The Drama with Zendaya; BAFTAs Slur Fallout; Sheryl Sandberg Leans AI; Sex Pest Take-It-Down Conviction; Sex Toys Meta Ban; ANTIFA Terrorism Trial – NEWS ROUNDUP!

Summary

Podcast Summary: There Are No Girls on the Internet

Episode: The Drama with Zendaya; BAFTAs Slur Fallout; Sheryl Sandberg Leans AI; Sex Pest Take-It-Down Conviction; Sex Toys Meta Ban; ANTIFA Terrorism Trial – NEWS ROUNDUP!
Host: Bridget Todd
Release Date: April 11, 2026
Producer: iHeartPodcasts

---

Episode Overview

This week’s episode is a rich, fast-paced roundup of major news shaping digital life for marginalized communities. Host Bridget Todd (with a co-host, likely Mike) covers internet culture, tech policy, AI, legal updates, and reproductive justice. Sharply critical and often funny, the two focus on how online power is wielded, who’s harmed, and ongoing battles over speech, safety, and autonomy—especially for women and marginalized people.

---

Key Topics & Insights

1. Zendaya’s The Drama: Moviegoing & Theater Etiquette

[01:49–08:35]

• Bridget and co-host share impressions of Zendaya’s new A24 film, “The Drama”, and reminisce about opening night's Gen Z-heavy crowd.

  “The theater was full of what I kind of clocked as young Gen Z types...which was very exciting.” – Bridget [02:23]

• Discussion morphs from generational movie-going trends to modern movie theater etiquette. Bridget laments that people loudly talked through trailers.

  “Everyone in that theater was talking at full volume...You and I were the only people who were not speaking.” – Bridget [03:36]

• They wonder if silence during trailers is still a social norm or if etiquette is shifting, with Bridget admitting she’s uncompromising about such rules in theaters (and also while deplaning).

  “I have no problem shushing youth in a theater. Maybe I am out of touch.” – Bridget [07:14]

---

2. Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, & Women in AI

[09:44–22:55]

• Sheryl Sandberg resurfaces with a new Lean In report urging women to “lean in” to AI, citing gender gaps in AI adoption at work.

  “Sandberg is clearly adopting a kind of framing that says that, oh, women aren’t using AI and that means that women are going to be left behind professionally and economically. This framing is very, very common, but it’s not…one I personally subscribe to.” – Bridget [13:59]

• Bridget critiques the elevation of a recent Meta intern (Bridget Griswold) to CEO of Lean In after only three years in the workforce—a move that triggered staff resignations and echoes allegations about Sandberg’s favoritism and inappropriate conduct with young women (as detailed in the memoir Careless People).

  “More than a dozen employees, roughly a quarter of the foundation staff, departed over the last year...Griswold’s rapid promotion...cited by insiders as a key factor driving the exodus.” – Bridget [16:17]

• Sandberg’s new campaign mixes opposition to the “trad wife” aesthetic with calls for women to embrace AI—Bridget and co-host both question whether promoting AI use is an adequate or relevant answer to combating regressive gender norms, especially given mounting evidence about AI’s potential to displace women’s labor.

  “Leaning in and girl bossing did not save women...So now it’s AI. I’m not sure how telling people to embrace AI is going to be the thing that combats women wanting to check out of the workforce.” – Bridget [18:33]

  “If anything, I think it will lead to the opposite. Like, we’ll all be able to be trad wives and stay home baking bread because we don’t have a fucking job.” – Bridget [22:14]

---

3. BAFTA Awards: Slur Fallout & Editorial Failures

[24:16–33:29]

• Recap of the BAFTAs incident where John Davidson, who has Tourette’s, involuntarily shouted a racial slur during the live show. The slur was included in the initial broadcast, despite Sony’s plea to remove it, but “Free Palestine”—spoken in a winner’s speech—was cut.

  “John Davidson…was at the BAFTA ceremony...He has Tourette’s…and at the BAFTAs, he yelled out the N word.” – Bridget [24:16]

• BBC’s investigation found it was all a series of “unintentional” mistakes, claiming the production team didn’t clearly hear or recognize the slur (but did recognize and remove a later instance). The defense is met with heavy skepticism and derision by Bridget and co-host.

  “So they didn’t realize it was the N word. Okay, sure.” – Bridget [26:34]

  “That part makes no sense...Why not edit it out just to be safe?” – Co-host [28:47]

• The decision to cut “Free Palestine” is attributed by the BBC to editing for time, not censorship—again, the hosts don’t buy it.

  “So just totally random that they cut Free Palestine.” – Co-host [31:47]

• They note that, fortunately, public outrage is largely correctly focused on the BBC and BAFTAs, not Davidson.

---

4. First Conviction under the Take It Down Act: GenAI Sexual Harassment

[33:32–39:37]

• An Ohio man is the first convicted under the Take It Down Act for sharing real and AI-generated nonconsensual sexual images, including AI porn he sent to victims’ families and posted to harass women.

  “He used AI to create pornographic videos...and then shared those videos with her coworkers as part of a larger harassment campaign.” – Bridget [34:35]

• Acknowledgement that the law only works if a victim discovers and reports the content, placing the burden on those targeted. While the Justice Department claims zero tolerance, Bridget points to Elon Musk’s platform Grok enabling similar abuse without apparent consequence, and a recent lawsuit by high school girls.

  “It’s so clearly two sets of rules and unequal enforcement.” – Bridget [37:58]

• Policy criticism: The law requires platforms to remove content within 48 hours of a complaint, but places most responsibility for detection and enforcement on survivors.

---

5. Antifa “Terrorism” Trial & Signal Messaging App Security

[39:37–46:56]

• For the first time, people are facing U.S. terrorism charges for alleged antifa actions, based in part on recovered Signal app messages.

  “A big part of the evidence...is from the defendant’s signal messages, which the FBI was able to recover…” – Co-host [39:37]

• Public Service Announcement: The FBI accessed deleted messages via Android/iOS notification logs, not the app itself—showing that much security depends on user settings.

  “So even though the message had been deleted...a copy still existed within that notification history in the phone’s operating system.” – Co-host [41:49]

• Advice: Audience is urged to adjust Signal’s notification settings to minimize data exposure (“name only” or “no name/message” for message previews).

  “You have three options…You should choose one of those latter two options, depending on how secure you want to be…” – Co-host [43:12]

• Bridget highlights: Digital privacy isn’t just for activists—everyone should care, as good stewardship protects your whole community.

  “Good digital security is important for everyone...It’s not just about everybody protecting themselves. It’s about all of us protecting everybody in our networks.” – Bridget [45:02, 45:26]

---

6. Forced Cesarean Sections & Maternal Rights

[46:56–58:29]

• ProPublica investigation: Florida courts ordered Black women—including a doula named Charisse—to forcibly undergo C-sections against their wishes, even mid-labor via Zoom court hearings.

  “She is very much somebody who is in the middle of attempting labor while also being forced to do a zoom court hearing with seven strangers…” – Bridget [49:06]

• Charisse fiercely advocates against involuntary surgery, citing her own health, children, and expertise as a doula:

  “I still have rights as an American citizen and as a patient that I am allowed to decide what goes on with me and my body and my baby.” – Charisse [50:16]

• Despite her opposition, a C-section is performed. The hosts emphasize racial disparities and systemic devaluation of Black mothers’ autonomy.

