Faulkner said, “I’ve been a Democrat since the day I was born because my dad would’ve died if he’d ever known I’d ever voted for a Republican.”

“My dad, before he got married, was part of the Nonpartisan League, which was an almost socialist resistance to the status quo. And he was a, well, he belonged to it, but he also was a spokesperson for it. And so he was a rebel from day one.”

For as much as modern-day Republicans like to use the word ‘socialist’ as a slurish label, Midwest and broader American history is filled with many a socialist labor rebel.

Faulkner’s father, Dennis, a North Dakota farmer, was a participant in a socialist group. A rather large socialist third party, called the Populist Party, emerged in the 1890s and was fused into the Democratic ticket for the 1896 presidential election. It was also during the Industrial Revolution that labor movements advocated for eight-hour workdays. (Lyz Lenz also gives more Midwestern examples here.)

And now, it appears that another present-day socialist movement is once again making its way through the U.S., and we can even see it taking a real hold in *gasp* the Midwest! And they’re advocating for crazy things like health care for all *gasp* and affordable *gasp* housing!

We recently saw Abdul El-Sayed’s win over establishment Democrat Haley Stevens in the Michigan U.S. Senate primary. Stevens was backed by millions of AIPAC dollars, and yet El-Sayed (who has rejected the democratic socialist label but still represents a ton of democratic socialist issues) walked away the winner and will face off against Republican Mike Rogers in November.

The Midwest has always been the cornerstone in the minds of real Americans. Middle America is known not only for great hotdishes, but also being obscenely normal and average. It’s one reason why the Iowa Caucus is as big of a deal as it is. The Midwest is the normal, everyday American.

And when a democratic-like socialist pulls off a win in the Midwest, one can conclude that a couple of your normal, average, everyday Americans have aligned themselves with their friendly neighborhood democratic socialist candidate.

Share People Call Her Snarky

But democratic socialists saw success elsewhere before they showed up in the Midwest.

In Denver, Colorado, we saw democratic socialist Melat Kiros beat longtime U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette in a primary earlier this summer. And how can we forget when outspoken socialist Zorhan Mamdani glided in as the mayor of New York City last November? (Instituting socialist policies immediately, which liberal TikTok seems pleased by, while Alex Berenson of The Free Press is not.)

I wrote an article for The Minnesota Star Tribune last summer regarding U.S Rep. Ilhan Omar and which ‘side’ she would choose: Establishment DFLers? Democratic socialists? The Minneapolis mayoral race was underway, and at the time, Omar had yet to make an endorsement for either the establishment incumbent (known doer of nothing) Jacob Frey or Minnesota Sen. Omar Fateh, a self-described democratic socialist. She was later pictured with Fateh at the polls, along with social media posts urging Minneapolis residents to vote for him, so it would seem she made her choice of side pretty clear.

And although in the end, Frey was able to pull himself into another mayoral term, the rise of democratic socialists or just socialist-like candidates showing up to take on establishment Democrats, or establishment-backed Democrats, and SEEING SUPPORT is quite telling.

There’s a reason long-term Democrats like Faulkner’s father clearly saw a need to advocate for and push for socialism in his 1940s North Dakota community. It’s the same reason Michigan Democrats chose El-Sayed in the primary. There’s a sector of American Democrats that are upset with the Democratic establishment, and are making an upset of their own. This sector (we all know it’s young people) wants to see more action on issues they care about: reproductive rights, environmental justice, the Free Palestine movement, student debt, health care, the housing crisis, etc. This sector has voted for the establishment likes of Joe Biden and Hillary Rodham Clinton when the average American Democrat nominated them to lead the charge. Now they’re taking matters into their own hands, and are trying their hardest to get their democratic socialist candidates in city councils, state legislatures, and even Congress across the finish line in the general election.

And if those democratic socialist candidates are showing up on the ballots of general elections in the Midwest, hell, they’re going to be showing up across the country.

I watched and enjoyed the original show from the 70s growing up with my childhood friend. We dressed in our own prairie dresses and played school. I’ve visited the real Walnut Grove in Minnesota. I’ve waded in Plum Creek. I’ve seen Laura Ingalls Wilder’s birthplace in Pepin, Wisconsin. I was sitting front and center to watch the new Netflix adaptation when it came out.

Weirdly enough, I never did get around to reading the real Little House book series written by Ingalls Wilder. I was too busy watching Melissa Gilbert push Alison Arngrim’s wheelchair down a hill. Small joys.

But recently, I cracked open my mother’s copy of the first book in the famed book series, Little House in the Big Woods. The book was published in 1932 and details the Ingalls family’s early years living in Wisconsin.

It may also have been the inception of women’s body image issues.

Chapter 8 of the book begins with the Ingalls family’s visit to Grandma and Grandpa’s house, where a big party is about to take place. Aunt Docia and Aunt Ruby are getting ready. Laura recalls her aunts pulling on the strings of each other’s corsets and exclaiming, “Pull harder!”

Here is the real written scene from the chapter.

“Aunt Docia kept measuring her waist with her hands, and at last she gasped, ‘I guess that’s the best you can do.’

She said, ‘Caroline says Charles could span her waist with his hands, when they were married.’

Caroline was Laura’s Ma and when she heard this Laura felt proud.”

Please excuse me while I scream into a pillow.

First of all, I expected there to be less, if any, mentions of women’s bodies in these children’s books, not solely because they were children’s books but also because they’re living in Wisconsin for Christ’s sake. Why were they wearing corsets in the first place? I’ve been to Wisconsin, and I’m drawing a blank for any reason why someone might wear a corset there. There’s no aristocracy. There’s bears, and Queen Victoria is not hiding in a tree trunk then or now.

After reading Chapter 8, I had to walk away and breathe.

Share People Call Her Snarky

Women’s beauty standards have always been focused on making women freakishly, physically smaller. What corsets were in 1870 is now an alien-looking Demi Moore on Ozempic.

And especially since the ‘release’ of the Epstein files (let’s be honest, we all know there are more files out there) earlier this year, grown men and their obsession with teenage girls and the standard of ‘smallness’ have become inextricably linked. Jameela Jamil wrote about it on her Substack last February in a post affectionately titled “Ah shit! We let pedophiles decide our beauty standards.”

“The prescription for grown women to be hairless, smooth, curve-less, and ageless is a response to a pedophile-dominant media/entertainment industry, and they’ve found a smart way to exploit the image of the very young,” (Jamil).

Even now, we can’t get away from the plague of smallness that was found in a log house in the great big woods of Wisconsin in 1870. The obsession for small baby waists and feeling proud that you or your mother had, or maybe even continues to have, one lives on. Demi Moore continues to reach for the Ozempic and Serena Williams continues to advertise it.

And the worst of it is is that women pass down small beauty standards just as much as men do. They are not guilt free. Ma has clearly bragged about her waist size in the past. How else could those aunts have repeated and honed in on the waist sentiment if it wasn’t for a comment probably made from Ma earlier before the party began? There was no reason for that, Ma! Just let Aunt Docia and Ruby have a nice time.

“Why is it a brag to lose weight straight after pregnancy? After your body has created a human inside? Why is the brag not the baby you made? Why is it how fast you can ‘bounce back?’ as if you didn’t just pull off a miracle?

…How did we get this far into feminism and allow for such stupid, vacuous, dangerous nonsense? To encourage it. To sell it to each other? To the next generation of young women? To our own daughters and nieces?

All of this shit is coded to say… erase all signs of [womanhood]. Age, [body hair], autonomy, motherhood, thighs, creases. Adopt girlhood as the forever norm. Girlhood good. Womanhood bad,” (Jamil)

Women who reinforce pubescent beauty standards are just as much victims of the small standard of beauty themselves, but different choices can be made with the young people in your life. I for one will not allow my young cousins to sit through family dinners with my relatives telling them that the food on their plate is fattening. I experienced the brunt of that as it is, I don’t need to pass the baton.

Laura Ingalls Wilder would have had no reason to ‘feel proud’ that her father could span the waist of her mother upon their marriage, if it weren’t for her poor aunts chasing an ideal that is disgustingly pubescent and that the beauty industry continues to facilitate today. I’m sure there was more about Caroline Ingalls to feel prideful about than her waist size. (For the love of all that is holy, she raised children on the prairie, not to mention what her life was like before her daughter’s memories of her.) And those aunts shouldn’t have had to worry about their waist sizes. They didn’t need to look like little girls. They were women. They were people with just as much right to exist without having their future husband measure their waists.

And if a husband can’t deal with the fact that he can’t span his wife’s waist, well then he should deal with the fact that he’s a terrible husband.

