Becky Mollenkamp: Hello, take two. How are you?
Taina Brown: How do they do that? I'm good. I'm good. How are you?
Becky Mollenkamp: I'm all right. Actually, you said, I've been better the first time we recorded this, which was a little mistake thing that we just did, but we're back. And I just was going to say before, before I freaked out because we were accidentally live on YouTube, that I appreciate when people say I've been better or not great instead of just the automatic, I'm fine. Because that's what we do, right? That's what we do. We always like to just say, I'm good. I'm fine. When in fact, maybe we're not. And also, I have always wished there was a better question to ask instead of, how are you? Because it's a lot. That's a lot because you're basically asking people to lie because no one wants to lay it on you, right? Anyway, some.
Taina Brown: Yeah, because it could be a lot. It could be a lot. Yeah. Maybe asking, how are you feeling today? Or I saw something once that was like a really good question and I can't remember what it is now. Now feel like I'm going to have to like dig through my inbox.
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah, we need to normalize another question. I don't know. Maybe it's like, hey, what's lightening you up right now? No one's asking that. And that'd be weird, probably. But only because it's not the norm. We need to create a new norm. Well, that's not what we're talking about today. But it was something that was just running through my head. So I was like, hmm, I do hate that question, honestly, because I feel like we all just lie.
Taina Brown: It's a nicety that doesn't really help in any way.
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah, and then we just teach our children to lie and to basically we're teaching ourselves to like minimize our feelings or that our feelings aren't important enough to discuss. Anyway, what were we going to talk about today?
Taina Brown: We're going to talk about how, my god, my brain. Well, you asked me a question last week that prompted the beginning of what this episode is going to be about. Yeah, so you asked me last week, would I, in the context of values alignment and making values aligned decisions, would I accept a speaking opportunity at Chief? Can you explain what Chief is for people who may not have heard of it?
Becky Mollenkamp: I remember why. This is how this is a couple of brains that are reaching their 40s and into their brains. We have audience members who relate to the fact that sometimes your brain just is like, wait a minute, I'm not even a link yet. We were talking about Tyra Banks. And I, as we were talking about Tyra Banks, I got an email from Chief with a story about Tyra that I had seen. And she was launching an ice cream line, which we didn't talk about last week. It really wasn't relevant to what we were talking about. But it made me think, this is clearly her PR team pitched this to Chief to ask them to write about it because there wasn't, it was like a pretty loose story angle that they were going with. And that sort of prompted me to say, would you accept an offer from Chief? Because let's say they reached out to you. You don't have a PR team. If you had a PR team, would you even pitch Chief? But let's say they reached out to you with this great opportunity. They have a large email list. It's all professional women, geared really for women who are either aiming for C-suite or in C-suite or at high executive level positions within corporate America. So it's not really you and I, right? It's more corporate. However, I have met many entrepreneurial women who want to work with corporate clients who are also inside of Chief because of the incredible network of people that are in there. So some of our audience might be inside of Chief. In fact, I know for me anyway, some of my ideal clients are inside of Chief. And it is specifically for women. They are, I don't know if they are apolitical. I think they might be apolitical. I'm trying to think if I've ever seen them really take much of a stance. But they have gotten in trouble in the past because it's run by a couple of white women and it is very expensive. It's something in the like, five figures. For a year. I think it's like 10,000, 12,000 maybe even more a year membership.
Taina Brown: Jesus fucking Christ, wow, I did not know that.