  “It’s just horrifying...It’s like the image of a black woman who is hooked up to all the machines...while having to plead her case about what she wants to do with her own body to a bunch of white guys is...just horrifying.” – Bridget [49:38]

• Legal and medical experts argue that pregnancy is a unique context where courts override a patient’s right to refuse treatment, disproportionately impacting women of color.

---

7. Sex Toy Company vs Meta: Instagram Censorship

[58:29–62:25]

• Bellesa Boutique’s Instagram account, a sexual wellness brand, deleted for “sexually explicit language” (e.g., using the word “clitoris”). The abrupt and unexplained ban erases years of work and removes a vital educational resource.

• Meta claims routine warnings preceded the ban, but similar content promoting men’s sexual health remains untouched—exposing a clear double standard.

  “Discussing women’s bodies in a health context is treated as inherently unacceptable...this standard really only applies to the genitals of people who are not cisgender men.” – Bridget [58:29]

• Listeners are asked to help build a legal case by submitting screenshots of comparable content that does not get banned.

---

8. Quick Updates & Behind-the-Scenes: Audiobook “Love at First Prompt”

[62:25–64:57]

• Bridget and co-host share anecdotes from recording their upcoming audiobook, detailing mishaps (tears, lost voice, sick cat) and expressing appreciation for their director, Sarah Ginsburg.

• Listeners who pre-order receive a thank-you card and sticker, underscoring mutual support within the show’s community.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On theater etiquette:

  “I have no problem shushing youth in a theater. Maybe I am out of touch.” – Bridget [07:14]

• On the BAFTA debacle:

  “Why not edit it out just to be safe?...That part makes no sense.” – Co-host [28:47]

  “Is it audible? It’s not even a good lie.” – Bridget [31:05]

• On Sheryl Sandberg’s AI campaign:

  “Leaning in and girl bossing did not save women...So now it’s AI.” – Bridget [18:33]

• On reproductive justice:

  “She is very much somebody who is in the middle of attempting labor while also being forced to do a zoom court hearing with seven strangers…” – Bridget [49:06]

  “I still have rights as an American citizen and as a patient that I am allowed to decide what goes on with me and my body and my baby.” – Charisse [50:16]

• On digital security:

  “Good digital security is important for everyone...It’s not just about everybody protecting themselves. It’s about all of us protecting everybody in our networks.” – Bridget [45:02, 45:26]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Zendaya Movie & Theater Etiquette: [01:49–08:35]
• Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In & AI: [09:44–22:55]
• BAFTA Slur Fallout: [24:16–33:29]
• Take It Down Act Conviction / AI Sex Abuse: [33:32–39:37]
• Antifa Trial & Signal Privacy: [39:37–46:56]
• Forced Cesarean / Maternal Rights: [46:56–58:29]
• Sex Toy Meta Ban: [58:29–62:25]
• Audiobook Behind the Scenes: [62:25–64:57]

---

Tone and Language

Throughout, Bridget’s approach is incisive, personal, and attuned to online cultural nuances. The language balances critical analysis with humor and frustration, often highlighting double standards, failures of institutions, and persistent need for vigilance—especially for women and marginalized people online.

---

Conclusion

This episode delivers a multifaceted briefing on pressing digital and social controversies impacting marginalized internet users. It mixes reporting, personal experience, and practical advice—serving as both a community update and a testament to ongoing struggles for equity, safety, and autonomy in online spaces.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

With VRBoCare, help is always ready before, during and after your stay. We've planned for the plot twists so support is always available because a great trip starts with peace of mind.

[T-Mobile/US Cellular Advertiser]

Everyone deserves to be connected. T Mobile and US Cellular are joining forces. Our networks are coming together bringing more T Mobile coverage all over the country. Switch to T Mobile and save up to 20% versus Verizon by getting built in benefits they leave out. Check the math@t mobile.com Switch and now T Mobile is available in the US Cellular Store in Pasco. Bigger network. The combination of T Mobiles and US Cellular's network footprints will enhance the T Mobile network's coverage savings versus comparable Verizon plans. Plus the costs of options, benefits, plan features and taxes and fees vary. Savings with three plus lines include third free line, free via monthly bill credits. Credit stop if you cancel any lines. Qualifying credit required.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

And Doug, there's nowhere I wouldn't go to help someone customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mutual, even if it means sitting front row at a comedy show.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Hey everyone, check out this guy and his bird. What is this your first date?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Oh, no.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

We help people customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mut Mutual. Together we're married.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Me to a human, him to a bird.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Yeah, the bird looks out of your league anyways.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

Only pay for what you [e-mail] Liberty.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Liberty. Liberty. Liberty.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

And Doug, there's nowhere I wouldn't go to help someone customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mutual. Even if it means sitting front row at a comedy show.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Hey everyone, check out this guy and his bird. What is this your first date?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Oh no.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

We help people customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mutual. Together we're married. Me to a human, him to a bird.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Yeah, the bird looks out of your league anyways.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

Only pay for what you [e-mail] Liberty.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Liberty. Liberty. Liberty.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

There are no girls on the Internet. It's a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. I'm Bridget Todd and this is There are no girls on the Internet. Can we dip into the drama around the drama a bit? The drama, of course, being Zendaya's new a 24 movie that is in theaters now, which you and I both saw over the weekend on opening night, mind you, which is always a little bit exciting for me.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, absolutely. The drama, drama is worth talking about. And the movie was pretty fun.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

I really enjoyed it. The reviews are very polarizing. So, like, it's not the kind of movie that's going to be for everybody. The theater was full of what I kind of clocked as young Gen Z types, which was very exciting. I actually saw a new poll that said that young people are going to the movies more. This makes me happy. As somebody who loves going to the movies, the idea of people not going to the movies concerns me, and it's all that I do. Frankly, it's like my one big pastime. So I feel kind of cool that I'm like, oh, yeah, me and Gen Z have the same pastime here.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

So youthful, so in touch with the kids.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

According to Fandango's annual movie going trends and insight study, they surveyed 7,000 adults and they found that 87% of Gen Zers and 82% of millennials saw at least one movie in theaters in the past 12 months, compared with 70% of Gen Xers and only 58% of baby boomers. Huh.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

So the gen Zers are going to movies more everybody else, Although sounds like everybody's going to movies. That's like the majority of American adults went to at least one movie, which is surprising. I thought the movies were dying. What are they talking about?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Well, that brings me to a little bit of my own personal drama regarding the drama, which was that, I don't know, I just want to have a little bit of a reset conversation about theater etiquette because we were at the movies together. And if, like, stop me if I'm lying, this was what I remember of that experience. We saw it at a small art house theater. Everybody talked at full volume through the trailers, not the commercials that come on before the movies. I'm talking about the coming attraction, the trailers for new movies coming out. Everyone in that theater was talking at full volume, not just one or two groups of people. You and I were the only people who were not speaking, and they were speaking at full volume. Is that a correct assessment of what the situation was?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I think you might be overblowing it a little bit. There were a lot of people talking. There was one group in particular that was sort of down front that clearly were there on some kind of like, large group, triple date, quadruple date thing. And I think there were a couple of them that were really talking at full volume and then just sort of giving license to many others in the theater to just, yeah, be talking through the commercials, which, like, you know, who cares? But then through the trailers, it was pretty distracting. I mean, you were taking it pretty hard.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