Danny from The Mindy Project surprisingly provided what I think is one of the best pieces of advice for young women’s body image. “You’re a woman, so look like a woman.” God, it’s almost as if a woman wrote that line. (Thank you, Mindy Kaling.)

If women want to change the expectation that requires us to shrink ourselves, if they no longer want exploited teenage baby bodies to be the order of the day, women are the solution to change those beauty standards. Ladies, we’re just going to have to change the beauty standards ourselves. Because men certainly aren’t going to do it for us.

Then it happened. Suddenly I was swept from Kansas to the land of Oz. I was embraced by Teen Council.

Teen Council was a program funded through Planned Parenthood, but has since gone defunct due to federal budget cuts, much to my dismay. It offered an incredible service to middle and high schools around the U.S. Its mission was simple: High school-aged kids attend class sessions once a week to learn how to become full-fledged sexual health educators, who would then teach their peers medically accurate and unbiased sexual health education.

When Coach Carr in the movie Mean Girls says, “Don’t have sex. Because you will get pregnant, and die,” I was glad I could be a person someone my age could come to to ask questions about contraception. Many people approached me about emergency contraception. A family member asked me about IUDs. I also made countless new friends, and was no longer crying into my radiator.

Share People Call Her Snarky

On July 22, I saw a post on The New York Times’ Instagram that read, “Trump Officials Overhaul Teen Pregnancy Program to Focus on Marriage, Starting Families,” and I almost spit out my Liquid IV infused water.

The corresponding article by Jan Hoffman goes on to say that new federal criteria for grant holders providing sexual health education and materials “must teach abstinence as the only means to prevent teen pregnancy. Courses must stress the importance of marriage and procreation and instruct young people how to safeguard their fertility.”

This ‘update’ to the Teen Pregnancy Program, which was an umbrella initiative that supported programs like Teen Council, is a direct attempt to skew medically accurate information towards traditional values like marriage and parenthood. Kat Rosenfield says in an article for the Free Press that in the new federal guidelines for the Teen Pregnancy Program, the word ‘marriage’ only appears twice. Okay, but the words ‘contraception’ and ‘birth control’ appear zilch. That’s telling. The very program committed to preventing unplanned teen pregnancies doesn’t mention the tools best-suited to prevent them.

Of course, all of this is coming out during a time when teen pregnancy rates are at a record low, and women over 40 are getting pregnant more often than teens. Most would think this is good news, but not the Trump administration. Not the administration that is more concerned with a falling birth rate than actually improving conditions for children or for raising them.

(Sidenote: This TikTok regarding the administration’s stance on falling teen pregnancy rates also made me spit out my Liquid IV infused water.)

The Trump administration’s policies indicate that they don’t want to improve Americans’ way of life. The changes made to the Teen Pregnancy Program indicate that they don’t want teens to have access to the tools that prevent pregnancies. They don’t want them to know how to put on a condom. They don’t want them to know about IUDs. They most definitely don’t want them to have access to abortion.

They want the birth rate to tick up. They want more capitalist slog-horses.

In a previous article, I mentioned that the Trump administration wants “Americans to have 11 children on a $7.25 federally mandated minimum wage salary… . They want cheap labor, so Trump and his billionaire friends can keep getting richer. And it’s all under the guise of religious superiority and morals.”

Again, I think this overhaul to the Teen Pregnancy Program is an indicator of this.

Rosenfield goes on to say in her article that “Maybe an update to our priors vis-a-vis the best uses of sex education isn’t the worst idea?” Sure. I don’t want anyone ever to experience a Coach Carr-like person telling them they’ll die if they have sex. More access to medically accurate and unbiased sexual health information is always a good thing.

However, cutting progressive sex-ed programs, like Teen Council, is not the way forward. Accusing programs and organizations of promoting ‘premarital sex’ when they too are simply offering information, and enforcing ‘sexual risk avoidance’ as the only method of birth control is not helpful. This new overhaul to the Teen Pregnancy Program is yet another step to ‘fix’ America’s falling birthrate at the expense of citizens who are already struggling. (I should know, since I’m currently an unemployed college graduate.)

And if you don’t think it is, you’re kidding yourself.

Always keep talking,

- C

Update: One player from Argentina didn’t shake President Donald Trump’s hand when receiving his silver medal, however, I don’t think it looked very deliberate. But thanks anyway Cristian Romero.

Germany won the Men’s FIFA World Cup in 2014, when I was 11. I still remember the winning goal from Mario Götze. I remember when my German father came back from partying into the night. I rewatch the 7:1 game against Brazil at least twice a year. I’m a soccer fan and a dedicated Men’s and Women’s FIFA World Cup watcher.

On July 19, Spain won the FIFA World Cup. At least it wasn’t Argentina (I’m still upset about their game against Egypt). And what a hangnail-pulling game it was. I was just as riveted by the final match as I was angered when President Donald Trump and FIFA President Gianni Infantino appeared on my screen to shake hands and hang gold medals on the sweaty necks of the World Cup champions.

Infantino and Trump carried the golden trophy over to this year’s soccer champions, their hands entwined obscenely like the poisonous rainbow snakes that swarmed the arena in The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes. The two most corrupt individuals representing their respective corrupt institutions. The two individuals who conspired to disregard U.S. player Folarin Balogun’s red card from their game against Bosnia and Herzegovina and allowed him to play in the laughably embarrassing match against Belgium, hilariously proving for the millionth time that everything Trump touches turns to shit.

Share People Call Her Snarky

I was waiting for the Spanish players to reject either of their handshakes, to put up a minor protest against their corrupt hosts. But no. As the procession continued, so did the parade of handshakes. (I thought at one point I saw one player reject Trump’s extended hand, but he just shook the hand of Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo first.) Some players even gave both men a long embrace, a pat on the shoulder, or a jokey jab in the stomach.

Really guys? Have you seen the news? I’ve traveled internationally before; I know countries outside of the U.S. hear about the corrupt shenanigans that plague us. Or have we already forgotten about Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis and the two deaths of Minneapolis residents at the hands of ICE (which is controlled under the executive branch), and two recent deaths in Texas and Maine, also at the hands of ICE?

Have we forgotten about the Big Beautiful (Shitty) Bill, where Americans lost a wide variety of health care coverage? Have we forgotten his response when Rep. Melissa Hortman was assassinated alongside her husband in their own home? Have we forgotten the complete tonal shift when Charlie Kirk was assassinated a few months later? Have we forgotten about the fake peace prize FIFA made up and gave to Trump to get on his good side? Have we forgotten everything that’s happened since Trump first appeared on the political scene?

The whole procession of handshakes reminded me of the U.S. Men’s Hockey team's gold medal win at the Winter Olympics last February. How Trump called and complimented them while poking fun at the women’s team (who also won fucking gold and have many times before), while the players laughed along and then allowed themselves to be shown off in the stands during this year’s State of the Union address. No mention of the women’s gold medal win was made.

Is it too much to ask for a handshake not to be accepted from the most corrupt sitting president in U.S. history?

And yes, before you ask, I understand that it is not the job of Spain’s players to put themselves in the line of fire of FIFA’s own Peace Prize holder. It’s not their country; it’s not their fight. But do you not know how happy I would’ve been if anyone from either Spain or Argentina had done something? Like that move where you go for a handshake and then run your hand through your hair instead.

I would have been ecstatic. I would have been as elated as my dad was when Germany won the World Cup in 2014.

I really wish more men on such a wide and all-encompassing platform would take a risk and make a point for some greater purpose. I really wish more men would get more upset that a sitting president gets FIFA’s president to revoke a player’s red card. I really wish men didn’t hug people who so degenerately flaunt their breakage of the rules. I wish men didn’t willingly shake hands with rapists and predators.

I wish more men would say something, do something. (“But he’s nice to me!” Yeah, well he also deliberately stood in front of your celebration, blocking your teammates, is he still your best friend?) I really wish more men would bite the hand that feeds them and hang golden medals around their necks when they win.

Instead, the players shook both Trump’s and Infantino’s hands, then cheered as they held up their trophy.

Congratulations to you, Spain.

Always keep talking,

- C

Now, allow me to introduce you to Sofia Coppola summer! Sofia Coppola summer means you no harm, so fear not! It’s not as free-loving as summers past, but doesn’t mean a total relegation to a sad girl coma. Rather, it asks you for some introspection.

Share People Call Her Snarky

Sofia Coppola summer means introspection and transformation. It means readying yourself for change. It means sitting in hurt and trying to understand what it means. It means scrapbooking, looking at old photos, reminiscing about a lost childhood, and trying to figure out what the world is laying on your inner teenage shoulders.

