the truth is actually the opposite of, like, the the North claims that it was about the slaves, but it never was, because when the Emancipation Proclamation came down, people who were enslaved in Union states were not freed. I did not know that. I had no idea that if you were enslaved in a northern state, when the Emancipation Proclamation came down, you were not freed, which is point and parcel to the fact that this was not about slaves for the North actually, which I know we know, but like that is just like, very clear, obvious evidence. And I feel like the south claiming that this was not about slavery, or was claiming this was about states rights, is like we obviously know this is, I

55:57

mean, about states rights in the way that they wanted the rights to own slaves, right,

56:01

but also like they, they're, I think that it's like, a little bit reductive in that case, because it's like, this is about not just owning of slaves. This is about our entire country of economy, our entire way of life. But I was, you know, I just the Emancipation Proclamation. That was that new to you? Did you know that? No, I mean, I think

56:19

that the way that the way that we're told is like the Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves. But I mean, we know that, like, the reason

56:26

why? Yes, we knew that enslaved people in the south didn't know that they had been freed. And that's like how we get Juneteenth. We knew that people were keeping their slaves enslaved after the Emancipation Proclamation, I did not know that that did not apply right to enslaved people in the union. Like, I think that was my biggest of all the aha moments I had. I had to, like, go back and read it three times as I was like, What am I reading? Like, what am i

56:52

What is this? Yeah, I mean to be honest. You know, like, honestly, I live in a world of non surprise when it comes to the way

57:00

that I love to be surprised. I know that it's like, very cool to like, morally being surprised is like, people look down on on being surprised. I'm always surprised. Oh

57:08

no, I don't look down on being surprised. I'm just like, whenever I read anything, I like, you could tell me you were like, and they were using their body parts for spoons. I'd be like, That sounds about right. You could tell me. You could tell me something. You could I think I

57:19

also live in that place of, like, Nothing surprises me, where I'm like, that doesn't seem possible, but the fact that, like, the information is just like, yeah, like, I'm just so surprised that, like, I didn't learn this by now. Just like,

57:35

I mean, I hope that that's because we never actually, the South was not punished. Like, the only people who got reparations were white people. Like, they talk about how President Johnson was, like, they were like, restored right in property. So like, when people, if they had stuff that was over $20,000 they were made whole. And that's how our government has always functioned. Them, banks. The banks needed that bailout in 2008 and they were like, Here you go. The airlines. Do you know what I'm saying? Though, like, that's really how it is. It's like, if you have enough money, you will never be broken America. That's everybody who's harmed by it, like the people who fought for the Confederacy. Then they become, they become the Hicks, quote, unquote, right? They become the they become backwards. They become this. They become that. The people who were fighting essentially for their way of life, because that tertiary economy, what we're talking about, that tertiary economy that benefited them, they got fucked over. But the people who have the money, they still got the money. Also, the idea of it has to be North versus south. The North wins racial equality. We build towards racial equality. The KKK is started by this. It has to always be the South's fault. It always has to be the South's fault because, and that's the contract, right? It's always a social contract. And I think that, like, for me, I always see it as not necessarily. It's not just like two sides of the same coin, but it's like a domestic dispute in a way. Because I think if it's the South's fault, and we're always saying it's the South, it's the South, it's the South, right, we ignore it. Like you said, the unions, like the unions still had slavery, but, like, nobody talks about that, right? Because that would disrupt this idea as, like, look at the big leap forward we made. And the government that we got was the fair one, right? That's we got the progressive one. We got the government that was, like, for freedom and freedom for all peoples. And obviously there were big shifts, like, reconstruction happens all the things like, it's not to say that we didn't make any progress, because obviously we're on this podcast talking right now like right and we are protected by a lot of rights, and we have the rights of free speech. We can go buy guns if we wanted to. We could do a lot of things, allegedly, allegedly. We have a lot of we have a lot of rights as a result of, yes, this evolution, but at the same time, it was kind of like, you be the fall guy, but the rich ones be like, just, just

59:48

shut the up and file your

59:52

compensation claim. Literally, file your compensation plan claim. We will make you whole. There was no real consequences. No.