I was a guest. I truly was. Like, am I missing something? I Guess that's a question that I will pose. Has theater etiquette shifted where there is no longer an expectation that you will be quiet through the coming attract? I come early because I want to see the trailers. I was so surprised. Also, I have to push back on your characterization a little bit because it was a very small theater, so there were only but like a few big groups in the theater. I remember that all of them were speaking loudly. And I don't mean again, I won't begrudge somebody speaking in hushed tones. Sure, do what you gotta do. I don't love it, but do what you gotta do. This was full volume conversation. And because it's a theater, you can sort of hear what people are saying. And it's not like they're saying things like, oh, that looks good, or oh, I'm going to see that movie. It's. They're talking about Sheila from work or something.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, they're talking about dumb stuff. So anyway, back to the part about you being in touch with the young people, but also super mad about them talking during the trailers.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Well, I guess that's my question. Young people, do y' all talk through trailers? Is that, Is that, Is that the vibe like, like this is like the Simpsons meme? No, it's the children who are out of touch. Is it me? Am I, Is. Is. Is my. I mean, I've told. I. I don't know if I've told this story on the podcast, but going to see a screening of the menu girl sitting next to me blasting through full volume tiktoks. And when I asked her to stop it, like, I have not had a lot of experiences in my life where things almost got physical, but I was like, we might get into a physical thing fight. Like, I was, I was like, ready. I was. If that's. If that's what happens, that's what happens in. At. At the screening of the drama. I remember when the movie started it. It did take a. They. They did quiet down, but it wasn't an instant quieting. So like the movie was like playing for a little bit until they stopped talking.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I mean, you shushed them about like half a second into the film. You had that shush on the tip of your tongue, ready to go, and you let it rip.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

I had it in the chamber at that point. We have paid to see the program. You know, I, I was, I'm not somebody who was too afraid to, you know, those. How people will be like, they'll show. They'll take a picture and they'll Put it on social media and be like, this woman did XYZ rude behavior. I'm the one in the comments. It's like, did you tell her that? You tell her to stop. You tell her to, like, put her feet down. You tell her to stop picking your chair, whatever it is. I have no problem shushing youth in a theater. Maybe I am out of touch. Maybe I'm not as cool as I thought I was.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I mean, the funny thing is that you only bring this energy to the theater. Like, I really can't think of any other aspect of your life that you are so gung ho to police the actions of strangers.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Oh, is there any. Oh, now you. I think that's. Well, it's movie theater etiquette, and it's how people get off of a plane.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Oh, yeah.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

We've traveled together, and you've seen how I get. We don't need to get into it now, but you've seen how I get when somebody is, like, not following the rules of being in a society, Being in a polite society when we're deplaning.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

You know, Bridget, you really keep me guessing about, like, where are the areas where you're just cool, go with the flow, and other areas where there are rules and they must be followed and enforced?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Mike says this. Nobody is a bigger enforcer of society's rules than Mike.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Well, yeah, right. I know.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Coming off sounding like. Like, I'm the one that's, like, little Miss Rules. Nobody is more of an enforcer of rules in public than Mike.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I mean, that's not entirely fair. But I do generally get annoyed when people do dumb things. Like, the other day, I was driving, and some guy who was just standing in the middle of the street not doing anything decided he was gonna let me go. So he, like, waved, and he was like, okay, you can come through. And I. And I said, like, gee, thanks, because I was pretty annoyed that he was just standing in the street and you were, like, aghast. But to me, that is so much more egregious. The guy's, like, blocking the street.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

We could go tit for tat of who is more insane between the two of us. I think I mask it better.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I think that's probably true.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

So the point is, I wanted to pose that question. Has the etiquette changed? Are we talking through trailers? What is the latest? Let me know. Okay, so let's get into it. Mike, what do you remember about Sheryl Sandberg?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Oh, man. I remember Lean in. I remember she was sort of unceremoniously. Pushed out. And then I remember, I think there was like a little bit of a delay, but then it came out that there was a lot of younger staffers were like cuddling in bed with her in like, like a story that just didn't make a lot of sense. Like, kind of made a lot of sense. But also I don't really recall exactly how that particular thread ended. How did I do?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Oh, I'm so impressed by how much you remember about Sheryl Sandberg because she's not a figure that people talk about a ton. You're exactly right that, you know, she was Facebook's first ever COO. She left Facebook in 2022 for how much fanfare there was of her time at Facebook. And when she got hired, she left with like very little fanfare. In 2022. She wrote the book Lean In. That I think represented a certain kind of empowerment for a certain kind of woman when we were having conversations about working women and girl bosses and all of that. So after Sheryl Sandberg left Facebook in 2022, there was a kind of little micro PR kerfuffle a few years after that that I thought was pretty telling. Last summer, Steven Miller was meeting with Mark Zuckerberg at Mar a Lago and according to the Times, Zuckerberg blamed Sheryl Sandberg for an inclusivity initiative that Facebook had been encouraging employees self expression in the workplace. And this he. So basically he just like threw her under the bus, was like, oh, all that self expression and diversity stuff, that was all Sheryl Sandberg. I didn't want anything to do with that. This was, of course, right before Zuckerberg announced that Meta was going to stop fact checking and they were going to get rid of their corporate diversity programs. When a reporter, Carissa Bell, wrote about this and wrote kind of like, oh, it seems like Mark Zuckerberg is throwing Sheryl Sandberg under the bus. Zuckerberg commented on that journalist's post, quote, cheryl did amazing work at Meta and will forever be a legend in the industry. She built one of the greatest businesses of all time and taught me much of what I know. And then very quickly, Sheryl Sandberg replies to his comment, says, thank you, Zuck. I will always be grateful for the many years we spent building a great business together and for your friendship that got me through some of the hardest times in my life and continues to this day. And then Zuckerberg hearted that comment. The whole thing read like a PR cleanup that like her PR talked to his PR and they agreed. We are going to Publicly affirm that we are friends and that you didn't throw me under the bus. Right. That's. That whole thing read like that.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

To me, those comments are like the most touchy feely, heartfelt sentiments that are just like hilarious to imagine them coming from Zuckerberg or Sheryl Sandberg. Like, regardless of what you think of those two, neither one of them is known for being like, touchy feely, really into. Well, we'll get to that. That's fair. You know, emotionally touchy feely, sensitive into friendship. These aren't things that they're into.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