It’s Lux Lisbon eating a popsicle. It’s Cecilia Lisbon exclaiming, “Obviously, doctor, you’ve never been a 13-year-old girl,” while also encapsulating Priscilla Presley’s, “If I don’t leave now I never will,” and Marie Antoinette’s, “That’s such nonsense, I would never say that."

It’s a hurting in your head while trying desperately to find yourself. It’s a questioning of external dynamics. It’s an acknowledgement of sacrificial lambs. It’s a romanticization of staring off in a daze while sucking on a cigarette to feel in control of your life, which, of course, you are not.

It’s a Sofia Coppola movie that we keep coming back to, trying to understand. It’s a summer that acknowledges that while things are bad and weird, joy is a choice; however fleeting, and however stagnant.

When people are laid off, rent prices soar, but salaries do not; when people find comfort in single apartments and not in others, and Dr. Oz complains that one in three Americans are ‘under-babied’ while offering no real proposals to improve the quality of life, it is difficult to not fall into a complete Lana Del Rey sad girl summer coma. We romanticize her films because they allow us to sit in hurt instead of constantly pushing it away. However, in those melancholic themes, in the rebellious moments, her heroines and the ladies watching them on their screens transform and reach for agency. In an attempt to protect their peace.

Sofia Coppola summer isn't about becoming someone else overnight. It's about living in the oftentimes uncomfortable era between who you were, or what you thought you were, and the happy little moth you're trying to become.

So, listen and acknowledge the hurt, and give it a pat on the head. Then drive away from Graceland and find your joy.

Always keep talking,

- C

P.S. This article was a little different than usual, but I hope you enjoyed it! Enjoy my Sofia playlist to play as you go about your errands this summer. Next week, we’ll be back to our regularly scheduled programming.

I have always been open about not being Catholic. I openly supported and continue to support Planned Parenthood. I’m a feminist. I wear ripped jeans. I disagreed with him on politics (a lot). I stand for everything he disproved of. None of my opinions or actions were a secret to him, nor were his to me.

And many times I’ve been angry as hell at him. The times he’s spouted on and on about the Bible, former President Joe Biden, or Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, I’ve often had trouble deciding whether to roll my eyes or shoot him a disdainful look. Usually, I just did both.

Yet, I still discovered him walking up the stairs of my college apartment to celebrate my graduation with me. He struggled with his walking cane and his almost 90 years up the staircase, and I silently cursed myself for not having moved into a place with an elevator.

I choose to remind myself of the good moments, like him traveling all the way to Des Moines, Iowa, to celebrate my college graduation just last month. And I try to laugh and think less about the time he booed Walz at my father’s citizenship ceremony (totally true).

I remember him giving me the last $5 I needed to purchase a used American Girl Doll. Waking me up early to go to the Hill Top Cafe in Paynesville, Minnesota, and letting me have a Coke for breakfast. Listening to Frank Sinatra and watching PBS murder mysteries. Learning about his 11 brothers and sisters, and asking him things that no one in my family seemed to know the answer to. (How did you propose to Grandma?)

And even though he and I didn’t agree on a single thing, we still found ways to enjoy each other’s company. Which I think, all in all, is a pretty successful implementation of Christianity.

Last year, when I accompanied my grandparents to their snow-birding condo in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, my grandfather started on yet another one of his long tangents about God and the state of the world. He turned to me, since he usually would just rant into the air in front of him, and said, “I hope I get to see you in heaven, one day.”

I’m not really sure how he meant it. Perhaps, as a warning. If you don’t convert to Catholicism, I won’t see you in heaven. He was always preoccupied with ‘earning’ heaven. Probably a little too preoccupied. Or maybe it was just his way of saying that he liked me; that he loved me. That he wants to see me again.

I choose to think it’s the latter.

I smiled and patted his hand. “I’m sure you will, Grandpa.”

That’s the price we pay for people pleasing. For putting others’ comfort over our own. To please others, to not ‘spoil’ the moment, women bend so far backwards that we can probably see our own bloody heels from the intensity of a self-inflicted bridge position.

And rarely do people pleasing ladies receive compensation or even recognition for their efforts. What do they get instead? Bloody shoes.

Share People Call Her Snarky

One of my all-time favorite movies, Fried Green Tomatoes, has a line that always makes me laugh. “[We need] an assertiveness training class for southern women. But that’s a contradiction in terms, isn’t it?” You could essentially replace ‘southern’ with any other U.S. region, or simply take out the region specificity entirely, and the line would still ring true for American women and their people pleasing habits.

But Midwestern women? Sheesh. They’re a different breed. Why don’t I just get in my car and wait 45 minutes at the nearest 4-way stop now?

People pleasing habits are integral to Midwesterners. How else do you explain the inability to halt a conversation while attempting to leave your neighborhood block party for fear of being impolite? Our reputation precedes us as peacekeepers who try to separate our grandparents’ conservative views from our happy memories with them. And for Midwestern ladies, the Midwest ‘nice’ expectation only increases. Just look at the endless series of hotdishes that show up at your door when you’ve experienced a medical emergency. Do you really think anyone’s husband is cooking that and dropping it off?

Women are expected to make sacrifices for the good of some greater body. Literally, like when Iphigeneia was sacrificed to Artemis to enable the Greeks to sail to Troy, but more realistically, when a woman pauses her career to care for the children while a husband advances his. At the same time, women are often encouraged to make themselves smaller in order to make the man they’re crushing on feel larger. And the expectation for women to people please continues along its ingrained path when the men of today consistently want and ask for girls that ‘don’t take themselves too seriously’ on dating apps.

And yeah, some people might say that the person I gave myself bloody shoes for didn’t ask me to do that for him. They would be correct, but to those some people I’d have to say that you missed the point. The point is that I felt like I had to. I felt like if I had advocated for myself it would be damaging in some way; put me in a bad light. I hoped that by pushing my needs, my wants, my anything away this person wouldn’t be disappointed, wouldn’t reject me, and would even like me more. A common Midwest trope of peace. A common people pleasing trap.

Let’s invite Uncle Jerry to the potluck, but keep him away from all the young girls.

Yes, I will take the lead on the group project since you’re all on the basketball team.

No, I don’t care where we eat tonight. Oh. Hooters again? That’s cool.

When my relationship with this more-than-friends friend came to an end, he told me that he still wanted to call me. He still wanted to feel like he could call me even though our romantic relationship was over, per his initiative. Maybe someone else wouldn’t have minded this request, but I felt that this offer was complete bullshit.

No, you can no longer have access to me. You don’t get to regurgitate our relationship into a way that is digestible for you, in a way that absolves you of guilt. In a way that prioritizes your comfort over mine. My energy is not free to entertain and humor you whenever you feel like talking. My life is not yours for you to walk into whenever you do or do not please.

Find your mother, or get a hooker.

So, when he made his request, I flatly told him “no.” And despite all of my anger, gloom, and tears that our romantic relationship was ending, there was an insurmountable pit of pride in my stomach (which I didn’t register until days later) that I didn’t take the people pleasing route.

Oh sure! Of course we can still be friends! Of course we can still text and chat whenever it’s convenient for you! Whatever works for you!

By taking the opposite route, I made room in our breakup for my autonomy. I wanted a life he didn’t want to give me, which was his decision, but I didn’t need to appease his request for friendship (if you can call it that). I didn’t need to please him. I didn’t need to pretend that everything was fine or that my feelings were no big deal. That I wasn’t angry. That I wasn’t sad.

Because when women don’t advocate for themselves, they risk losing themselves piece by piece. When they don’t tell their more-than-friends friend that they wore the wrong socks and would rather turn back, when they bend and bend themselves to the point they can’t remember the last time their spine was straight, hoping that someone will witness their efforts and acknowledge them accordingly, all they’ll get in return is (say it with me) bloody shoes.

Always keep talking,

- C

P.S. This article has been read, edited, and approved by Lyz Lenz ;)

You’re here because you want to read my constant references to Lyz Lenz’s books and other written work. “What’s on your mind lately?” people always ask Lyz Lenz, and then subsequently come to my Substack because I cite her for free beyond a paywall. (I mean, she’s got to put food on the table somehow, guys.)

Well, guess what? Now, that chatty, acid-mouthed broad knows my name.

Share People Call Her Snarky

Last week, I attended Falling Forward, a writer’s retreat in Camden, Maine, hosted by Lyz Lenz, and the brainchild of Lucia Graves, a writer and editor at Midcoast Villager. The people and writing classes from Lyz were absolutely wonderful, and the beautiful location on the sea was just a sweet, sweet bonus.

For three spectacular days, all of the amazing, talented writer retreaters accomplished so much. We yoga’ed in the morning, refined our writing skills with specialized class sessions from Lyz, sailed a real boat on a real ocean, and ate fresh oysters and mussels (as a white girl from Minnesota, my knowledge on both of these tummy treats is equally minimal).

