Olympics aside, there’s a lot of grim news out there right now, so this post is a break from all that – a ray of hope among the February gloom.

Last week, I spent 4 days up in Vermont with Dad Guild. We have data to tell us that dads connecting with dads builds parenting confidence, helps build more equitable partnerships, and helps reduce stress for all parents. But it was pretty amazing to witness this playing out in real time, with real people.

I’ve known the Founder and Director Dad Guild, Keegan Albaugh, for several years. We were introduced in 2019 when I was researching Equal Partners. Back then, Dad Guild was an informal, volunteer-led group of dads in the Burlington area. Today, Dad Guild is a registered 501(c)(3) with four full-time employees, an office space, programs running in 4 counties 2,500 fathers, and an expansion plan to scale-up further in 2026.

I have previously facilitated two virtual workshops for Dad Guild, which I loved doing. So, when Keegan invited me up to Vermont last week for some in-person events, I jumped at the opportunity.

We packed a lot into a few days. There were podcast recordings (check those out here), breakfast with US Representative Becca Balint’s staff, and a radio gig on Vermont Edition. But the best things we did, in my opinion, were the 5 events with Dad Guild members. We did two events around raising healthy boys, and three around the concept of equal partners. People gathered in the Dad Guild office, at a local library, in a bookstore, and we even had one event in a bar an hour outside of Burlington… in the middle of a snowstorm. Gotta love Vermont.

But you know what? People showed up! They came because they trust Dad Guild, and because they have questions about parenting, kids, being a good partner, and where to find support. I reject the notion that “men” – in general – don’t want to talk about love, kids, or relationships. Of course they do! Lots of men want to talk about love, kids, and relationships. But in the United States, we just don’t create enough spaces where men are asked these questions.

(This is Patrick from Dad Guild. Keegan was sick the day I remembered to take pictures.)

I won’t bore you with blow-by-blow accounts of our events. But below are three gems that came out of those conversations.

• Boys and Tech: We’re all worried about kids and technology. Especially our boys; everyone wants to protect our collective sons from the manosphere. We’ll try protections, we’ll buy ad-free memberships, we’ll limit content or set timers for screen time. But the reality is, we’ll never out-tech our kids. After a certain age, it feels like a better use of time to sit down with our boys, and talk with them about what they’re seeing and hearing online. We can’t assume that “tech savvy” means our kids have the digital media literacy to process what they’re seeing. That’s the piece they need from us most.

• Creating a Safe Space for Boys: A lot of guys I talked to last week had to “man up” when they were little, and they want something different for their own sons. They want their boys to be whoever they are. But it is unrealistic to think that boys can be completely themselves in all spaces as they grow up, and knowing that is causing a lot of parental anxiety. What might be best is to let go of what we cannot control, and focus on what we can. What can make sure that boys always feel safe at home, where they can dress as they like, act as they like, and feel things not typically associated with manliness: fear, embarrassment, joy, playfulness.

• Solidarity Helps: Life is hard. Earning enough money to pay the bills, meeting the demands of modern parenting, taking care of a home, and maintaining relationships – it can all feel like too much sometimes, even when you’re in an equal-ish relationship. If you feel like this – you are NOT alone. Know that most of us are in the same situation, and talking about this with others can help tremendously. (And stay tuned for more about this in the future! My friend Leah Ruppanner’s book Drained is coming out this spring – and has all kinds of valuable information on lessening our own mental load.)

And a HUGE thank you to Keegan, Dan, Marlon, Patrick and Sarah for hosting me. If any of you happen to be up in Burlington some time, stop by Dad Guild (at the Soda Plant) and check out Phoenix Books.

This week’s Equal-ish episode is, not coincidentally, with Vermonter Traci Cherrier. Traci is a Family Mediator who helps couples through separation and divorce. Rachel and I were excited to talk to Traci about parallel parenting outside of an intimate relationship. But we actually ended up learning things that can be applied to any relationship! AND I got to meet Traci in person last week, too.