No. And notably, Mark Zuckerberg did not walk back his comment. It wasn't as if he said, oh, I didn't mean that. He, he, he, he stood by what he said to Stephen Miller that these things were her idea and that he didn't want to do them. And that after she left, he continued to go on and on about how the problem with tech companies is they don't have enough masculine energy, you know, so he, it's it. To me, it seems like he's standing by those comments.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah. Mark Zuckerberg and Stephen Miller, two of the most masculine guys you could imagine. Can you imagine what the conversation must have been like between those two?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Oh, I don't want to imagine it.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I, I can only imagine it was forced. So what is Sheryl Sandberg up to now?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Well, Sheryl Sandberg is trying to get women to lean out from wanting to be trad wives and Lean in to using AI. Lean in, her organization, just put out some new research that digs into how women use AI in the workplace relative to their male counterparts, which basically says that women are adopting AI less in workplaces. Lean in found that 78% of men had used AI in the workplace when compared to 73% of women. Men also reported using AI more regularly. About a third of men use AI daily, while only 27% of women did the same. We actually discussed a lot of similar findings in an episode of the podcast that we'll put in the show notes. In reading about Lean In's position on this, I think Sandberg is clearly adopting a kind of framing that says that, oh, women aren't using AI and that means that women are going to be left behind professionally and economically. This framing is very, very common, but it's not framing that I personally subscribe to, which we get into in that episode that I'll put in the show notes. So, but that, but that's like her framing that we got to get more women using AI. So that women don't get left behind economically and in workplaces. She also hired a brand new CEO for Lean in named Bridget, spelled correctly, by the way, as it should be spelled. Bridget Griswold, who is a former Meta product manager who just entered the workforce three years ago. So she's newly hired from her last position as AI and product director to the chief executive, from that position to now being the CEO of this massive women's empowerment nonprofit, Lean in, despite having zero traditional nonprofit leadership experience, according to the Wall Street Journal.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

When I read that in your notes for this episode, I was like, oh, Bridget must have made a typo here or something. Let me look this woman up. And so I, I looked at her LinkedIn, which is just right there, and you. It, it's not a typo. Like in 2022, her position was intern. And then from that, she catapulted to a product manager position at Meta and is now CEO of Sheryl Sandberg's organization, which is just a meteoric rise for anybody.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

That is definitely one way to put it. This is kind of interesting for a lot of reasons. A bunch of longtime staffers at Lean in quit after this. Bridget was promoted. More than a dozen employees, roughly a quarter of the foundation staff, departed over the last year through layoffs and resignations. With Griswold's rapid promotion and lack of nonprofit experience being cited by insiders as a key factor driving the exodus, according to the Journal. And I do have to just mention this, you kind of obliquely alluded to it earlier, but if you have read the memoir Careless People, which you should read because it's really a phenomenal piece of writing. That book makes allegations about how Sheryl Sandberg always wanted to have young, attractive female staffers around her. There's an allegation made that Sheryl Sandberg expected or invited these young, attractive female staffers to cuddle with her in bed during overnight trips on private planes and such, Sheryl Sandberg would reportedly buy them lingerie, according to Careless People. If these were not things that you were down with, if you were invited to do these things and you didn't want to do them, it could harb your career. So I feel like I need to say that just because if I had read allegations of this kind of workplace behavior about a man, I would definitely have something to say about it. I would have some raised eyebrows. And then seeing a very young woman be, you know, I guess I don't want to. I don't want to say the wrong thing. I just think It's, I think, I think it's worth noting that this was a allegation made by someone who was working under Sheryl Sandberg. I think that, I think that's important context for people to understand this leadership change.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

It feels like potentially very relevant context. Yeah, I mean, promoting somebody to be CEO who has no nonprofit experience, who only entered the workforce as an intern a handful of years ago, it's a curious move, you know, curious.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

And I'll say people, I, I've, I've worked at a lot of nonprofits. People might think, oh, a nonprofit, it's not really a big serious organization. The nonprofit world is cutthroat and people have a lot of experience. And yeah, this is not really the kind of meteoric rise that I have heard of a lot. Someone going from, you know, intern to CEO of a big, of a big nonprofit in this a couple of years, that's not something that I, that I have heard of a lot. So. Sheryl Sandberg wants Lean in to focus more on combating trad wife sensibilities. In a LinkedIn post, Sandberg criticized the trad wife online movement, calling it a recycled idea that could push women to give up their careers and revert back to old fashioned gender roles. Which I absolutely agree with and think that she's right on the money there. She also raised alarm about the timing, citing data suggesting that younger men are growing more supportive of super traditional gender dynamics and marriage dynamics, and encouraged women to push back against what she sees as these outdated assumptions about where women belong both at home and in the workplace. So I don't disagree with any of that. I think that she's right on the money there. But I don't really see how telling women to embrace AI is going to be the thing that makes women want to turn away from trad white lifestyles. And I guess I just don't actually trust that someone like Sheryl Sandberg is going to know what will actually support women in this moment. Leaning in and girl bossing did not save women. That didn't. I don't think that meaningfully got women a lot. I would actually argue that a mindset that tells women to just lean in and kick butt through things like systemic failures and systemic lack of support systems that you did not create caused a lot of us to burn out and frankly is quite probably one of the reasons why people are able to repackage trad wifery into something that looks kind of appealing online when it just actually isn't. So I would argue that Leaning in sheryl Sandberg's big answer to all of these problems didn't actually work for women. So now it's AI. We already know that emerging evidence suggests that women's labor may be disproportionately vulnerable to AI labor displacement. So I don't know. I'm not sure how telling people to embrace, like full throatedly embrace AI is going to be the thing that then combats women wanting to check out of the workforce. You know what I'm saying?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I do. It does feel like these are two pretty different things. Like confronting trad wifery, which is a phrase that I had not heard before. But I do kind of like the phrase tradwifery. Not the concept, just the. The phrase itself. But pushing back against that certainly seems like a good thing to do. But like you said, and therefore we need to encourage all women to embrace AI feels like not. It doesn't feel like a solution to the problem of women being exposed to trad wife messaging like these. These seem like two different things that don't really have a whole lot to do with each other.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

So if anything, I would argue that telling more people to just full throatedly embrace AI because we know there is such a risk. Human labor displacement. I would actually argue that if you, if your whole thing is you want women robustly showing up in a workforce and being paid what they're actually worth and being able to make economic and professional and educational moves for themselves, I actually don't know that full throated embrace of AI will lead to that. If anything, I think it will lead to the opposite. Like, we'll all. We'll all be able to be trad wives and stay home baking bread because we don't have a fucking job. Like, that's. I feel, I feel like she's not like thinking it through.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, that's the big gamble that we're all making right now.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

And I guess my larger point is maybe we should stop listening to Sheryl Sandberg. Let's take a quick break.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

And Doug, there's nowhere I wouldn't go to help someone customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mutual. Even if it means sitting front row at a comedy show.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Hey, everyone. Check out this guy and his bird. What is this your first date?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Oh, no.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

We help people customize and save on car insurance with Liberty Mutual together. We're married.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Me to a human, him to a bird.

[Liberty Mutual Conversational Partner]

Yeah, the bird looks out of your league anyways.

[Liberty Mutual Advertiser]

Only pay for what you [e-mail] Liberty, Liberty, Liberty, Liberty.