Lyz Lenz instilled deep wisdom in all of us, but to me specifically, she told me I should stand up straighter.

“I feel like I’m spiritually taller than you,” Lyz said. “I think you need to stand taller.”

I was confused. I already towered over her as I normally do most women who claim to be 5 feet, 7 inches. But now that I’m back on Midwest soil, I think I know what she meant.

She meant that I need to stand more confidently.

The average woman worries about what she looks like in a bathing suit, and I am no exception. As a 23-year-old woman, I am no stranger to feeling bad about my skin, my hair, or my body. I am no stranger to furiously applying concealer in the bathroom right before a big event, or a small one, or none at all. I am not exempt from looking at a photo of myself and swiftly jumping back in horror. I’m sure many women can relate.

But, as I’m sure Lyz Lenz would tell you (and me), get over it (in the nicest way possible). Stand tall, take up space, write, and read your writing in rooms filled with people, whether or not you have two big toes that aren’t symmetrical, your eyes have permanent dark circles, or if you were once mistaken for a man in a lunch line (“Excuse me, sir”). (For the record, all of the experiences above truthfully belong to me.)

Do you think a man would let any insecurities stop him from speaking in a crowded room or receiving an award? Um, no. So, why should any woman?

When Lyz Lenz gives you advice, guess what? You need to reexamine your fucking life. So, that’s what I’m doing.

And writing. I’m also doing writing. Stay tuned for an article edited by Lyz Lenz herself next week!

Always keep talking,

- C

Cue my cringe, a subsequent attempt to ignore my second-hand embarrassment, and an inevitable block button. Was this the standard of dating the apps had to offer? I may have only been freshly 19, but I knew that this sucked.

Fast forward to my junior year, when, for the spring 2025 issue of DrakeMag, I wrote an optimistic article on Gen-Z dating culture and the urgent need for Gen-Z to take a breather from swiping habits. However, now, a year later, I feel that a total breakaway is the antidote to the situationship/hookup filled dating culture plaguing Gen-Z.

Share People Call Her Snarky

Recently, in Lyz Lenz’ newsletter, Men Yell At Me (I know, I know, another Lenz shoutout; I have a problem), she chronicled her recent attempt to try dating apps again. Dating apps and algorithms today, Lenz argues, with the promise of more and more connections, have done the opposite, while placing the blame on women for any and all unsuccessful hetero romantic relationship attempts.

“[They've] monetized our antisocial behaviors; gotten us addicted to the dopamine of swiping and convinced men that there is a better woman out there, while women are told to stop being snobby bitches and just give a normal man holding a fish a chance already.”

Instead of men being held accountable for bad behavior (c’mon something we’ve all experienced) — ‘communicating’ that you’re not ready for a relationship while still engaging in intimate actions that say otherwise, bitching about the possibility of paying for someone’s meal, consistently getting involved with people even though you have ‘commitment issues’ (if this is you, there’s a special corner in hell saved just for you) — it’s all chalked up to be a woman’s fault for not knowing better.

“You had a bad date? Pick better! Your husband was awful? Pick better! Men on the apps are bad? Pick better,” Lenz says.

Alas, there is a solution before us, and no, it’s not paying Hinge’s subscription fee for premium matches:

“[You] could argue that men aren't going to change, so women better or they won't get dates,” Lenz says. “Okay, then no dates!”

See what I mean, ladies? Why spend time on dates — giving people the benefit of the doubt — when, instead, you can just, ya know, not? Why must women continue to seek out connection and intimacy with men who don’t know how to properly give it? Why must we be tasked with solving the male loneliness epidemic instead of incentivizing men to properly behave with the opposite sex? Why must we accept men’s half-assery and pay to be premium subscribers on dating apps that connect us with men whose bad behavior shows up in one form or another? Why waste your time with someone who doesn’t appreciate your efforts?

“Listen, this is some cooked brain thinking to argue that I have to learn algorithmic jiu jitsu just to go on a date with a guy who can't stop talking about his bitch ex-wife or this cool underground band called The Clash,” Lenz says. “I could throw myself off a roof and it would be so much easier and less painful.”

Stop. Start a book club. Plant some daisies. Find a local ultimate frisbee team.

Stop looking for signs of love and care in the most minuscule of moments (Oh my God, he messaged me back after one day, not two!). Instead of bending for the smallest hint (or hope thereof) of intimacy and connection, simply clock out. Don’t engage with a dating field that’s not serving you. Don’t waste your energy on dating apps that thrive on your swiping dopamine hits. Don’t waste your time on people who waste yours.

Surround yourself with people and communities who value and care about you, and focus on what brings you joy. And if you should happen to find mutual romantic feelings along the way, hurray! But that shouldn’t be your end goal.

There is more to life than trying to look past will anyone above the age of six using the word ‘squish’ unironically, or waiting for a man to ask you a single question on a Thursday night at Chili’s.

Always keep talking,

- C

We can expect abortion to be another hot contender for the political issue of the year. Recently, an article from the 19th arrived in my inbox titled, “Abortion isn’t the issue in 2026, but it’s still an issue.”

But why? Why abortion? Why do antiabortion advocates continue to get their panties in a wad about abortion? The political issue of the 2010s was gay marriage. For the 2020s, it’s all about abortion.

You’d think the drive and journey to successfully dismantle Roe v. Wade would be enough. But still, conservative ‘religious’ lawmakers across the country are seeing to it that abortion restrictions find their way to their state’s debate stage, in some way, shape, or form.

Share People Call Her Snarky

Iowa most recently passed House File 2788, prohibiting the delivery of abortion medication from outside the state, which I’ve written about previously. This bill was signed on May 19 in tandem with Iowa’s current near-total abortion ban.

Kansas overwhelmingly rejected an amendment to its state constitution in 2022 that would’ve removed residents’ right to abortion. However, Kansas has yet to see movement on an additional amendment to secure and protect that right. And their state legislature overruled Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto and established support for fake abortion clinics, otherwise known as crisis pregnancy centers.

In Missouri, despite the voter-approved 2024 amendment to the Missouri Constitution that protects access to abortion, there were still countless abortion-related bills at their state legislature. This session, the state legislature passed the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,’ which ensures that a “child born alive during or after an abortion or an attempted abortion shall have all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state, including any other liveborn child.” As Bridgette Dunlap noted in her commentary for the Missouri Independent, “This is not a thing.”

Again, I ask why? And while I ask why I scream into my pillow.

If abortion has been shown to be widely supported across the states, with even some states enshrining abortion rights into law, then why is there still this incessant need to hinder abortion access and mislead the public?

I like to think that decreased birth rates, the so-called male loneliness epidemic, and the insane costs of raising a healthy child with hardly any government help (which the 19th article noted) are all contributing reasons for the U.S.’s current political obsession. And the European socialist in me likes to think it all comes back to capitalism, the economic system America has sold its soul to.

Women’s bodily autonomy and family planning means less or no children. When a woman has contraception and her own money, she doesn’t need to submit to her husband and birth 11 children, like my great-grandmother. And because of these feminist gains, women don’t need to rely on men who aren’t offering anything substantial anyway, who instead of shaping up, are complaining that they’re ‘lonely.’ And of course, less children means a decreased workforce, leading politicians to say 1 in 3 Americans (women) are ‘underbabied.’

In caveman tongue, this essentially translates to: women’s rights bad. Capitalism good. Or more specifically, that advancements for women — contraception access, abortion access, financial independence, a choice of who and who not to marry — equate to fewer capitalist slog horses. And rather than make changes to our capitalist-dependent system, and acknowledge that women are human beings with independent minds, the solution for Dr. Oz and the rest of the Trump administration is to get more women pregnant.

And what better way to get more women pregnant than criminalizing legitimate access to abortion?

And the Trump administration and conservative Republicans in (insert your state here) don’t care about improving the lives of Americans and investing in their current or future children. That’s the point. They want Americans to have 11 children on a $7.25 federally mandated minimum wage salary. They don’t want kids to get a head start in life. They don’t want everyday Americans to succeed. They want cheap labor, so Trump and his billionaire friends can keep getting richer. And it’s all under the guise of religious superiority and morals.

When you see attacks on abortion access in your state, please know that it’s personal, and understand that it’s all pointed.

Always keep talking,

- C

I’m no a chemist, but for awhile now, I’ve been feeling like the title of this blog, Caroline’s Current, doesn’t quite emphasize the content I put out. When I originally launched this Substack, I intended to cover current events, and I do still try to emphasize trending topics and connect to broader feminist and women-centered themes, but, I don’t know man, I just don’t think its fits very well anymore. It’s as simple as that. I feel as though I’ve outgrown it.