This newsletter will always arrive on a Wednesday afternoon. This is in honor of my dad, who used to call Wednesdays “hump day.” He did this to cheer me up when I was a kid slugging my way through the week; he’d assure me I was already over the hump, and nearly to the weekend. So, when this hits your inbox – even if you don’t read it – think to yourself: congratulations! You made it over the hump, and the weekend will be here before you know it.

I have a lot to talk about today – and this is important stuff, so I hope you find time to read through to the end.

But first, I want to point you towards today’s Equal-ish episode, which is an interview with Wharton School professor and economist Dr. Corinne Low – who is also the author of the 2025 book Having It All. You do not want to miss this one! This interview was one of my favorites, and covered some new territory for us, including: a little history lesson around US marriages since 1960, why parenting is so much more time consuming today than it was a few decades ago, and why women need to think about their utility function when it comes to relationships. Enjoy!

After you listen to the Corinne Low episode, I’d also recommend the newest episode of Be a Happier Parent, hosted by my new friend, Alex Trippier. On January 29, he posted an interview with Francesca Cavallo, the author of Midnight Stories for Rebel Girls and Stellar Stories for Boys of the Future. I mentioned Rebel Girls in Equal Partners, and said we needed an equivalent for boys. Seems that Cavallo agreed! This was a heart-warming interview about new masculinities, helping boys explore new worlds beyond their dreams, and why gender equity is good for all of us.

The timing of these latest Equal-ish and Be a Happier Parent pods couldn’t be better, as both provide beautifully articulate counterpoints to the new policy paper from the Heritage Foundation.

OK, so here goes….

This paper went up on their website a few weeks ago, and was co-authored by the Heritage Foundation and the DeVos Center for Human Flourishing. (I’m not being snarky; that’s the actual foundation name.) I wanted to read the whole thing before writing about it, hence the delay in this post. But rest assured – no AI summary for you! I read each and every one of those 191 pages so you wouldn’t have to. (You’re welcome!)

The #1 most important thing to highlight is that this paper is not an extremist policy suggestion from the fringes of American society. The Heritage Foundation wrote Project 2025, which has been a literal blueprint for the second Trump administration. Heritage is highly influential among GOP leaders, and we should take their policy papers seriously.

Top 4 Differences Between Equal Partners and the Heritage Foundation Policy Paper

To be clear, this paper is not really about marriage, gender, or families. It is dressed up as a family policy paper, but this is really all about control. My interpretation is that the Heritage Foundation has a clear vision for the American future: a robust population of not-very-bright workers and breeders; contented heterosexual couples procreating early and often. They want Americans to be healthy enough to add to the GDP, and not require much government support. But they don’t want anyone to be smart enough or rich enough to gain any real power or hold leaders accountable.

Of course, I doubt the writers themselves would adhere to these guidelines. They would never want their own kids to be working a manual labor job, giving up on professional dreams or goals. This report is not for people like them. What they describe is an ideal sub-class of Americans that enable the elites to live comfortably and securely. But I digress.

End goal aside, this paper is presumably about family, gender, and marriage – which happen to be the central topics of Equal Partners. So, here are my top 4 take-aways, the most obvious contrasts between my work, and this paper:

1. The Definition of Marriage

The Heritage paper makes it abundantly clear that marriage is between one man and one woman. They repeatedly disregard the concept of marriage between same-sex and/or queer couples, and they are very anti-trans. (They actually disregard the concept of gender identity and transgender completely.) All of their policy recommendations are solely for a heteronormative couple, whereas I wrote Equal Partners intentionally to include all couples.

I also find it interesting that Heritage claims the reason why people get married is to procreate. And to a lesser degree, for economic stability and to build the social fabric of our nation. But mostly to procreate.

They seem to think that having children is why people walk down the aisle. The paper never talks about love. (Actually, the word “love” only appears two times in the 191-page paper: once in reference to love of children, and once in reference to a reason for divorce.) The word “partner” is only used in terms of “sexual partners,” which are cast is a negative light. Heritage never mentions mutual respect, partnership, support, companionship, attraction, or shared interests. It felt like a very 1600’s feudal definition of marriage – and one that is very out of touch with what real humans feel in 2026.