[Commercial Announcer]

Run a business and not thinking about podcasting. Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcast, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only iHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think iHeart, streaming radio and podcasting. Let us show [e-mail] that's iheartadvertising.com.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

And we're back. Okay, so we talked about what happened at the baftas earlier this year. The baftas are kind of like the British Oscars. So just to give you a bit of a recap, John Davidson, who has the neurological condition Tourette's, was at the BAFTA ceremony back in February to celebrate this film about his life. He has a particular kind of Tourette's that involves tics, where he sometimes uncontrollably shouts out things. And it's, it's. When that happens, it's like the worst thing that you could imagine saying. So the most contextually awful, offensive thing that one can say. And so at the baftas, he yelled out the N word. At the first award of the night being presented by the Sinners team, Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo, who were black, there were other things that he yelled out, like yelling out pedophile while the bafta's award ceremony host, Alan Cumming was speaking, but those did not make it into the broadcast. They were edited out. Also edited out was a speech where Akanola Deities Jr said free Palestine during his winning speech that was also edited out. However, the N word was kept in the broadcast even as Sony executives asked the baftas not to include it in the broadcast. But they did. After this happened, Davidson gave an interview where it sounded like to me, he had been kind of set up by the baftas. He said that the Baptist told him that he would be seated very far from the stage and that no one would hear anything if you were to experience a tic. But then somehow there was a live microphone in front of him for some reason. And like when he was experiencing tics, he did not realize initially that people could even hear them because he was told, you'll be sitting in a place where people won't hear them.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I remember talking about this story and looking into it and that that was my conclusion too. Like, it did sound like he had been set up. Like there was just to believe that it was an unintentional accident. One would need to believe a whole series of really weird, almost unexplainable events transpired.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

That is exactly how I would describe the results of the investigation which we now have. So the baftas said they were going to look into this this week. We have the results of the investigation from the BBC's executive complaints unit, or ECU, about what went wrong, what you just said, that you would have to believe so many things, so many random things all happened at once, just happened to happen. That's essentially what they're saying happened. So this is from Sky News. In its report, the ECU said members of the production team monitoring the ceremony in an outside broadcast vehicle said they did not hear or recognize the N word. Investigators accepted their account, agreeing the word quote was extremely indistinct to the point where it might well have not been recognized. So they didn't. They. They didn't realize it was the N word. Okay, sure. So they also say about 10 minutes later, there was another recurrence of the N word, which was recognized and, quote, immediately edit out in accordance with the protocols of offensive language. There is no reason to conclude that they would have applied the protocols in one case while deliberately ignoring them in the other. The ECU report said.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I mean, that's a pretty generous assumption that they're making.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

I'm so curious how they came to this conclusion, but. Okay, okay, but remember, one of the big issues was that the word was not edited out of the recorded version of the broadcast later, because certainly by then, all parties knew it contained the slur. There was no confusion about what the word was by that point. So what happened there? Well, investigators said there was a, quote, lack of clarity among the team as to whether the word was audible, which resulted in a delay of several hours. This was a, quote, serious mistake because there could be no certainty that the word would be inaudible to all viewers, they said, adding that the unedited recording remained available, quote, for so long, aggravated the offense caused by the inadvertent inclusion of the word during the initial broadcast.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

So this part makes no sense to me. Right. Like this part, if I'm understanding it correctly, they're saying that for several hours, which we know that almost immediately after it occurred, Warner Brothers went to the BBC, who is producing the show, and explicitly asked them to edit it out and make sure that it was edited out. So that happened right away. So according to this investigation, we're meant to believe that for several hours, the BBC production team was, like, debating with itself whether or not the word was actually audible. And so like, my question is, like, why not edit it out just to be safe? Like, even if it's like so quiet that nobody can hear it, just edit it out. And if it truly is so quiet, nobody will hear it, nobody will ever know the difference. Why not do that? That part makes no sense.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Also, if you're doing, if you're, if you've got a, A tape delayed broadcast and you can make. And they clearly, as we'll get to in a minute, they clearly had a lot of editorial decisions to make about what to cut and what to leave in. So you've got a broadcast. Let's say, let's. Let's say I believe them, which I fucking don't, but let's say that I do. Why is it okay to have it be like, well, something was screamed out, but don't worry, it's not audible. People, people aren't going to be able. It's not clearly recognizable as a slur. It'll just be like an unrecognizable thing that is yelled out. Why is that better? Just like, just. You know what I mean? Like, as you said, just cut it out. Like why, why include that?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Why include it? I mean, yeah, it's a great question. I struggle to think of any answer why they wouldn't just cut it out.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

And I just don't believe it. I guess that's what it comes down to, the whole thing of them saying we didn't know that was going to be audible or not. What do you mean? I feel like I need more information about what they mean about that. Because they could hear it.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, but was it audible? Sure, you can hear it. But is it audible?

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

But is it audible? It's not even a good lie. Okay, so what about the fact that Free Palestine was cut out of. Out of a speech for the broadcast while the N word was left in? Well, per Sky News, the investigation found that the production team's decision, quote, did not hinge on considerations of impartiality, but rather the main consideration was cutting out an hour of the three hour show to fit the two hour broadcast, quote, as is usual in coverage of events of this kind, cuts were made in some of the longer acceptance speeches, including that of Mr. Davies. The report said the ECU found the editing of the speech did not raise an issue of editorial standards.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

So just totally random that they cut Free Palestine.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Just random. Just random that they cut Free Palestine. It could have been anything, you know, it could have been anything that they cut.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I'm glad that they threw that part in there as well, just to make it clear that their conclusions are bullshit.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yes, Yes, I will say this was nice to hear that the ECU report noted that the complaints about the broadcast all showed a high level of awareness that Mr. Davidson's interjection was an involuntary result of his condition and that no blame was attached to him because he has a condition. So he is not to blame for this. The baftas and the BBC are to blame for this. So, I mean, I guess I'm happy that most people are keeping the smoke on the BBC and the baftas where it belongs, but I am disheartened to see that they're like. And also, it kind of wasn't our fault either.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

You know, we were doing our best. We were just locked in an internal debate for several hours about whether or not this thing that we all heard was actually audible and should be cut from the broadcast and that we were

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

told to cut from the broadcast and we said that we would cut from the broadcast and that we just didn't cut it from the broadcast. The report didn't say anything that I saw about why Davidson was sat next to a mic or why it took so long for the baftas or the BBC to meaningfully reach out to the sinners cast about what happened or what was being done to make any kind of amends for this catastrophic failure. Uh, I think honestly, they could have written anything in this, in this investigation report, and I would still be mad. I think I personally will probably die mad about it and that this has to be it.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

There's a lot of stuff like that these days.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