I came up with the title on a whim, trying to utilize the power of alliteration, while trying to create something memorable.

And now I think I have.

Introducing People Call Her Snarky! Inspired by the title of Lyz Lenz’ newsletter, Men Yell at Me, I decided to make a four letter phrase over a word that people already use to describe my writing style, too.

When I wrote about abortion in relation to the Hortman shooting for The Minnesota Star Tribune, Matthew Laszlo from Anoka wrote in to the Readers Write section on June 19, 2025, to say, “The snarky opening to her opinion serves only to inflame those who don’t believe that a tiny human is an nonautonomous organism, as she says.” Well said Matt. That was exactly my goal after a Minnesota representative and her husband were murdered for their pro-choice stance.

In another instance, I wrote about Sen. Joni Ersnt (R-Iowa) and her decision not to seek reelection. “Very apt and appropriately snarky,” said Dr. Beth Younger, an English professor at Drake University.

I’ve featured it here before, as my subhed and on my ‘About’ page, but more and more I’ve felt like ‘snarky’ perfectly encapsulates my content on this platform.

25% newsy. 25% opinion. 50% snark.

But wait, there’s more! You didn’t think I was going to leave Bad Midwest Feminist out in the cold, did you? Absolutely not. I’m proud of that title. And just like Lenz’ subhed for her newsletter is “Not a Dingus,” corresponding with the title of her weekly podcast, “Dingus of the Week,” my subhed shall henceforth be, “Just a Bad Midwest Feminist.”

Anyway, just a little update for y’all. Now back to our regularly scheduled weekly programming.

Keep talking,

- C

Share People Call Her Snarky

Being a stay-at-home parent is a financial decision as much as it is an emotional one. Some families have no other options, since childcare is expensive as all hell.

My aunts, who were able to afford childcare, paid roughly $125,000 in childcare costs before their children started kindergarten. (Insert gasp here.)

Share Caroline's Current

I recently worked on an article for the Business Record, detailing a recent initiative from Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds regarding childcare grants. The grants spread $5.2 million over a cluster of grant recipients to improve hours available for childcare, hourly pay for providers, and transportation to and from the childcare facility. It’s a great initiative, one that Reynolds was extremely proud to execute. However, out of the 159 applications for the grant, only 19 childcare providers have been selected to receive $300,000 over the course of three years.

“$5.2 million doesn't go very far when thinking about child care, when thinking about a statewide initiative,” said Claudia Schabel, CEO of the Iowa Women’s Foundation.

The people I interviewed about the grants were more than happy to see Reynolds and her administration take action on Iowa’s childcare crisis, even if the action will be short-lived. The grant program is short-term if anything, and since Reynolds’ term is up this year and she isn’t running for reelection, this action isn’t expected to live on past the three years of its inception.

Schabel said that childcare is the issue that keeps people (more often than not, women) from joining the workforce, and whenever legislators hold space to improve it, it should be celebrated. In fact, HF2514, a bill signed by Reynolds on April 9, is a direct attempt to support childcare providers and employees. Reynolds’ grants and HF2514 were great additions to Iowa this legislative session, but more action is possible and necessary to support women and families.

More often than not, women and families are forced to fend for themselves. It’s very normal in the U.S. for one parent to leave the workforce to alleviate childcare costs. More often than not, that role falls to women.

The sole reason my mother was a stay-at-home parent all those years was directly related to the costs of childcare. Childcare costs are consistently a source of financial stress for families, with families spending a sizable portion of their income on quality providers.

If Schabel had it her way, she’d institute universal childcare, like New Mexico established last year.

"[New Mexico’s] initiative…removes income liability requirements and waives family co-payments, making child care accessible to all New Mexicans,” Schabel says. “It doesn't matter if you have the means or if you don't have the means, all children will get a head start in life.”

Reynolds’ childcare grants and HF2514 were moving initiatives to see implemented this year, but let’s not grant our legislators eternal salvation just yet. They can do more. They should do more. For children. For mothers. For families.

I wonder what my mother would’ve done had she not felt like it was financially necessary to be the stay-at-home parent. I wonder, if I have children, will I feel the need to do the same?

As always, keep talking.

House File 2788, an act relating to “abortion including definitions, informed consent, dispensing of abortion-inducing drugs, and other abortion-related provisions,” prohibits the delivery of abortion medication (mifepristone and misoprostol) into the state of Iowa from neighboring states where access to this medication is protected.

This bill, which is on its way to Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds’ desk where she will undoubtably sign it, aims to restrict Iowa’s already strict abortion access, making it even more difficult for Iowans to access medication abortion.

First and foremost, f**k you Iowa Republicans.

This bill died in the legislatures’ funnel period (which is a fancy Iowa way of saying it didn’t get through a full committee), but was brought back through some sneaky political maneuvering that of course Iowa Republicans used to their advantage.

Iowa Republicans should know that there are much more pressing issues that are impacting Iowans, which don’t include inserting government officials into every Iowan’s house and mail slot. Things like household affordability, health care and child care costs are sky high on Iowans’ priority lists, but not for the Republican majority. Not for the so-called party of ‘family values.’

This bill, which no sizable Iowa majority asked for, serves only to appeal to the mission of loud conservatives, and restrict medication that is safer than Ibuprofen. Kyrstin Delagardelle, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Iowa, said “Medication abortion is safe, effective, and trusted health care that has been used by over 7.5 million people since it was first approved over 25 years ago. It has been a critical expansion of access — and that’s exactly why anti‑abortion politicians are trying so hard to restrict it.”

I’m going to include the names and contact information of the legislators who voted in favor of HF2788 for two reasons. (1) Iowans should see and recognize the names of the politicians who voted to restrict abortion access further than they already have and who placed undue burden on the lives of Iowans who are already struggling, and (2) in the state where the lobbyist group, The Family Leader, led a very successful judicial campaign to unseat the Iowa Supreme Court judges who decided in favor of same-sex marriage in 2009, why shouldn’t the 64% of Iowans (a majority!) who believe abortion should be protected do the same to their state legislators?

Let me make thing extremely salient and clear: This is not a call to threaten political violence. It’s a call to express displeasure with legislators and their voting record. It’s a call for the 64% of Iowans who support abortion access to push out who represents them at the Capitol.

Share Caroline's Current

The names and contact info for the legislators who voted in favor of HF2788 are as follows.