2. The Future of Traditional Gender Roles

The Heritage paper, no surprise, supports traditional gender roles: men should be breadwinners, and women should be caregivers. “Fathers and mothers are not generic and interchangeable ‘parents.’ It is not discrimination to acknowledge the differences between them. Each brings unique and complementary assets to the vocation of parenthood.” The Heritage paper is very concerned about a diminishing American birthrate, and asserts that traditional gender norms are the answer. If we want to increase our birth rate, stabilize families, and support young parents – they believe we need to lean into traditional gender norms.

Not surprisingly, Equal Partners cites data indicating traditional gender roles are actually restricting for both men and women. They are the cause of family stress, not the answer. Because traditional norms limit our choices, and restrict our opportunities. Not all women want to marry a man, have babies, forego a career, and link 100% of her value to her family. Not all men want to marry a woman, have a robust career, prioritize work over his relationships with his kids, and find 100% of his value in his job. To truly support young families, we need to reject traditional gender norms and encourage all people to embrace all parts of themselves. We need to fight against restrictive social norms that limit our life choices.

And to be clear – all of my writing is very pro-family, pro-relationship, and pro-kids. Including traditional families. I have repeatedly said that if traditional gender roles work for you – great. We need policies that support everyone. But the Heritage paper is very different; they are exclusive. If you don’t agree with their version of natural family, you are deemed unnatural.

Again, is it just as important to note what they are NOT saying, and there was no mention of the fact that lack of male participation in the home is driving young women away from marriage. They failed to note that many young women are choosing to be single because of traditional gender norms. Many Gen-Z women grew up watching their mothers work full time AND do everything at home. And they don’t want to choose that kind of exhaustion for themselves. They are tired of Mankeeping, and tired of doing all the cognitive and emotional labor for their relationship. These Gen-Z women – the most highly educated women in American history – are rejecting traditional relationships so they can pursue true fulfillment. It is because there isn’t enough equal partnership that we see women rejecting marriage – not the opposite.

3. Why It Is Hard to Start a Family in 2026.

The Heritage paper states that it is economically challenging for young people to start a family in 2026. Housing prices are restrictive, wages are low, inflation is up. Kids are expensive! Those without generational wealth, especially those saddled with college loans, have a very hard time breaking free of debt. Starting a family is also time consuming, and it is hard to find the hours to balance both work and time with a new baby. On all of these points, we agree! However, we differ in our responses to this challenge.

The Heritage paper is highly focused on tax policy, and devotes many (many) pages to outlining a series of suggested tax incentives for young people to get married and make lots of babies. (They also devote many many words to railing against the current social safety net – which they think incentivizes single, female-led families. “Congress has made a deliberate choice to privilege and subsidize out-of-home, marriage-agnostic, non-parental childcare.”)

Honestly, a lot of this tax stuff is outside of my lane. I would love for a tax specialist to dig into this more deeply. But essentially, they are very supportive of tax credits for families. I have two big issues with this theory.

One, humans do not make life and relationship decisions in response to the tax code. I’m pretty sure the “rational economic actor” theory got debunked years ago. People have kids for all kinds of reasons – but no one is ever going to think, yes, I am going to take on the massive life-long responsibility of having another baby so I can access that one-time $2000 tax rebate.

Two, these tax credits would only apply to a narrow definition of family: male-female couples; families where all members (parents and kids) are full US citizens with social security numbers; families where the parents got married before they were 30 years old; households where parents live with biological children only (no blended families); families with more than two children; and families where one parents is a stay-at-home.

It is interesting that the Heritage paper talks about work structures, and how hard it is for women to both work and care for an infant. True! But their solution is for women to leave the workforce when their first child is born, and stay home. Which is contrary to what many women want - and they don’t mention that 85% of fathers want to be involved in their child’s life from day one. Their solution of a stay-at-home mom does not solve anyone’s problem.