So quick trigger warning on this next story because it's a little bit rough. We have talked a lot about non consensual AI generated images of women and girls this year. And now an Ohio man who pled guilty to to cybercrimes involving both real and AI generated sexually explicit images has become what the Department of Justice says is the first person to be convicted under the Take It down act, that new federal AI statute. So, according to prosecutors, James Strahler II targeted at least six adult women between December 2024 and June of 2025, sending them harassing messages along with both real and AI generated explicit images of these women. So he would obtain or make these images of the women and then send them to the women he was harassing. He used AI to create pornographic videos depicting at least one of the victims in sex acts with her father and then shared those videos with her coworkers as part of a larger harassment campaign.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Sounds like a real cool guy.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yeah, a real winner. He also reportedly contacted the mom of his victims, threatening to distribute the explicit material that he had created of their daughters unless the mothers sent him nude photos of themselves. So he was basically like trying to extort the mothers of the victims that he was harassing into sending nude images. Prosecutors further alleged that he repeatedly called the victims, leaving voicemails of himself either masturbating or threatening sexual violence. So the Guardian reports that he admitted to cyberstalking, producing obscene visual representations of child sexual abuse and publication of digital forgeries. So that last charge, the digital. The digital forgeries charge, relates to the Take It down act, which prohibits non consensual online publication of intimate visual depictions and AI forgeries. So this legislation prohibits anyone from knowingly publishing or threaten to publish intimate images, including AI generated deep fake images, without consent. Social media companies and websites must remove the violating content within 48 hours following a victim's request. The U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Ohio said, we believe Strahler is the first person in the US to be convicted under the Take It Down Act. We will not tolerate the abhorrent practice of posting and publicizing AI generated intimate images of real individuals without consent. And boy, oh boy, do I wish that were true. Because GROK is still being used to generate non consensual images of women and girls, even while high school girls are taking Elon Musk to court over it. A group of high school girls just sued Elon Musk over Grok being used to create AI generated images of them. And they are minors. Yet Musk is still doing business. Payment processors are still supporting payment transactions for people to purchase GROK and X subscriptions, even as the EU says that GROK is being used to create illegal content of miners. So, yeah, I wish it were true that we won't tolerate this happening, but I don't think that actually is the truth.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

That's so disappointing because it's so true. You know, it's like you. It almost feels like a little bit of a win. Like a creep is prosecuted and women who have been targeted by what seemed like pretty disturbing crimes get some justice. And you almost feel good about that, but then you just look at the uneven, inconsistent way that the administration and the Justice Department apply things like this. And it clearly is like two sets of rules, right? Like one for people that they want to target, which in this case it seems like they targeted a legitimate creep, but then a totally different set of rules for their allies like Musk, who, like you said is just continuing to sell subscriptions to software that does exactly the same thing that this guy was just convicted for.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Exactly. It's so clearly two set of rules and unequal enforcement. So, yeah, I wish that we did live in a world where this stuff was taken seriously and that we wouldn't tolerate it, but we don't because of exactly what you just said, that the powers that be are invested in letting people that they like and their allies get away with it, profit from it, laugh about it, diminish it, continue to do it, find new ways to do it, build an empire on it. And I hate it. And so, yeah, I think until that institutional wrong is righted, I just, I wish I could agree that we take it seriously, as this district attorney said, but I don't. All the evidence is pointing to the fact that we don't. The Take it down act only works if somebody complains. And so somebody has to know, like, if I'm on X, I have no idea that this image of me is on there. And so like nobody has to no platform. I'm not a big fan of this legislation because I think it puts a big burden on the survivor to first of all be on the platform where this is happening, make the request and then follow through with it to make sure that that 48 hours window is abides by. There's lots of different ways to do legislation. I think as legislation puts way too much of the burden on the. On the victim. More after a quick break. Let's get right back into it.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

So this is a quick story that I'm glad we're talking about because I think it has some very practical implications. 404 Media published an article today about what they said is the first trial in which people were charged as terrorists for antifa activities. ANTIFA stands for anti fascist. Being opposed to fascists has been criminalized by the Trump administration. So despite the fact that antifa is really just more of like a general idea than any sort of organization, Trump declared it a terrorist organization in September. And so in this particular trial, a group of people who allegedly set off fireworks and vandalized an ICE facility in Texas were arrested. And because of that declaration, they are being charged as terrorists. So one detail that's emerged from the trial is is that a big part of the evidence that was presented against them is from the defendant's signal messages, which the FBI was able to recover from the phone of one of the defendants who was charged with setting off the fireworks. As listeners know, we are huge fans of signal here. At tangodi, it's the primary messaging app that we use for talking about show production stuff as well as just personal conversations. It's free, it's secure, and in my opinion, everyone should be using it all the time as like our default messaging app. Both Bridget and I give monthly donations, but not because we want to unlock some special features or anything because everybody gets all the special features for free. It's just because we really like it and want to support it. It's run by a nonprofit. I think it's a great model for what valuable software can be. They don't sponsor the show in any. I'm just talking like this because I genuinely really like what they have built and put into the world.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

As you said, I'm a big fan of Signal. But I have to ask, if Signal is so secure, how did the FBI gain access to these defendants messages?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

That is a great question, Bridget, and that is a big part of why I wanted to cover this segment here almost as like a public service announcement for listeners. So like pretty much all messaging apps, when you receive an incoming text on your phone via Signal, you get a notification on your phone that tells you that you have a new message. By default, that notification includes a preview of the actual message contents, the first 100 characters or so of what it says. And this is the problem. And this is how the FBI was able to access the defendant's messages. Even though they had been deleted by from Signal, they were no longer accessible from the Signal app itself, but they were still able to be found in the phone's notification history. So even though the message had been deleted within the app, a copy still existed within that notification history in the phone's operating system. And so that's what the prosecutors presented in court. And it's a good reminder that despite all of the app's like, sophisticated encryption and very careful design features and so much many ways that one user setting and the way it was configured undermined all of that and left those messages exposed.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Wow. So if anybody listening wants to fix this, what should they be doing?

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yes, they should change that setting. And I would urge everybody to do this, like right now, while you're listening, why not? What else have you got to do? Dry your hands from doing the dishes or whatever you're doing While you listen to this, go to the Signal app, go to Settings, Notifications, and then click on Show. And that will give you some options about what information gets shown in notifications. You have three options. You can choose name and Message, which is the least secure that's what these people who are now being charged as terrorists had. So you probably don't want that. You could also choose name only. So it just shows you the name of the person who messaged you, but none of the content of the message itself. Or you could choose no name or message, which would be the most secure. You should, in my opinion, you should choose one of those latter two options, depending on how secure you want to be, and that will keep the contents of your messages out of your phone's notification history. I actually think it's really unfortunate that one of those more secure options, even the name only option, isn't the default on signal. We know that defaults really matter a lot for how people engage with apps. Like, the reality is that most people install an app and probably never change the defaults. And so for an app that markets itself so strongly on security, it feels a little bit like a miss to leave something so important to the responsibility of the end user. And I hope they change that, honestly. But in the meantime, until they do, I would really urge everybody who values their privacy to make that change.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