Iowa House of Representatives

1. Rep. Brett Barker (R-Story) — brett.barker@legis.iowa.gov

2. Rep. Chad Behn (R-Boone) — chad.behn@legis.iowa.gov

3. Rep. Michael R. Bergan (R-Winneshiek) — michael.bergan@legis.iowa.gov

4. Rep. Jane Bloomingdale (R-Worth) — jane.bloomingdale@legis.iowa.gov

5. Rep. Brooke Boden (R-Warren) — brooke.boden@legis.iowa.gov

6. Rep. Jacob Bossman (R-Woodbury) — jacob.bossman@legis.iowa.gov

7. Rep. Dr. Steven P. Bradley (R-Jones) — steven.bradley@legis.iowa.gov

8. Rep. Taylor R. Collins (R-Des Moines) — taylor.collins@legis.iowa.gov

9. Rep. Tom Determann (R-Clinton) — tom.determann@legis.iowa.gov

10. Rep. Jon Dunwell (R-Jasper) — jon.dunwell@legis.iowa.gov

11. Rep. Samantha Fett (R-Warren) — samantha.fett@legis.iowa.gov

12. Rep. Dean Fisher (R-Tama) — dean.fisher@legis.iowa.gov

13. Rep. Jason Gearhart (R-Clayton) — jason.gearhart@legis.iowa.gov

14. Rep. Dan Gehlbach (R-Dallas) — dan.gehlbach@legis.iowa.gov

15. Rep. Cindy Golding (R-Linn) — cindy.golding@legis.iowa.gov

16. Rep. Pat Grassley (R-Butler) — pat.grassley@legis.iowa.gov

17. Rep. Bill Gustoff (R-Polk) — bill.gustoff@legis.iowa.gov

18. Rep. Austin Harris (R-Appanoose) — austin.harris@legis.iowa.gov

19. Rep. Helena Hayes (R-Mahaska) — helena.hayes@legis.iowa.gov

20. Rep. Bob Henderson (R-Woodbury) — robert.henderson@legis.iowa.gov

21. Rep. Christian A. Hermanson (R-Cerro Gordo) — christian.hermanson@legis.iowa.gov

22. Rep. Steven C. Holt (R-Crawford) — steven.holt@legis.iowa.gov

23. Rep. Heather Hora (R-Washington) — heather.hora@legis.iowa.gov

24. Rep. Chad Ingels (R-Fayette) — chad.ingels@legis.iowa.gov

25. Rep. Thomas M. Jeneary (R-Plymouth) — tom.jeneary@legis.iowa.gov

26. Rep. Craig P. Johnson (R-Buchanan) — craig.johnson@legis.iowa.gov

27. Rep. Megan Jones (R-Clay) — megan.jones@legis.iowa.gov

28. Rep. Bobby Kaufmann (R-Cedar) — bobby.kaufmann@legis.iowa.gov

29. Rep. Kniff McCulla (R-Marion) — barb.kniffmcculla@legis.iowa.gov

30. Rep. Wendy Larson (R-Sac) — wendy.larson@legis.iowa.gov

31. Rep. Judd Lawler (R-Johnson) — judd.lawler@legis.iowa.gov

32. Rep. Brian K. Lohse (R-Polk) — brian.lohse@legis.iowa.gov

33. Rep. Shannon Lundgren (R-Dubuque) — shannon.lundgren@legis.iowa.gov

34. Rep. Joshua Meggers (R-Grundy) — joshua.meggers@legis.iowa.gov

35. Rep. Ann Meyer (R-Webster) — ann.meyer@legis.iowa.gov

36. Rep. Gary M. Mohr (R-Scott) — gary.mohr@legis.iowa.gov

37. Rep. Norlin G. Mommsen (R-Clinton) — norlin.mommsen@legis.iowa.gov

38. Rep. Thomas Jay Moore (R-Cass) — tom.moore@legis.iowa.gov

39. Rep. Carter F. Nordman (R-Dallas) — carter.nordman@legis.iowa.gov

40. Rep. Matthew Rinker (R-Des Moines) — matthew.rinker@legis.iowa.gov

41. Rep. David Sieck (R-Mills) — david.sieck@legis.iowa.gov

42. Rep. Brent Siegrist (R-Pottawattamie) — brent.siegrist@legis.iowa.gov

43. Rep. Travis M. Sitzmann (R-Plymouth) — travis.sitzmann@legis.iowa.gov

44. Rep. Jennifer J. Smith (R-Dubuque) — jennifer.smith@legis.iowa.gov

45. Rep. Ray Sorensen (R-Adair) — ray.sorensen@legis.iowa.gov

46. Rep. Henry Stone (R-Winnebago) — henry.stone@legis.iowa.gov

47. Rep. Mark I. Thompson (R-Wright) — mark.thompson@legis.iowa.gov

48. Rep. Charley Thomson (R-Floyd) — charley.thomson@legis.iowa.gov

49. Rep. Mike Vondran (R-Scott) — mike.vondran@legis.iowa.gov

50. Rep. Blaine C. Watkins (R-Lee) — blaine.watkins@legis.iowa.gov

51. Rep. Ryan Weldon (R-Polk) — ryan.weldon@legis.iowa.gov

52. Rep. Sam Wengryn (R-Decatur) — sam.wengryn@legis.iowa.gov

53. Rep. Skyler Wheeler (R-Sioux) — skyler.wheeler@legis.iowa.gov

54. Rep. Craig Steven Williams (R-Carroll) — craig.williams@legis.iowa.gov

55. Rep. John H. Wills (R-Dickinson) — john.wills@legis.iowa.gov

56. Rep. Devon Wood (R-Taylor) — devon.wood@legis.iowa.gov

57. Rep. Derek Wulf (R-Black Hawk) — derek.wulf@legis.iowa.gov

58. Rep. David E. Young (R-Dallas) — david.young@legis.iowa.gov

Iowa Senate

1. Sen. Kevin Alons (R-Woodbury) — kevin.alons@legis.iowa.gov

2. Sen. Mike Bousselot (R-Polk) — mike.bousselot@legis.iowa.gov

3. Sen. Doug Campbell (R-Cerro Gordo) — doug.campbell@legis.iowa.gov

4. Sen. Mark Costello (R-Mills) — mark.costello@legis.iowa.gov

5. Sen. Dan Dawson (R- Pottawattamie) — dan.dawson@legis.iowa.gov

6. Sen. Adrian Dickey (R-Jefferson) — adrian.dickey@legis.iowa.gov

7. Sen. Dawn Driscoll (R-Iowa) — dawn.driscoll@legis.iowa.gov

8. Sen. Lynn Evans (R-Cherokee) — lynn.evans@legis.iowa.gov

9. Sen. Jesse Green (R-Boone) — jesse.green@legis.iowa.gov

10. Sen. Kerry Gruenhagen (R-Scott) — kerry.gruenhagen@legis.iowa.gov

11. Sen. Dennis Guth (R-Hancock) — dennis.guth@legis.iowa.gov

12. Sen. Mike Klimesh (R-Winneshiek) — mike.klimesh@legis.iowa.gov

13. Sen. Carrie Koelker (R-Dubuque) — carrie.koelker@legis.iowa.gov

14. Sen. Tim Kraayenbrink (R-Webster) — tim.kraayenbrink@legis.iowa.gov

15. Sen. Mark S. Lofgren (R-Muscatine) — mark.lofgren@legis.iowa.gov

16. Sen. Charlie McClintock (R-Linn) — charlie.mcclintock@legis.iowa.gov

17. Sen. Mike Pike (R-Polk) — mike.pike@legis.iowa.gov

18. Sen. Jeff Reichman (R-Lee) — jeff.reichman@legis.iowa.gov

19. Sen. Ken Rozenboom (R-Marion) — ken.rozenboom@legis.iowa.gov

20. Sen. Sandy Salmon (R-Bremer) — sandy.salmon@legis.iowa.gov

21. Sen. Jason Schultz (R-Crawford) — jason.schultz@legis.iowa.gov

22. Sen. Tom Shipley (R-Adams) — tom.shipley@legis.iowa.gov

23. Sen. Amy Sinclair (R-Wayne) — amy.sinclair@legis.iowa.gov

24. Sen. Dave Sires (R-Black Hawk) — dave.sires@legis.iowa.gov

25. Sen. Annette Sweeney (R-Hardin) — annette.sweeney@legis.iowa.gov

26. Sen. Kara Warme (R-Story) — kara.warme@legis.iowa.gov

27. Sen. Scott Webster (R-Scott) — scott.webster@legis.iowa.gov

28. Sen. Cherielynn Westrich (R-Wapello) — cherielynn.westrich@legis.iowa.gov

29. Sen. Jack Whitver (R-Polk) — jack.whitver@legis.iowa.gov

30. Sen. Dan Zumbach (R-Delaware) — dan.zumbach@legis.iowa.gov

Of course, since these Republicans are more likely than not all bankrolled by conservative lobbyist organizations in Iowa, we can’t solely place the blame on the legislators in favor of HF2877 without also calling out the lobbyist groups who were all ‘for’ HF2877. So, here they are, too.

1. Iowa Minuteman Civil Defense Corps

2. Pulse Life Advocates

3. Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition

4. Iowa Right to Life Committee

5. Lutheran Family Service

6. Iowa Catholic Conference

7. The Family Leader

Let’s all point and laugh while we email each and every one of them to take piano lessons or do something more useful with their time. Then push their antics out at the midterms.

These legislators aren’t interested in supporting the wishes of the majority of Iowans. Only keeping their lobbyist banks happy.

As always, keep talking.

I am not planning on getting married anytime soon, but I am graduating from Drake University in a few weeks. And white is deemed the unofficial color of graduation for women, whether high school or college.

There are a lot of reasons for this. Others are wearing white. It’s a plain backdrop against colorful cords or other honors. It symbolizes the end of an era and a new beginning.

Whatever the reason may be, the color white has a sordid history with tradition and accepting the status quo.

It’s a uniform, and an eraser of individuality. It’s tradition.

That all being said, not all traditions are bad. On Thanksgiving, my extended family exchanges ornaments for Christmas, and that’s always a fun time. And when I visit my aunt in North Carolina, she always buys me a book. Cute, right?

There is joy in traditions, but that doesn’t mean all of them are worth following. “It’s the way it’s always been done” is not a valid excuse anymore, if it ever was. So, I want to renegotiate the terms of traditions and my role in them, because in addition to being a creative, I’m also a politics major who has adopted an institutional way of examining the world.

Share Caroline's Current

I have an off-white dress that I (my mom) bought at a Plato’s Closet last summer. It’s knitted with black stripes, and I bought a matching white slip to wear under it from Depop. It extenuates my height and my frame, and I love it.

Yet, it’s not totally white. It’s not short, it’s not pure with ruffles. It’s not the dresses I’ve seen graduates wear while posing for graduation photos on campus in years past.