Becky Mollenkamp: And the idea is you're getting access. I mean, I think in theory there's supposed to be benefits to being inside of it, but from everyone I've talked to, you're basically paying to be in a room with people with some power, which is already kind of a problematic thing anyway. And then they had some issues a while back around some white women speaking over black women. And I don't know all the ins and outs of it. They did a very good job of trying to keep the lid on it. But if you do research, you can find some stories about some of the reasons Chief had some issues about two years ago now, maybe a year ago. So they've had some problematic issues and they may be our ideal clients inside of that community. And so it prompted this question of, would you accept? Forget about pitching to them, because more than likely we're not going to be pitching to places that we have some values misalignment with. But if they were to approach you with an opportunity to be featured in their newsletter, which goes out to a large audience, people, including their members, but also non-members. I'm not a member and I get the newsletter. They talk a lot about news of importance to women in business. And you're going to get in front of a lot of eyeballs, eyeballs that maybe your ideal client, eyeballs that, you know, are powerful people. Would you accept that opportunity? And that was, it was an interesting question because I had said, I was approached maybe two years ago to be flown down to speak at an oil company to women executives inside of an oil company. They were going to pay for my travel. They were going to pay me a good amount of money to go speak. And listen, I can use money. I'm not rolling in the dough here. I'm not, you know, Tyra Banks level income. And it certainly is appealing on the financial sense. But I had to say no because I just, it was too much of a values misalignment. The company's values were clearly not aligned with mine. And I had a real strong feeling that the women that were working inside that company more than likely were also not values aligned. I would be going to Texas, already a state where I have a lot of values misalignment. And so they're living in a state that's not values aligned with me, working for a company that's not values aligned with me. My feeling is that most of those people would probably not be my people anyway. And the company was just such a misalignment. So that was a place where it was really easy for me to say no. But what we were talking about is what do you do when things get a little murkier? Like, Chief is not an oil company. They're not a deeply problematic company.
Taina Brown: It's a networking organization.
Becky Mollenkamp: They've had issues. They're not perfect, but they're not like, you know, it's not an oil company. So what do you do in these situations? It's not just that situation. I think these things can come up quite a bit where it's a little murkier. It's a little less clear. It's not like an obvious, my gosh, no, that's, I'm not going to go, you know, work for Trump. That's clearly a values misalignment. But let's even say, not to make it too political, but also like Harris. It's not a values completely aligned situation for me. So those kinds of situations, what do you do? So I want to hear your in-the-moment thoughts.
Taina Brown: Okay, so I have two things I want to discuss specifically about Chief before we get into the bigger question of like, how do you make those decisions, right? Because I think with the question that you asked me about, would I go speak at Chief or with the example of big oil wanting you to come out, those are really big examples, but I think for most of us, those values alignment questions are in little actions day to day, right? And so there's a way to manage that that makes managing the bigger decisions easier. But before I get into that, so you mentioned that Chief might kind of position itself as being apolitical. And to that, I would tell Chief, there is no such thing as being apolitical.
Becky Mollenkamp: Correct. You and I know everything is political, and the decision to be apolitical is political.
Taina Brown: Exactly. Like if you have the ability to be quote-unquote apolitical, what that indicates to me is an exorbitant amount of privilege that you have to be able to say, well, I don't want to mess into politics too much. And basically what that means is that all the quote-unquote things that you view as political don't affect you. So you have the luxury of staying on the sidelines and not really engaging in those conversations, which also indicates to me that you are probably white and you probably have a certain amount of wealth to be able to do that. Yeah. And then the other thing is the whole cost, right? Like paying five figures to access a network of quote-unquote powerful people.
Becky Mollenkamp: Well, ding ding ding, it's run by white women and the cost is exorbitant, so yeah.
Taina Brown: Hello, that's mimicking our political system. So that in and of itself really just kind of gives me the ick because one, it's gatekeeping for people who may not have that kind of financial privilege to be in specific spaces that would allow them access to people with power to collaborate with them, to mentor them, to coach them, to provide marketing services or whatever the case might be. But also, you're basically just taking one of the horrible things about capitalism and embedding it into your networking group that just continues to perpetuate inequality. It continues to perpetuate this idea that you can buy your way into the positions that you want to be in. And that does not sit well with me. So last week when you asked me this question, When I think about making decisions about values alignment, I think of it as on a spectrum. I don't think it's a black and white yes or no, unless it's something very obvious. If the Trump campaign reached out and said, hey, can you come in and do a session on DEI? Well, first of all, I know you don't actually mean it. You don't care about DEI. So that's an immediate no for me. But with things that are a little bit murkier, I like to think of it as being on a spectrum. So last week when you asked me, was like, well, it's something I might have to think about. But now as I'm talking and I'm breaking down these two points about being apolitical and buying your way into spaces and rooms where powerful people are, which to be fair, I didn't know these things last week. I knew that they had taken the stance of being apolitical. I didn't know how much it cost.