I am a big supporter of the #paidcareforall policy suggestion, which would ensure that any worker can take time off work to care for a child, sick family member, or elder care - without worry about losing their income or job. This way parents could take time off, giving both parents maximum time for bonding with new babies. No surprise, the Heritage paper did not mention this policy suggestion.

The paper did talk about the need for greater workplace flexibility, which is great. They even cited a 2018 Cato Institute poll that found parents say flexible work schedules, remote work, and part-time are they best ways to balance work and family. But then they quickly slip back into gender roles, saying that work flexibility is more valuable for women than men. My read – they’re OK with women working part time or a flexible job. But men should be the more traditional 40+ hours-a-week breadwinners.

Just to reiterate - traditional gender norms box everyone in. The traditional breadwinner / caregiving dichotomy is bad for everyone. It means women feeling all the pressure of managing and caring for a family – and squeezing in her professional or personal interests into those times of day when she’s not breastfeeding, cleaning, cooking, or driving kids to soccer practice. (And any woman that has significant professional dreams, aspiration, or goals? Well, they’re just selfish.) Traditional norms mean that men are pressured to financially provide for their family, and in the mean time often give up what matters most in life - time with their families, close relationships, and the joy of parenting and caregiving. And traditional norms mean that trans and non-binary people are simply erased from society, because they don’t have a clear role in society at all.

4. The Role of Marriage Bootcamp

I reeled when I read these pages, because on the surface it sounds a lot like the MOVE Your Marriage we-treats I created with Brian Page and Ashley Brichter. The paper talks about how young families are often un-prepared for the relentlessness of family life, and don’t always have the communication tools they need to navigate a long-term relationship. Strangely enough, I agree! But here’s where we diverge. The Heritage paper suggests government grants should pay for Marriage Bootcamp … but only for couples who are cohabitating. (Aka living in sin.) And these bootcamps aren’t designed to improve communication or foster more loving, supportive partnerships; they are designed to convince people that being legally married is better than living together. If your metric is # of couples married, then this program could be successful. But I am unconvinced they spark any real impact, because getting married does not necessarily improve the quality of a relationship.

(And get this - they even suggest holding graduation ceremonies where people walk down the aisle at the end of their class. I couldn’t help but to think of Moonie mass-weddings when I read that part.)

Do we really need more marriages? Or do we need stronger family units? When Brian and Ashley and I created MOVE, we intentionally created a program that presents a breadth of research, asks key questions, and allows couples some time to figure out their best way forward. We should not force any couple into a one-size-fits-all relationship structure. We need to trust people to find the best way for themselves.

Why Does Any of this Matter? Here’s the Scariest Part.

Here’s the paragraph that scared me the most.

“The President should issue a series of executive orders requiring every grant, contract, policy, regulation, research project, and enforcement action involving the federal government to do the following: Explicitly measure how it helps or harms marriage and family, block actions that discriminate against family formation, and give preference to actions that support American families.”

At first read, this executive order could feel innocuous. After all, no one wants to be seen as anti-family. But think about the impact if every federal dollar spent needs to reflect the Heritage Foundation’s definition of a “natural family,” which is clearly stated as a union between one man and one woman, who marry young, and have more than 2 kids. I know a lot of great families that fit that description – but I also know a lot of great families who do not. Including my own.

In the eyes of this policy, anyone who chooses not to marry or never meets anyone they want to marry is “unnatural.” Any couple who chooses not to have kids, or who can’t conceive, is unnatural. Any queer or same-sex couple is unnatural.

After reading this paper, I can see that it isn’t a far stretch that families that only have 1-2 kids, blended families, people who use birth control, or couple who choose to adopt, are also deemed unnatural.

If you got all the way down here - thank you for reading! And thank you for caring. If we’re lucky, this paper will fade into memory. But the ideas in this report are already being voiced by elected officials with lots of influence. Elements of this report are likely to find their way into legislation in the near future. We need to pay attention, and elect officials that care about ALL American families.

P.S. I actually have a few more pages of notes, but decided anything more on substack would get tedious. If you’re super interested, drop me an email, and I’ll be happy to send you the rest of my thoughts.