And I know some of you were thinking, I don't go to protests. I'm not an activist, I'm not a journalist. This is not the kind of thing that I need to think about. That is actually not true. Because good personal digital security is important for everyone. I always tell my friends who say that to me, I'm like, well, I am a journalist and an activist and you know me and I'm in your phone, so have good digital security to protect your friend. B. Who is these things even if you're not.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yes, that is such a great point. Right? Like, it's not just about everybody protecting themselves. It's about all of us protecting everybody in our networks. Our, our families, our friends, our acquaintances, right? Like, good digital security, I think, is just a good practice for all of them. Especially, like just look at the world, right? Like look outside, look at any headlines in any newspaper. Listen to the stories that we cover on this show. Like, how many people have we covered where just some normal, non celebrity, everyday person going about their life who all of a sudden, for reasons outside their control, is thrust into an Internet maelstrom where they have to contend with being doxed and harassed and coordinated attacks from people who just want to harm them. It's, it's unfortunate, but it happens. And I, you know, I don't think we need to live our lives in fear or like unreasonable paranoia, but I think just in case it is, it's important to take steps to protect our privacy and the privacy of the people that we care about. Because once it's the sort of thing that, like, once you need it, it's too late.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Well put. More after a quick break. Let's get right back into it. Okay, so the courts have found time and time again that the state cannot force somebody to undergo medical treatment, even if that medical treatment might save someone else's life. But there is a pretty big, glaring exception, and that is people who are giving birth. ProPublica has this horrifying investigation that we'll put in the show. Notes about black women who are being forced by the courts to undergo C sections when they don't want to have C sections. In the one ProPublica piece, she talks about a black woman named Charisse, who herself is a doula. So she has some exceptions. Experience around childbirth and birthing. Her water breaks. She goes to the hospital in Florida. This is how ProPublica reports on what happened next. Doctors told her they were concerned about the risk of uterine rupture, a potentially deadly complication for her and her baby. Sharee understood the risk to be less than 2% and repeatedly told doctors she would not consent to a cesarean without trying to have a vaginal delivery. First, the doctors appeared to relent, leaving her to labor for several more hours. Then a nursing supervisor wheeled a tablet up to her bed and informed her that she was in court. The reason? Failing to agree to a c section. So ProPublica has the video of her zoom court hearing, and it is exactly what you're thinking. She is very much in a hospital bed. She is undressed. She's got that, like, hair cap thingy on that they make you wear when you're in the hospital. She's hooked up to IVs. She is very much somebody who is in the middle of attempting labor while also being forced to do a zoom court hearing with seven strangers, judges and court administrators.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

I looked at that video, and it is horrifying. It's like something out of a parody because there's so many people on that zoom call. And not only is she the only black person on that zoom call, but she's, like, in a hospital bed, hooked up to IVs, in labor, in active labor.

[Charisse (Interviewee)]

It.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

It's. It seems like a parody if it weren't so, like, horrifying and upsetting.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yes. ProPublica obtained that video of her Zoom court hearing and got her consent to share the story. In that zoom call, you can basically hear her arguing her case for Wanting to do this vaginal birth and not wanting a C section and exactly as you said, it's just horrifying. It's like the image of a black woman who is hooked up to all the machines and very much in a hospital while having to kind of plead her case about what she wants to do with her own body to a bunch of white guys is. It's just horrifying.

[Charisse (Interviewee)]

I don't want to be a statistic, and I came here out of precaution. However, I still have rights as an American citizen and as a patient that I am allowed to decide what goes on with me and my body and my baby.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Well, let me ask you about that. What about the risks to the child? The doctors testified about some risks and help me understand that.

[Charisse (Interviewee)]

In regards to what? Because she's saying that the uterine rupture can cause the placenta to abrupt. And it's a lot of what ifs and maybes. Anytime you go into childbirth, whether you do a vaginal or a C section, there is inherent risk to the mother and the baby. So if it's between them choosing whether I have to live or the baby has to live, I did tell them that I want to live. I have other children out here in the world that need me, and that is my right. Because at the end of the day, if I die from a C section, nobody on this call is going to take care of my children. And that's just being frank. Okay? So I am concerned about the well being of my child, but at the end of the day, with my background, I can read a trace just like they can. And there's nothing that is saying that this is that emergency situation that I have to be rushed into a C section within an hour.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

At one point on the zoom hearing, she asked for an attorney or at least to have a patient advocate present for the conversation. But Florida courts do not require lawyers for pregnant women in hearings about their medical decisions. And the hospital, I guess, just didn't provide her a patient advocate, so she has to advocate for herself. I will say, though, I as I can, I can tell that she's doing that thing where you're absolutely fucking furious. But, you know, you've got to hold it together because if you give them ammo for them to be like, oh, you're like a crazy, angry black woman right now. Even though she is legitimately going through a situation that is genuinely enraging, I can tell that she is really trying to keep her composure and like, speak in a certain kind of way. And, like, advocate for herself. And she's a doula, so she knows what she's talking about, and she's really drawing on her experience as a doula to advocate for herself. So I guess I say that to say, like, kudos to her for advocating for herself so well under such duress, but she absolutely should not have to. So she explains her reasons for not wanting a C section, and they're very reasonable. They're things like, you know, infection and not wanting to have a long recovery along with the risk of death. She talks about how she is very worried that she will not be able to care for her other children if she is struggling with recovery from a C section, which is pretty major surgery and whatever potential complications might come from it. She also says to the Zoom Court judges and administrators, if something happens to her and she was. Were to die in that C section, her children would go into foster care. And she says, nobody on this Zoom Court hearing is going to take care of my kids if something happens to me while I'm getting this major surgery. So I don't feel like any of you all can tell me what I should do with my body in childbirth. So that hearing lasted for two hours. At one point, she asked if she could transfer to a different hospital, and they were like, ooh, that's probably not likely, because that new hospital would have to admit you as a patient. She also then asks if she can have a black doctor or at least a black nurse work with her. The judge, again, who was a white man, he almost sort of laughs at her and says, well, I don't see how race has anything to do with this. And he wouldn't be saying that if he knew the statistics around black maternal mortality in this country. And she actually checks him on this. She says, well, the. As a doula, I can tell you the medical outcomes are better when black people have doctors that look like them. Their health outcomes are better, which is just like, a fact. Like, again, I can. I can. My heart breaks for her because I can see her having to draw from, like, very specific expertise and very specific experiences to communicate this in a way that might have a chance of getting through. So she doesn't just sound like some, you know, difficult black woman. She makes another good point where she says, I don't want anybody who is in. Involved in me having to do this. This, like, Zoom Court hearing while I'm trying to give birth. I don't want any of these people involved in operating me on this. What I'm under for a C section, which I completely understand, because these people already clearly, clearly see her as difficult and, like, argumentative and problematic. I can understand why she's like, now I don't trust any of these people to be operating on me while I'm under for a C section.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, they really talked down to her a lot in that hearing, too, in ways that are just, like, pretty surprising, maybe, maybe shouldn't be surprising.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yeah, it just is a really bad, horrifying situation. So the judge did not order an immediate C section, but he did say the hospital could perform one in an emergency without her consent. In the end, her baby was born via C section. And after the baby was born, immediately after, they made her do another session of Zoom court, even before she was taken to the neonatal unit to see her baby, at that point, she was like, you all can do this meeting on your own. I want to see my baby. Like, I don't give a fuck what you all have to say. I'm done. So the ProPublica journalist who wrote this piece, Amy Yorkarian, covers reproductive health and is based in Alabama, and she writes. Throughout my career, I focused on women facing the consequences of the state's fetal personhood policy. That's the idea that fetuses should have the same legal status as children. My investigation shows how a similar theory played into the cases of two women, Cherise Doily and Brianna Bennett, who was another black woman who was also forced to have a court ordered C section. These women experienced eerily similar situations in Florida. In both cases, they found themselves fighting for their rights to make medical decisions because they were pregnant. And so her piece also goes on to sort of contend with the fact that ob gyns do have a unique challenge in that they're simultaneously caring for two patients, the mother and the baby. And the needs of those two patients do not always align. And so when conflicts arise, which can happen, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, their own ethical guidelines say that doctors should put the mother's well being first. But in practice, that does not always happen. And so they talked to this professor of law at Drexel University, Elizabeth Kukura, who says that basically these cases reveal this pattern of doctors prioritizing the fetus over the mother, which is a dynamic that is sort of rooted in this tendency to view women primarily through the lens of our reproductive function, that we're not kind of humans with agency and responsibility, let alone the need to, like, care for other children that we may have or live life or whatever, like, not want to be dead. We are meant to just be vessels for carrying children rather than patients with agency in our own right. And we also see Shareese talking to the doctors and arguing with them, saying, you know, I've made it clear that if it came down to my life or the baby's life, that I would rather live because I've got other kids I need to care for and I don't want those kids going into the system. I think there is a little bit of a thing that if you are not willing to sacrifice your life for your child in childbirth, then you're like a bad mom. And it's just frustrating to hear her have to argue this case of like, no, I actually, it's very important for me to be alive and healthy because I've got children to care for at home. It just. Yeah, it's just very heartbreaking. Yeah.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