Becky Mollenkamp: Well, let me also, I just quickly looked up, because I don't want to be besmirching an organization. I was close, and these figures are a year ago. I haven't found what current membership rates are, because they're not real obvious with it, just so you know. Like, it's not on their website that I have found. You have to go through a whole application process before they'll tell you what it costs.
Taina Brown: Which is also icky.
Becky Mollenkamp: And the company is valued at a billion dollars.
Taina Brown: Yeah. So with this new information, it's a hard pass. I think what I told you last week, which I think I would probably still do, is if they reached out and said, hey, can you do this? Or can you come speak to our group or whatever? I would decline. And then I would, what's the word I'm trying to think of, make it publicly known. Hey, Chief reached out to me and this is why I said no.
Yeah, that's always great content, right? "This is why I turned down a multi-whatever," or "why I turned down this amazing opportunity." Those are the things that would get reads. Yeah, I don't know what I would say, but yeah, go ahead.
Taina Brown: Yeah. But I think, yeah, beyond it being great content in the traditional sense of content structure and content creation, I think it's also about creating clarity to the community I want to build, about where my values are. It's making it clear to them—for people already in my community or who could potentially be in my community in the future—where I stand on certain things. And so I also see it, yeah, sure, it'll make great content for SEO, keywords, things like that. But also, I see it as a way to continue building community by making sure my values are as public and transparent as possible.
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah. The company to me smacks of sort of white feminism in that girl bossy way of showing up in the world, which ultimately is not feminist. It's "How do we beat them at their game or at least tie them at their game?" Meaning, "How do we, as primarily white women, beat white men at their game or at least get to where they are in their game? How do we have the same victories they have?" Instead of what I think actually is feminist, which is, that game sucks. There is no way we can all win at that game. So your approach of just trying to get more women—which usually means more white women—to also succeed at the game isn't feminist because it's leaving behind most women, primarily women of color. I really think the feminist approach is to say, "How do we create a new game or a system that isn't a game?" Because a game inherently has winners and losers. How do we create a new community that allows us all to have success instead of the answer to our liberation just being shifting who's at the top of the pyramid? But the pyramid still exists, and that's the problem. It's about the hierarchy—how do we get rid of it? That's what this is. And I think Chief is very much an example of that. And it's not just Chief. I don't mean to only call them out, although I'm fine with doing that. But there are so many folks out there in the online and regular business space that are trying to use this sort of feminist, women's power, "we care about women, care about empowering women" rhetoric. But what they're really doing is not remotely liberatory. It is not revolutionary. It is simply, "We just want to see if we can get more white women to succeed." And I think that's how they're getting to that billion-dollar status. You know, like Taylor Swift and so many examples of the same sort of mentality, and that's not winning. So I get what you're saying. And this is where I was getting to the question where it gets murky. I also know there's a lot of people who feel like, "One way I can make a little dent in that is by being a chaos maker from the inside, right?"
Taina Brown: A disruptor.
Becky Mollenkamp: Right, like, I show up with my value set, the true feminist value set, and say, "If Chief wants to feature me, then this is what revolution actually looks like, right? This is what true empowerment for women looks like." And if they’re willing, I can be the person who brings that message through them to try and create some of that change inside of that organization, to disrupt what's happening there. Then that may feel aligned with my values. And this is where it's tricky, right?
Taina Brown: Yeah, yeah. No, I actually think that's a legitimate place to be, because what that does is it lets us know that our values are different. There are values you and I have in common, but because of our lived experiences, there are also values that you and I have that are different.