AI, Deepfakes, Pornography and Grok: Follow-up to my Jan 7 Post

I would never waste your time by reposting a blatantly misogynist article. But I thought this was interesting – a counterpoint from my own, but written by another Feminist perspective. I don’t agree with this author, who says, “we have to teach girls to be tougher, not men to be nicer.” But I’m including this for readers to demonstrate how complex and complicated the issue is.

The Spectator published Does it really matter if Grok undresses us all? This is behind a pay wall, but you can request a copy through their IG page.

The author doesn’t appear to believe that men should be allowed to run amok, but that “we need to enforce the laws which are already in place to punish men for active misogyny, domestic violence, rape or the use of child pornography.” She feels that simply putting women’s faces on nude images isn’t really a problem. Women should buck up, and focus on the super-egregious. Again, not my perspective. But I’ll throw it out there – what are your thoughts?

This newsletter will always arrive on a Wednesday afternoon. This is in honor of my dad, who used to call Wednesdays “hump day.” He did this to cheer me up when I was a kid slugging my way through the week; he’d assure me I was already over the hump, and nearly to the weekend. So, when this hits your inbox – even if you don’t read it – think to yourself: congratulations! You made it over the hump, and the weekend will be here before you know it.

And for all of you who survived last week’s snowstorm AND massive school closures for days - and extra congrats and big hug to you!

Happy New Year!

Let’s start with something fun. This week’s Equal-ish episode is fantastic, if I do say so myself. Make sure you add the Anna Machin interview to your pod feed this week. Rachel and I had a wonderful time chatting with her. I know I’ve said that before, but it’s true! This interview was so good, and I was so excited and energized by what she had to say, the same day we recorded I asked Evan to listen to the raw tape. And he loved it. I hope you do, too.

Anna is an evolutionary anthropologist, and she had some terrific insight to the age-old nurture vs. nature conversation when it comes to parenting and caregiving. This is one you’re going to want to share!

And if you missed our New Year’s Eve episode – go back and check that one out, too. We started the conversation that I’ll call Am I Gatekeeping, Or Am I Right? I think we’ve hit a nerve on this one, and we’ll be sure to continue this topic into 2026.

Now for the hard stuff. I wish I had an uplifting topic to start the year, but the news is pretty bleak right now. And with so much media attention (rightfully) going to Venezuela, I want to make sure this topic doesn’t sneak by under the radar.

The Washington Post recently published this article on disturbing images generated by Grok, the AI chatbot on Elon Musk’s X platform. As explained by the Post, people on X were asking Grok to manipulate photos of women and repost them wearing a bikini, lingerie, or dental floss. “The latest spate of such images has given new weight to accusations by watchdog groups, women’s advocates and foreign governments that the social media company is playing fast and loose with artificial intelligence while other companies enforce stricter guardrails.”

In a brief experiment, I spent about 20 minutes on ChatGPT trying to get the bot to help me create nude photos… and ChatGPT wouldn’t do it. Even after many prompts from various angles. So… good on Sam Altman? But, for now, Grok seems to be deviating from other mainstream chatbots, and that presents a risk for everyone - especially women and girls.

I think it’s important that we recognize this article is not describing a one-off phenomenon. This is not just a Grok or an X problem. And it’s definitely not a victimless crime. Tech-facilitated gender-based violence is everywhere. And whether users realize it or not, these kinds of sexualized manipulations of real peoples’ likenesses is dehumanizing, humiliating, and terrorizing women and girls.

For more on the intersection of tech and sexualization, I highly recommend Laura Bates’ most recent book, The New Age of Sexism.

I had the pleasure to meet Laura in person in October. She was in the US for her book tour, and I attended an event in DC. Here are some of the notes I typed into my my phone during the panel:

• 99% of deepfakes feature women. (In fact, many deepfake apps can’t even process a male body.)

• 96% of deepfakes represent non-consensual pornography.

• Many deepfake apps offer the first few pictures for free, which makes for easier access. (Especially for under-aged boys.)