I know, I know, it’s not revolutionary of me to wear a slightly different shade of white to graduation. In fact, it screams, “Who said I can’t wear my Converse,” and “I’m not like other girls.” If you know, you know.

It’s not my intention to start a revolution, quite the opposite, actually. I want to tweak the unofficial graduation uniform in a way that suits me and what I currently have in my closet. I want to fit within the confines of tradition, honor its purpose, while still allowing myself to push the boundaries, albeit slightly.

My mother didn’t want the traditional wedding ceremony — uniformed bridesmaids, an aisle, a church, a salad course — so she didn’t want to wear the traditional white wedding garb. But she still wanted to feel beautiful. She still wanted to wear something she normally wouldn’t on the day that became her wedding anniversary.

So, in comes her red dress with matching lipstick, and (oh look!) my off-white, black striped dress lags behind.

This article was originally published by “The Times-Delphic.”

However, I worry that those days might soon be over.

When the U.S. Senate voted on April 16 to end the 20-year moratorium on copper mining in the BWCAW’s watershed, I knew the vote would be close. I didn’t think it would pass.

Despite Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith’s hard-fought efforts to uphold the moratorium, the simple majority of her colleagues (50-49) thought it would be better for Chilean billionaires to make a quick buck. And let’s be honest, the senators who voted in the affirmative have been bought out by the mining corps. Smith confirmed as much after news of the vote broke.

“Republicans privately told me they knew this is wrong, and I wish they had voted their conscience,” Smith said in an Instagram post.

I’m completely and utterly upset that the people sworn to keep their country and their country’s citizens safe would deliberately choose not to, and instead expose its citizens to toxic mineral mining, contaminating one of the most beautifully wild spaces in the U.S.

Share

The Republican senators here in Iowa, Sens. Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst, both voted to end the mining ban despite my and countless others’ efforts to reach them via phone and email. Grassley (probably an aide of his) did respond to me, saying, “I certainly recognize the value of protecting and utilizing public lands in a responsible way. But when mining is done in the U.S., it comes with far better labor and environmental standards than if that same mine is located in a country like China or Indonesia.”

Firstly, the U.S. will not benefit from this mining at all. Secondly, I don’t care. Mining will wreak havoc on public lands, whether it’s done in the U.S., China, or Indonesia. No one can ensure our public lands will be safe when the floodgates to mining are opened. Operations for the mining project would drain into the BWCA. The purest water there ever was or ever will be suffocated. Countless wilderness and mining experts have affirmed this.

If any country forcibly came to the U.S. and started damaging our public lands, we’d wage war. But since it’s Chilean billionaires who can now legally extract minerals for their own gain, it’s fine.

Columnist Jill Burcum of The Minnesota Star Tribune has dubbed this measure, which now heads to the president’s desk for his assured signature, the ‘Chilean Billionaires’ Relief Act.’ And I wholeheartedly agree.

A fellow lover of the BWCA told me that we need to keep up the fight. Absolutely! But I’ll just need a minute to finish screaming into my pillow.

I covered it for the student newspaper, The Times-Delphic (you can read that coverage here), but was also honestly anxious to hear for myself what she had to say. To my surprise, she spent an amazing amount of time addressing the issue of book bans across the U.S.

“The vast majority of Americans are opposed to book bans and book challenges, but the people who are challenging books are very loud, and they are very focused, and they show up at meetings,” Quinn said. “And so we also need to do the same.”

Book bans have been popping up in almost every U.S. state for the last couple of years, with the Iowa House having introduced House File 2324 just last February. (Thankfully, it didn’t advance.) An incredible number of genres have been put on the chopping block: Young adult, political dystopians, and, yes, even romance.

Share

Quinn, being a romance author of guilty pleasure books that women often keep in their sock drawers, it makes sense why book bans would be an issue close to her heart, since there may be people out there (there are) who may object to her romance novels, because, ya know, they’re known for being quite steamy.

“You know, people will couch it in terms of, ‘We’re just trying to protect our children,’ and usually somebody will hold up the book Gender Queer… and be like, ‘Do you want your kindergartner looking at this book?’ And I’m saying, ‘Nobody is putting that in a kindergarten library,’ Quinn said. “That’s why we have librarians, and that’s what they are trained to do, and they have educations. They know how to curate a library.”

She’s totally and completely right. Go to any library in the U.S. and I doubt any of the Bridgerton novels will be available in the children’s section.

When books are banned, whether they’re books that explore themes of gender identity, race, or fictional Regency era romance novels, we all lose. Even ‘frivolous,’ sock drawer-bound books are worthy of First Amendment rights and being read, enjoyed, and talked about by the public. And it’s possible that even romance novels can go on to make history as a regency era show that engages with color-conscious casting, changing the narrative of what stories can be told in period dramas (i.e., Bridgerton).

Sure, the original Bridgerton books are not really pushing the boundaries of political speech or testing life-changing societal norms. They’re smut, plain and simple, with a happy ending rarely afforded to real-life people. But is it a crime for people (women) to escape from the horrors and stresses of everyday American life and immerse themselves in a sexy romance? I think not.

“If you need to convince anyone, just remind them that never in human history have the people banning books turned out to be the good guys,” Quinn said.

By protecting the Bridgerton books, we’re simultaneously protecting nonfiction, boundary-pushing, ambitious written work, bound in critical thinking, that seeks to draw attention outside the binary.

But my God, just let people enjoy things, without shame, and without book bans.

“I hate Republicans” — spoken on multiple occasions.

“I hate Catholics” — spoken primarily in Protestant-based settings.

And my personal favorite, “I hate root beer,” which I still stand by.

I loved going on rants (still do), using harsh words (still do) and speaking at my full natural volume (yeah, you get the idea).

Perhaps the more conservative members of my family were concerned that my college years would only exacerbate these personality traits. In some ways, it did, but in other ways, college has taught me how to take a breath and think.

My first official post on this Substack was about Charlie Kirk’s assassination and good Lord, if you thought that post had been contentious, you should’ve just taken a look at my first draft. I hadn’t slept, definitely hadn’t eaten anything, all while digesting the news that this very controversial figure had been killed. And just before I was about to click the ‘publish’ button, I stopped and decided to sleep on it. The next morning, I was appalled at the words staring back at me, and rewrote much of what I’d originally spit out.

Graduating high school senior Caroline wouldn’t have done that, but college graduating senior Caroline did.

College has changed the way I view things. I’m still mouthy, but I’m less combative.

Share Caroline's Current

I remember sitting on a panel with pharmaceutical students representing Planned Parenthood, along with its director of public affairs at the time, Mazie Stilwell. The student who had organized the event had pulled Stilwell and me aside and said that the questions were phrased very neutrally, and the title of the event would not say it was sponsored by Planned Parenthood, because the pharmacy club didn’t directly endorse any one organization.

This loosely translates to: “In case antiabortion students object to you being here, we’re only saying you’re here lending your voice, and you’re not in direct sponsorship with our organization.” High school Caroline would have been annoyed up the wazoo. “Just say you support abortion access! It’s not that hard!” I definitely would’ve said. While college Caroline wasn’t any less annoyed, she was more understanding. She knew the club was just trying to protect itself and was paying us a service by giving Stilwell and me a platform to discuss and answer questions on our pro-reproductive rights stances.

My college experience has encouraged me to think critically. For all the complaints that young people leave college more liberal, they’re just being exposed to new ideas and interacting with their class material accordingly. They’re thinking critically about the world around them, and if people have issues with that, then I suggest they examine internally why they think critical thinking is a no-go.

I was fully ready to continue down the road of hairy-legged, braless feminist wonder, and it’s not like any of that ended when I enrolled in higher education. But now, I think a little more before I talk, I choose which fights to engage in and which not to and I think critically about the world and its institutional makeup.

Instead of relying fully on my own previously unbaked and baseless opinions, I read political theory class materials and recommendations, and journalistic books and novels from my personal inspiration writer library: Bad Feminist Essays by Roxane Gay, The Color Purple by Alice Walker, This American Ex-Wife by Lyz Lenz and many other writings and reflections from other authors.

I engage with their ideas just as much as my own, if not more. I value the privilege to be exposed to others’ ideas.

I listen in class. There are conservative students with whom I wholeheartedly disagree, but they provide great insights, too. When I disagree with someone, I calmly raise my hand to do the same. If we spar, I like to think the disagreement is beneficial to us both.

So, thanks Drake University, you taught me well. You didn’t turn me into a hairy-legged liberal. I already was one. But you did teach me to think before I speak — before I write — to listen courteously, without twitching my eye too much. And those aren’t skills I possessed before I stepped foot on campus.