Becky Mollenkamp: What do you feel about that?
Taina Brown: Because it is a majority white woman space, my values tell me I'm probably not going to be safe in that space. Even if they were in the midst of completely restructuring and doing the work, they might very well be at this point in time—we don't know because we're not in those spaces. So, being generous and giving them the benefit of the doubt, they might be doing that internal work, and it just might be taking a while for that to be seen publicly, right?
So if they were to reach out to me, I’d be like, "Well, it's still majority white, and my experience has been that majority white women’s spaces, who feel like they can buy their way to power, are not safe spaces for me." I know that's going to trigger me, it's going to feel like an anxious place. But you, as a white woman, might have a completely different experience. And if part of your calling or values is to be a disruptor, a chaotic agent, I’ve seen people do that—go on news shows, talk shows, or be in articles, and completely call out the person interviewing them or the company.
When it’s done right, it can be a pivotal moment for people in the room. If you, as a white woman, feel like that is part of what you're here to do, to go into white spaces as an ally and call stuff out and disrupt the norms, then I say more power to you—go ahead and do that. Let that be part of your work. But for me, as a non-white woman, unless I see evidence of change, of movement away from the "our feminism is about getting equality with white men" approach, I know for a fact that’s not going to be a safe space for me. It's going to trigger me.
Becky Mollenkamp: I’m just doing live research. According to Forbes, 33% of Chief members identify as women of color. I want to share that because it’s more than I thought. But ultimately, I think what you're saying—and I agree with you—is that it's not even about diversity in the sense of how many people look different; it’s about what the organization represents. It's held by two white women, and the ethos is about getting the bag—how do we get this billion dollars, how do all of our members gain more wealth. It’s not about changing systems.
For you, that wouldn’t feel safe, and I fully get that. This brings up another interesting point that I think comes up for white women, especially those trying to do deep, meaningful work. A lot of times we hear this idea that we want to amplify the voices of women of color, right? We don’t want to center ourselves in everything.
For example, if a podcast approached me that wasn’t values-aligned—it’s another girl-bossy podcast, and I’m looking at their guest list and it’s all white women—should I say yes and try to disrupt from the inside? Or would it be better to pass the mic and say, "Taina and I talk about a lot of the same stuff. She's fucking amazing. Why not have her on instead?" Would it be more helpful to amplify someone else's voice rather than take up space myself? Or could that potentially be harmful, because I’m suggesting something that might not feel safe for you? Or is that potentially harmful? Because what you're saying is like, because what if Chief approached me and I said, you know what, Tiana and I talk about the same stuff. She's fucking amazing. She rarely gets the, you she's not getting as much requests as I am simply because I have this privilege for my skin tone. Would you be willing to feature her? In my mind, that's an amazing opportunity for you to get your voice in front of a lot of people. But then I also hear you saying, but it might not be safe for you. Consent Is important. I would have to ask you first. I'm just talking more generically, what is the better ally approach in your mind? And again, I'm not asking you to speak for everyone.
Taina Brown: No, this is the definitive answer. No, I'm totally kidding. Context is important. And I think understanding that context changes from person to person, and situation to situation, is part of breaking down the nuance of how to make values align decisions. What's the context here? Who's going to be harmed? Who's going to be highlighted, etc.?
If you were to pass the baton, like in the Chief example, I wouldn’t fault you for it. You’d have good intentions, but it could still be harmful. If I’m not comfortable or don't feel safe in that space, it wouldn’t be helpful to me, no matter how much exposure or opportunity is involved. That’s why it's important to always consider consent and to recognize that allyship isn't just about amplifying voices, but about making sure the voices being amplified are in a position to thrive, not just survive, in the space you're offering.
Becky Mollenkamp: I don't think Chief is ever gonna reach out to me after this episode. They're not gonna be talking to either of us.