• Women are 17 times more likely to experience tech-facilitated violence than men.

• Big tech companies have the ability to increase safety, but they are choosing not to, because they can make more money by allowing it.

• It isn’t just the tech companies – it is also our governments. During the Paris AI Action Summit, countries like the US and the UK prioritized tech development and innovation over the safety of women and girls.

This is not something that is happening to other people somewhere else. This is happening in every school district, in every community. People are using AI tools to generate (and digitally share) degrading pornographic deepfakes using the likeness of actual humans – girls in their class, women actors they like, female politicians they don’t like. It’s desensitizing viewers to images and acts that society would rightly condemn. And the effects on the women and girls who are targeted can be devastating.

Thankfully, some governments are expressing the kind of moral outrage that we should all feel. The UK’s Technology Secretary, Liz Kendall, is desperately working to curb Grok across the pond. Even in Japan – a country where exploitative pornographic comics flourish – senior government officials are publicly acknowledging the need to address the risks pornographic deepfakes pose to real people.

I admit, this is not a beach read. It’s scary, hard stuff. But it is necessary. And if Laura was brave enough to research and write this book – then we should be brave enough to read it and confront the reality she describes.

This newsletter will always arrive on a Wednesday afternoon. (Or evening.) This is in honor of my dad, who used to call Wednesdays “hump day.” He did this to cheer me up when I was a kid slugging my way through the week; he’d assure me I was already over the hump, and nearly to the weekend. So, when this hits your inbox – even if you don’t read it – think to yourself: congratulations! You made it over the hump, and the weekend will be here before you know it. (And this week we all REALLY need it. Was going back to work on Monday as painful for everyone else, too? Yeesh.)

I saw this sign earlier today. And and it made me pause. I know we want it to be the most wonderful time of the year. But the truth is that the holidays come with a lot of emotions and a lot of expectations, which can make December particularly hard.

Along with the cheer of the season, there’s also a lot of coping. Some people are coping with the fact that they have way too much on their plate – and not enough time to do it in; the franticness of it all suffocates away the joy. Others are coping with grief, loss and loneliness. And while everyone’s situation is unique, here are some things to keep in mind if you, or people you care about, are having a hard time this December.

Holiday Coping: Feeling Overwhelmed

My Equal-ish co-host Rachel Childs published this article in the Huffington Post over the weekend: ‘Tis the Season to Share the Mental Load.

When we take our usual packed calendar and over-extended lifestyle and then add a bunch of parties, gift-buying, familial expectations, and general magic making, it is easy to understand why the holidays can feel so hard. Our own fun can get buried under obligations and never-ending to-do lists.

Sometimes, just naming our feelings is help enough. And in 2025, we have great vocabulary to explain why we feel so stressed in December. [EM1] I’ve talked about these terms in previous posts, but they fit with the holidays too.

• There’s a longer than average to do list of physical tasks that require time and attention: baking cookies, buying gifts, sending cards, etc.

• There’s more cognitive labor (or thinking work) than usual: do you have the ingredients for cookies? When do you have time to stop and pick things up? Did you order everything on time to arrive by the 24^th? Do you have enough stamps? And not that stamps are 78¢ can I even afford to do these cards anymore?

• The emotional labor, the feeling work, is through the roof. Because it isn’t just the baking cookies – it is how your grandma will feel when you carry on a family recipe. It isn’t just buying gifts – it’s buying the perfect gift that crack the teenage angst on Christmas morning. It’s not just the cards – it is making sure you don’t forget anyone or hurt any feelings.

No wonder it feels like too much. Because it literally is too much! The Christmas mental load is way more than anyone can tackle alone. Even delegated amongst several adults, this is just A LOT.

I wish I had a magic solution or easy answer, but there isn’t one. Here’s the best I can offer, based on my own research and talking to other experts.