The line for payment at the Sugarlands Visitor Center wove along the store, crisscrossing around the aisles of stuffed animals and stickers. I chose a black bear iron-on patch for my Duluth Pack, and a ‘junior ranger’ pin for my roommate, and once I reached the front, I laid out my carefully chosen items and asked the (tired) cashier, “So, where do all the proceeds go?”

Scanning my items, the cashier answered, “Everything goes to the park.”

I smiled and tried to make a joke. “So, you and your colleagues don’t skim anything off the top, right?”

The cashier looked at me, concerned/annoyed. “Um, no.”

“Excellent!” I paid for my items and let the line continue its unending descent.

It was a sight to behold. The mass of people purchasing souvenirs for friends and family far and wide, the multitude of cars filling visitor center parking lots, parents experiencing the mountain tops with their kids, and crowded icy hiking paths.

Even though brochures for Cades Cove were $1.25, when before January 21, 2025, I imagine they were free, people were showing up, working the glutes, and buying magnets for the fridge back home.

It’s a subtle method of protest. And it’s not nothing. It made me think that the ways in which we choose to spend our money might be the easiest form of protest we have.

Share

In 1975, women in Iceland clocked out of their jobs and homes, took to the streets, and didn’t clock back in to protest wage discrimination and the unpaid labor of mothering. Wanting to showcase just how important women’s contributions were to Iceland, the 90% of women who participated effectively disrupted the economic and social order so much that a year later, Iceland passed its equal pay law.

Along that vein, what better way to protest federal parks funding cuts than by actually visiting and spending money at national and state parks? They not only offer you respite from the constant stream of news detailing the Trump administration’s anti-environment antics, but supporting them helps them thrive when the Trump administration doesn’t want them to.

On this camping trip, my group and I brought our spending money to small businesses. We bought souvenirs that crowded our car space. Our payment for the campsites we stayed at, plus the firewood and kindling we bought while there, all contributed to national park support. And with the mass of people we ran into for the week we were there, and the mass of cars we fought for parking, I can sleep better knowing that the Great Smoky Mountains National Park can continue to operate with support from people who actively choose to support it.

Choosing where to spend your paycheck may not seem like a dramatic gesture, but it can be. Your paycheck is power. Throw it behind your local bookstore, even if there’s a better deal at Barnes and Noble. That’s how they get ya. Life is more than chasing the lowest deal.

I mean, don’t get ripped off, but don’t sell your soul to Walmart.

My camping trip, as fun as it was, wasn’t just a camping trip, just as that line at the Sugarlands Visitor Center wasn’t just a line for souvenirs. Both were an example of people quietly funding a public good. It was a group of camping college students (who did not bring enough warm clothes) and lines upon lines of souvenir seekers making sure that we can have the opportunity to hike mountains for years to come.

Share Caroline's Current

Anne Brontë was known for crafting stories around social issues affecting women, and both of her novels, Agnes Grey and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, explore feminist themes. When Anne Brontë died in 1849, her sister Charlotte (author of one of my favorite books, Jane Eyre) assumed publishing control of her works. (She also assumed control of Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, but not everything is about you Wuthering Heights fans!) When Anne’s publisher requested a reprint of her two novels, Charlotte said ‘yes’ to Agnes Grey, but halted further production of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. First of all, judgy much, Charlotte? Secondly, this move proved detrimental to Anne’s reputation as a writer, and she remains the least well-known of the Brontë sisters.

Youngest child, and youngest girl no less! I feel both the wrath and pain she probably felt from beyond the grave, and, as the youngest daughter myself, I entirely sympathize with her. I appreciate the combined works of both Emily and Charlotte Brontë, but I don’t feel as connected to them as I do Ms. Anne.

Overlooked by older siblings, written work not taken seriously, with an intense longing to make an impact beyond a sleepy English town. In Agnes Grey, a novel often thought to be semi-autobiographical, when Agnes’ sister, Mary, tells Agnes that she couldn’t possibly be able to make a living outside of their childhood home, Agnes replies, “You think, because I always do as you bid me, I have no judgment of my own: but only try me — that is all I ask — and you shall see what I can do.”

Aside from all those personal aspects, I’ve spent a lot of time making connections and finding similarities between my writing journey and hers. We both crafted worlds where fantastical stories lived and thrived, wrote poems of love lost, and engaged with feminist ideas in our work.

However, I’ve never written a beautifully strong, renowned feminist novel, and I most definitely didn’t write The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, the book Charlotte Brontë didn’t want you to know about.

Share

The story surrounds the appearance of the mysterious ‘widow' Helen and her young son, who move to the dilapidated Wildfell Hall. She spends her days painting watercolors for income and raising her son with her unconventional, hands-on parenting style. I’m only halfway through the book (no spoilers, please), but the story follows Helen’s diary entries about the unhappiness she experiences in her marriage and, inevitably, her decision to escape. It was an instant success, but less than a year after its publication, the wonderfully artful and thematic Anne Brontë died of consumption.

I’ve had many internal debates regarding what Charlotte’s problem could’ve possibly been with The Tenant of Wildfell Hall that she felt the need to shield the public from a book they already liked. Jane Eyre similarly expresses her moral autonomy when she tells Mr. Rochester that she will not live with him as a mistress. Helen also expresses her personal, political, and functional autonomy. What I’ve been able to come up with is that while Charlotte was not against women expressing autonomy, she was against women shaking up the social order with said autonomy. Leaving your husband was hardly an accepted social norm. Jane Eyre decided not to marry Mr. Rochester once she discovered that he was already married, but Helen willingly left her established marriage.

In a previous article, I said that women have never benefited from the institution of marriage, and when divorce was not only unacceptable but almost unfeasible for women, a story about a woman finding her way out of the confines of marriage, and not ending up destitute or committing suicide, was pretty revolutionary.

So, what better way to celebrate Women’s History Month than to channel the revolutionary writing energy of Anne Brontë and read the book that defied marriage and its ultimate immovable social framework, presenting a version of women empowerment?

Channel the energy of Helen from The Tenant of Wildfell Hall and remember that you do not need to remain in socially accepted situations that aren’t serving you. You are always your own solution out of them, whether or not its considered socially acceptable.

Share Caroline's Current

It was unofficially announced by Drake University’s provost, Sue Mattison, at the panel, and was formally announced by Jerry Parker, Vice President & Dean of Students, later that evening. We held a moment of silence for Coady, and as we did, my mouth hung open for a solid minute, and I felt the cucumber slices move uncomfortably in my stomach.

Parker’s email read, “Declan enrolled at Drake University beginning in the fall of 2023. In 2023, following his graduation from Valley High School in West Des Moines, Iowa, Declan enlisted in the United States Army Reserve serving as an Information Technologies Specialist. Declan had a passion for being involved with the Boy Scouts of America having served as a Troop Leader and an Assistant Senior Patrol Leader helping other Scouts progress through the ranks. In high school, Declan was also a member of the Valley High School Men’s Swim team. While at Drake, Declan completed the Adams Leadership Institute’s Summer Series showcasing how important leadership and service beyond self was to him.”

Share

Posthumously, Coady has been promoted to sergeant. He was only 20. He had a future.

I can’t say that I ever knew Coady. I haven’t recognized his face from the picture of Coady dressed in his military uniform that’s been circulating. It’s possible I passed him somewhere on campus once or twice. And it’s possible that I didn’t. Really, the last thing I ever expected when I opened my phone on Feb. 28 to news of airstrikes on Iran was that this ‘war’ in question would have a direct impact on my university, and the people and community around it.

There’s not much else to say, except I’m thinking of him and his family. I’m taking a class on international law right now, and instead of working on the project that’s due on Monday. I’m sitting in my apartment writing this, trying to make a cruel world make sense.

My professor, Dr. Rachel Paine Caufield, whom I’ve featured before, told us today, “There’s no honor in sharing [explicit] social media posts. Go touch grass.” She also urged us to conduct deep thinking, not reactionary thinking. It’s good advice. It’s digestible advice, in the weird time and space that the Drake community is currently swaying in.

Are the U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iran legal under international law? Dr. Debra DeLaet, professor of political science at Drake University, says the short answer is no. I encourage everyone reading this to check out her blog post under Iowa’s division of the United Nations Association, answering that question with the pristine international relations expertise that she is known for in the political science department.

But for now, I’m going to allow myself to be a member of the Drake community, follow Paine Caufield’s advice, and not post anything politically explicit at this time. What I will do is sit, absorb, and process Coady’s death with my community as best I can.

My thoughts are with Declan Coady, his family and friends, and everyone else impacted by the deaths of these American soldiers.