Taina Brown: Absolutely not. So this is all hypothetical. We're just using them as an example because they happen to be available to use as an example at this moment in time. But I think, you know, in that case, if you were to pass the baton to me, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think that could be an indication of good allyship. At that point, it's my responsibility as an individual to know what are the spaces that I want to be in and that I don't want to be in. That responsibility comes off your shoulders and is now on mine. And if it's a space that I don't want to be in, then I can politely decline, or if it's something I do want to do, I can take that baton up.
Going back to my thoughts about allyship after our conversation with Dee two episodes ago about white women and politics, I think when it comes to people in positions to be allies, you as a white woman going into a space that's majority white, being the disruptor, bringing in your values, and trying to initiate change that way, there’s a time and a place for that. But as an ally, something you also have to consider is how that’s going to affect how people see you as an ally, right? Because we have this podcast together, right? And I would consider us friends. We've never met in person. It's all been online.
Becky Mollenkamp: Going back to our episode about friendship, we decided we were friends, so don't tell me you think we're not. I've been hanging my hat on that we're friends now. Okay, good.
Taina Brown: We are definitely friends. We are definitely friends. But as a non-white woman, as a woman of color, as a Black woman, as a queer woman with a very specific lived experience, the way that I treat allies or people who call themselves allies—or the way that I know whether or not someone is truly an ally—is if I know that person is a safe person for me. If most of your behaviors or actions are embedded in white supremacist cultures, regardless of your intentions, at some point, that is going to signal to me that you are no longer a safe person for me.
If I were to go to your house for a function, or to your child's birthday party, most of the people there are going to be from those spaces, right? So even though our relationship technically is separate from those spaces, because of how embedded you are in the system, the outer circle, the outer spheres, are not safe for me. That means sometimes you're a safe person for me, and sometimes you're not. And that makes it hard for me to decide how connected I want to be to you.
I've been thinking about this for the past few weeks because, again, after that episode with Dee—who I totally appreciate—white people who consider themselves allies shouldn’t come into our spaces. Go to your own spaces and disrupt things over there. That's part of your work. You being an ally in Black or POC spaces is not allyship. Your allyship is calling out your own people in your own spaces when they do or say things that are abhorrent. But if you continue to embed yourself in spaces with people you're not normally connected to, that becomes a problem for me.
I think most Black or POC folks share a similar perspective because when we meet someone who is white, we're always waiting for the other shoe to drop. We never feel safe immediately. It’s never like, "This person's a great person." No, it’s always like, "How long do I have to wait before I realize this person isn't safe anymore?" Sometimes it doesn’t turn out that way, and I realize after six months or a year that this person has not proven me wrong and is a safe person for me. But I'd say probably about 60% of the time, it's the opposite.
Becky Mollenkamp: I’m surprised it’s that low.
Taina Brown: Yeah, for some people it's higher. For me, it's been about 60%. But yeah.
Becky Mollenkamp: Which is still ridiculous, right? It's too many. The place where I can relate—not to compare, but to relate—is that as a woman, I have the same feeling around men. I definitely don't trust men until they earn my trust. So I think for white women, that's where we can try to find some understanding and apply it to our relationships with people who have more oppressed identities than ours. It’s like, "I know what it feels like with men, so let me remember that as I show up in this relationship as the person with the privilege, the white man version in this dynamic."
Instead of trying to cling to the oppression I share, like "I also know what it's like to be oppressed as a woman," we need to think about how it must feel for the person on the other side of the relationship, where I hold the oppressor identity.
Taina Brown: Yeah, exactly.
Becky Mollenkamp: So for me, I have to think about the spaces where I’m the one with the oppressor identity, and how that might make the other person feel. I know what it feels like in reverse, so instead of clinging to the shared oppression, I need to think about how I might be making them feel. Then I can take that awareness and act accordingly, like how I would want someone to act when they're in a privileged position in relation to me.
And just quickly, about people who call themselves allies—that always gets me. People who call themselves allies rarely are. It’s not a title you should claim for yourself. Like, when I see "ally" in someone's bio, I'm always like, "Are you though?" Allyship isn’t something you decide for yourself because you like gay people or whatever. Really, it's something other people decide about you based on your actions. This applies to anyone—you don't get to decide if you're an ally to a community. They do. So, I think that's important for people to remember.