The judge explicitly called her a bad mom and said that a good mom would let herself be cut open.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yeah, so just really horrifying. Okay, so I have a less enraging story also about sexual and reproductive health, though less horrifying. The popular sexual health and wellness company Bellesa Boutique said that Instagram permanently deleted their account for using the word clitoris. Belsa makes sex toys for all genders and they also have a sister site that is a like of porn site for women on Instagram. They had over 700,000 followers and a decade's worth of content. I was actually looking into them and it sounds like they like started on Instagram in earnest. That's like where the company started. The company confirmed to Mashable that Meta said that their account was disabled for violating Meta's community standards due to sexually explicit language in organic content. There is no opportunity to appeal and they also say they got no warning about this specific outcome. However, a Meta spokesperson told Mashable, quote, this account repeatedly posted explicit descriptions of sexual acts and over the last few months was alerted each time it violated our sexually explicit language policy, the CEO of the company told Mashable. For over a decade, hundreds of thousands of people came to the Bellesco community to learn about and celebrate their own bodies. A safe, shame free space to discuss sexual wellness and pleasure. Instagram deleted it for sexually explicit language, meaning discussing women's bodies in a health context is treated as inherently unacceptable. So they showed Mashable the email that Meta had sent them about this. The email said that examples of content that would not be allowed include sexually explicit language that uses explicit or graphic detail about the genitals, states of sexual arousal or sexual encounters. But we actually know the truth about this. That truth is that that standard really only applies to the genitals of people who are not cisgender men. Because Meta totally allows ads for things like erectile dysfunction, medication, or other kinds of content or products that are geared toward men's sexual health and wellness. Back in 2023, a sex toy company called Unbound, which actually used to sponsor our show but I don't think does anymore, tested whether or not Meta would approve its product ads if those ads were targeted at men instead of women. And it did. They built a whole fake brand called Thunder Thrusts geared toward men to see if it would stop their ads about sex products from being taken down if those ads were geared toward men and not women. And guess what? It worked. And that is because Meta absolutely does not equally enforce this standard. And by doing so, they basically decide whose sexual wellness and health is acceptable and whose isn't. A 2025 study by the center for Intimacy justice examining how platforms like Meta handle sexual and reproductive health content found widespread suppression. It is like not is like, very, very documented. Among the groups surveyed, nearly two thirds had organic content taken down from Meta's platforms, while the vast majority of both businesses and nonprofits, 84% and 76%, respectively, had their advertisements rejected. This sex toy company, Belsa, is not taking this lying down. They say that they want to pursue legal action against Meta over this. And so now they are asking folks to help them build the case that Instagram is using a sexist double standard by sending them evidence of content that you see on Instagram that violates the same standard that was used to ban them. They put a post on threads that said, we need your help. If you come across content on Instagram that violates the same standards they used to ban us, screenshot it and send it to evidence. Elsa, co help us prove the double standard.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Okay, Bridget, thanks for taking me through all of those news stories. Before we wrap up here, do you have any updates to share about the audiobook? Love at first prompt. That's coming out in July.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Little behind the scenes update on the audiobook front, which is that we finally finished recording the audiobook audio. I thought that because I am a professional talker as a podcaster for a living, this would be no sweat, y'. All. It actually is quite a lot of work to record an audiobook and I wanted to give a quick shout out to Sarah Ginsburg who listens to the show. Hey, Sarah, if you're listening, who is our audiobook director? Who knew that audiobooks have directors? They do, but Sarah is ours and she is fantastic. And I don't know if I would have gotten through it without her help.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah, yeah, Sarah was fantastic. Really just like, kind, but also clearly very dedicated to her craft of producing high quality audio. And it was really exciting to get it all recorded and to have that step in the process wrapped up. And I believe that the audio engineers at Simon and Schuster are editing it, putting it together now. And so we should have a draft to listen to pretty shortly and then it's not going to be that long before it's available for listeners to listen to, which I'm so excited to hear what people think about it.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yes. Sarah knows that while we were recording in my home audio booth at different times, I lost my voice, burst into tears, and watched my cat get sick in the booth. And Sarah was a pro through all of it. If you want to hear an audiobook that was recorded through tears, lost voice, and cat sick, please pre order our audiobook. Love that first prompt. You can do [e-mail] if you send us a screenshot of your pre order, you can email us or tag us on social, whatever you wanna do. We will send you a handwritten thank you card and a sticker. Thank you so much to everybody who's done it so far. Thank you again, Sarah. No, thank you to my cat who chose the least opportune moment to get sick in an audio booth. But we still love you, Sammy.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

Yeah. And listeners will be happy to know that we did edit that part out. So you would never know if you didn't listen to this behind the scenes segment.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

You're getting this, like special BTS content.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

This is like the author's cut.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Yes.

[Co-host (likely a guest or secondary host)]

All the cat sick details. All right, well, thanks for having me here, Bridget. Listeners can let us know what they thought about these stories by emailing us helloangote.com leaving a comment on Spotify and they can follow Bridget on Instagram and tick tock at BridgetMarie in DC. Follow the show on YouTube. The handle is there are no girls on the Internet. We're also on Blue sky with the same handle. And I think that is everything. So thanks for having me here. Bridget, great talking with you.

[Bridget Todd (Host)]

Great talking to you too. Thanks for being here and I will see you on the Internet. Got a story about an interesting thing in tech or just want to say hi. You can reach [e-mail] youm can also find transcripts for today's [e-mail] There are no Girls on the Internet was created by me, Bridget Todd. It's a production of iHeartRadio and unbossed creative. Jonathan Strickland is our Executive producer, Tari Harrison is our producer and Sound Engineer Michael Amato is our contributing producer. I'm your host, Bridget Todd. If you want to help us grow, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, check out the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. This is an I heart podcast.

[Commercial Announcer]

Guaranteed human.