59:59

Like,

1:00:00

nothing really happening,

1:00:01

right? Exactly. We have to go. I want to ask you, usually talk about the title and the cover. Do you have any thoughts about the title and the cover on this book? I

1:00:11

love the name. I love the name. Yeah. No. I think it's great. And I just think that, like, I actually think that all white women, this is required reading for all white women, back to front, cover to cover. Get out your highlighter, contend with it, sit with it, all of it. Because I think that there, the story that we've run with is this kind of like, almost like white women who are engaging in oppression, or voting for oppression, or all of these things. Like, there is this infantilization, like they don't know any better. And we have the quote, unquote northern women, or the coastal elites, as they like to call them, right? They are just they need to be saved. Like, if only they had information, if only they had, I don't even know what they wish that they had. They'd be trying to save people. I'm like, these are not people who want to be saved. These are people who are happy to let their men be the fall guy in public, so that, and they are happy to look oppressed, so that, yeah, behind closed doors, they can have power like that is. But I think that this book explains that so well, and I need to read it for that reason. I think also,

1:01:19

though to your point, this book also explains the coastal liberal white woman who is like, what can I do? Like everyone else did this? Like I believe in these things. I want these things, but like the other 46% or 52% or whatever, they did this, and I'm helpless, and there's nothing for me to do. I think that also that point of view, the like good white woman is in this book, right? Like that, that that you good white woman could not you are not separate from the bad white women.

1:01:54

I mean, not only are they not separate, I think that these white women are essentially pioneers for the white women as a whole. I mean, to your point about the Edit, like, they get the best edit in the world, inclusive of the white women who wielded their power openly, or wielded their power via the men who kind of take the fall for them essentially, or like, look to be the ones pulling the strings, being the ones in charge. So it's like this book, to me, really illuminates the ways that people will jump through extraordinary hoops and even lie to make to manufacture innocence, even when there's evidence to the contrary. And it's not about just like total culpability, but it's about complicity and understanding. Like, if there's benefit, there's probably agreeance, you're very rarely going to find people who are benefiting and hating at the same time, like in a real way, enough to shake some shit up, right? That's real, right,

1:02:48

right? I think we should end there 10 B. Thank you for reading this with me. Thank you for reading this. You're the perfect person to read this with, and I'm so grateful that you would talk about it and read it with us. People listening. Stay on till the end, because I'll tell you what our April book club pick will be. It's Poetry Month, so there's your hint, but I'll let you know what we're reading. Y'all need to read 10 B's book, home bodies. You'll need to subscribe to her sub stack, extracurricular. I will link to all those things in the show notes, temby, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for having me Always a pleasure, and everyone else we will see you in the stacks. All right,

Y'all that does it for us this week. Thank you so much for listening, and thank you again to Tembe Denton-Hurst for joining the show. Now it's the moment you've been waiting for our announcement of our April book club pick. It's Poetry Month. We are going to continue our poetry tradition and read blessing the boats new and Selected Poems, 1988 through 2000 by Lucille Clifton. This collection brings together some of Clifton's most powerful and celebrated poetry showcasing her sharp, moving and deeply insightful voice. We will be discussing the book on Wednesday April 30, and you can tune in Wednesday April 2 to find out who our guest will be. If you love the show and you want inside access to it, head to patreon.com/the stacks andjoin the stacks pack and check out my substack at tracithomas.substack.com. Make sure you're subscribed to the stacks wherever you listen to your podcasts, and if you're listening through Apple podcasts or Spotify, please, please, please leave us a rating and a review for more from the stacks. Follow us on social media @thestackspod on Instagram, threads and Tiktok, and @thestackspod_ on Twitter, and you can check out our website at thestackspodcast.com. This episode of the stacks was edited by Christian Dueñas, with production assistance from Megan Caballero. Our graphic designer is Robin McCreight, and our theme music is from Tagirijus. The Stacks is created and produced by me, Traci Thomas.

Megan Caballero
Previous

Ep. 365 The Poets that Make Me Understand Myself with Tiana Clark
Next

Ep. 363 Gender and Genre Are the Same Word with Torrey Peters