1. You can say no. Women and girls are socialized to believe that we have to put others’ needs ahead of our own. (Not all women of course, but broadly speaking.) We tend to take responsibility for the happiness of others, which leads us to say “yes” too often, making compromises and accommodations that inconvenience us for the sake of others. And this can easily go to an unhealthy degree, where our own wellness is sacrificed for the sake of others. We understand intellectually that we can say, “no,” but something stops us from doing it. I get it… I do it too! We desperately want to avoid disappointing others. But sometimes we just have to cut back on commitments to allow ourselves to breath.

2. Make time for yourself. If you are arranging a hectic calendar, you might as well make sure there are things in there for you. Whether it is time to exercise, watch a movie, see a friend, or take a nap – put it on the calendar. Whatever fills you up – make sure you get some of that over the next few weeks. (And if you don’t think there’s time for yourself, go back to #1.)

3. Make new (easier) traditions. There are so many activities during the holidays that fall into the “tradition” category. We do things over and over, because we think we have to. Because it is the way it has always be done. But sometimes we have to stop and think – do I want to do this? Does anyone else really want to do this? Sometimes NONE of us want to keep a tradition alive, but we all do it for the sake of others, without realizing that we’re all over it. Take time to talk through traditions with family and friends – you might find that no one really likes your homemade eggnog, that pizza delivery on Christmas Eve sounds great, or that everyone just wants to stay home in soft pants for New Year’s Eve.

Holiday Coping: Grief & Loneliness

This time of year is not happy for everyone, and I was reminded just how hard the holidays are for many this past weekend. I am currently doing some work for the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), and during a workshop, some new friends bravely shared why the holidays are really hard for them.

December can churn up painful memories. We miss loved ones: both people who are deceased, and people who are no longer in our lives. We may mourn a life we used to have, or a life we wanted but never got. And those feelings are not made any easier by the constant stream of festive movies, cards, and decorations reminding us of what we should have, or what we should feel. No wonder so many people self-medicate to get through the holidays, or turn to self-harm.

If you’re reading this and you can’t wait for January 2, for whatever reason, I get that. And I am sorry you’re going through a hard time. I’ve been there, too.

There are a lot of places out there where you can find support. It probably doesn’t feel that way, because, in my experience, our culture is generally not open to talking about hard things for more than a few minutes. But you are not alone, and there are people out there who care.

• NAMI operates in all 50 U.S. states, offering free support groups for people experiencing any sort of mental illness, or for family members who are caring for someone with mental illness. And a lot of their support groups are virtual, so you can join from your own home. If you’re interested, you can find a support group here. (Note – NAMI is in no way sponsoring this content. I am passing this information along because I recently learned about this recourse, and I believe in it.)

• If you are going through something hard, or you feel lonely, and don’t have anyone to talk to about it, try Warmlines. This is a nation-wide network of peer supporters who are trained to listen with empathy, and offer a judgement-free space to talk. If you want to check them out, that link is here.

It is awkward to transition from that conversation about coping to talking about time off and joy…. but the reality is, many of us balance dual feelings on a daily basis. So, whatever your holidays look like, along with your coping, I hope you experience many moments of peace, relaxation, and joy.

Personally, I am looking forward to closing this computer on Friday afternoon, and taking some much needed time off. I am officially signing off substack for the year and hunkering down in my own soft pants next week. Thank you so much for being here in 2025. Sending everyone love and hugs as you celebrate and/or cope during the next few weeks. I’ll see you in January with fresh energy!

And while you’re driving, dish washing, folding laundry, cleaning, wrapping gifts or taking an extra loop around the block to clear your head - Rachel and I have new Equal-ish episodes lined up for December 24 & December 31. (Make sure you subscribe so you don’t miss any new episodes.) On the 24^th we will share our interview with Alex Trippier from the Be a Happier Parent podcast. Alex is very funny – and brutally honest – and I think you’ll really love that conversation. And on New Year’s Eve, we have our final Coaching Edit of 2025.

Happy New Year!

This newsletter will always arrive on a Wednesday afternoon. (Or evening.) This is in honor of my dad, who used to call Wednesdays “hump day.” He did this to cheer me up when I was a kid slugging my way through the week; he’d assure me I was already over the hump, and nearly to the weekend. So, when this hits your inbox – even if you don’t read it – think to yourself: congratulations! You made it over the hump, and the weekend will be here before you know it.

Many people have reached out and asked how the MOVE Your Marriage pilot went. And here’s my response!

But before reflections, I want to announce our first publicly available, 1-day MOVE we-treats in NYC! Saturday, Feb 28 & Sunday, March 1. Both run 10am - 4:30pm. Details can be found here. And read on for information about a discount code.

Our first MOVE invitation-only pilot event was held last month. And as a reminder, MOVE stands for:

M = Money

O = Operations

V = Values

E = Empathy

We had 9 wonderful couples join us for this one day workshop; their wide range of backgrounds and experiences brought diversity of opinions and perspectives to the event. Here’s a picture of the room just before everyone arrived!

These are the things that went really well:

• The feedback was that couples felt more aware, more connected, and more prepared leaving the space at the end of the day. YAY!

• We had a great conversation around household labor. We talked about why it is hard, and why all of us feel tired all the time.

• I tried a session that I have done around the world, and it worked in NYC too! Participants were receptive to the conversation about gender norms, how much they shaped our upbringing, and how much influence they still have on our lives today.

• Couples loved the conversation about money scripts – and how our economic situation growing up heavily creeps into the way we see the world when we grow up.

• Couples had really good conversations about family values – and how important it is to talk about, and prioritize, family values with your partner.

• I really loved the long format, in-person workshop. I often do short webinars, or panel presentations - but it was fantastic to have the time to listen to each couple, and really talk more deeply about issues. Having a full day together allowed for real reflection and thoughtful dialog.

• Holding the event at Workplayce was great! It was an ideal venue.

But a pilot is a pilot – and hindsight is a beautiful thing. There are a few things we need to change.

• Money is a really sensitive topic! We’re going to move some of the money material out of a group setting, and allow participants to work one-on-one with Brian Page post -workshop.

• I felt that the flow was slightly off in my session – we jumped straight from values to operations. But there is another step in there – you have to lay the groundwork to make operations possible, like identifying motivation and ensuring solid communication. I’m going to alter my sessions to include this piece in the February workshop.

• We heard that people really liked having one-on-one time with their spouse to talk about some of these tough topics in real time. We were encouraged to build even more break-out time for couples, and more household examples that do not revolve around kids.

• As suggested, we are tightening the material and making it 90 minutes shorter.

• Participants asked for a take-home packet of information… so we’re putting that together now!

How does one sign up? This link will take you to our website, and information about the spring we-treats. If you’re ready to commit, please sign up here. Readers of gender (in)equality get an extra perk… use the code KATE at check-out and you’ll get $250 off!

As I talked about in last week’s post – Dr. Sheehan Fisher explained that even when a couple values gender equality, society makes that HARD to operationalize that value. Generations of norms and policies are like that undertow in the ocean, even when you swim harder, it can pull you down. Writing your own rules requires time, intention, and talking through some really hard questions. And MOVE is a great opportunity to bring greater intention to your family structure.

If you’re interested, I hope you sign up! And if you have questions, please don’t hesitate to reach out; send me a comment, DM, or email me. I’m happy to chat and help you decide if MOVE is right for you.

And I would appreciate everyone’s help getting the word out. If you have friends, colleagues or family in the NYC area – please forward this along.

Check out this week’s episode of Equal-ish where we tackle a topic I’ve not heard elsewhere…. Coaching vs. Therapy. When a couple decides they need some expert advice, who do they call? We interviewed couple’s therapist Sarah Fishburn-Roberts to help us answer this question. (It wasn’t as straight forward as we thought it would be!)

This newsletter will always arrive on a Wednesday afternoon. (Or evening.) This is in honor of my dad, who used to call Wednesdays “hump day.” He did this to cheer me up when I was a kid slugging my way through the week; he’d assure me I was already over the hump, and nearly to the weekend. So, when this hits your inbox – even if you don’t read it – think to yourself: congratulations! You made it over the hump, and the weekend will be here before you know it.