Taina Brown: Absolutely.
Becky Mollenkamp: Lastly, to white women—if you find yourself in spaces and convince yourself you're there to be a disruptor, have some hard conversations with yourself about your motives. It’s easy to tell yourself, "I'm showing up to disrupt things." But power and privilege are addictive, and you have to be vigilant. You could end up clinging to that power, thinking you're doing it for a righteous cause, and before long, you’ve lost sight of your original intentions and are just fully participating in the system.
Taina Brown: Yes.
Becky Mollenkamp: I see this happen all the time—not just with white women, but with folks who start out with good intentions to disrupt, and before long, they’ve drunk the Kool-Aid and are just playing the game. They've lost sight of the disruption entirely.
Taina Brown: Yeah, exactly. I was looking for this Black creator I found on Instagram. Most of her content is about asking, "Are you a safe person for Black people?" I’ll try to find her handle so we can share it in the show notes, but she’s really insightful.
Becky Mollenkamp: Is it Ashani Mufuko? She’s an anti-racism coach. Super popular on social media. I’ll link her in the show notes. She’s great and does a lot of content aimed at white folks. I'll drop her info in the chat so you can see if it's the person you’re thinking of, but either way, she's awesome.
Taina Brown: It is her, I just looked her up. I was gonna say she is really beautiful.
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah, she's gorgeous. And incredibly intelligent. And the other person I might recommend is Blair Imani, who's also really good at delivering a lot of that kind of content with her Smarter in Second series. And she's with Feminist.com. She's awesome too.
Taina Brown: I agree with what you said about allyship. You can’t just call yourself an ally and that’s that. You have to earn it. You earn your allyship stripes by being a safe person for the community you’re trying to support. What you said earlier about how white women sometimes focus on the sameness—like, "We’re the same because we’re women, right?"—and overlook the differences, really reminded me of that quote by Audre Lorde. I’m going to completely butcher it because I don’t remember it by memory, but the gist is, it’s not our sameness that connects us. Let’s focus on the differences. That’s where our power is, in recognizing and valuing those differences.
We grow up in a world that always tells us to find common ground, right? Especially in politics or other discussions, it’s all about finding the common ground. But the full Audre Lorde quote, which you sent to me, says: "You do not have to be me in order for us to fight alongside each other. I do not have to be you to recognize that our wars are the same. What we must do is commit ourselves to some future that can include each other and to work toward that future with the particular strengths of our individual identities. And in order for us to do this, we must allow each other our differences at the same time as we recognize our sameness."
Focusing so much on the sameness without acknowledging the differences is where allies lose the plot, right?
Becky Mollenkamp: That's the "I don’t see color" people, and that’s not anti-racism work.
Taina Brown: Exactly. It’s not anti-racism work, and it’s not intersectional. Without an analysis of power differentials, there is no intersectionality. And to understand power differentials, you have to understand differences, and that difference is not a bad thing. If you're in a space where people don’t look like you, it’s your responsibility to understand the power dynamics at play because that will indicate who the allies are and where the real work can be done.
A lot of traditional feminists, white feminists, or liberal feminists lose the plot by focusing too much on sameness. It’s almost like they’re afraid of difference because they’re scared to give up some of the power that comes with their whiteness and privilege.
Becky Mollenkamp: Exactly. I just immediately think of Joanne Rowling. I won’t use her gender-affirming name, but she’s a prime example of that TERF mentality—this focus on a narrow definition of what it means to be a woman. Instead of saying, "Women are different," she’s focused on finding the sameness, the limited definition of womanhood, which ultimately protects her power. She’s holding onto her piece of the pie, thinking that if she allows other women in, she’s going to lose something.
It’s that scarcity mindset, the idea that there’s only so much pie to go around, so you have to fight like hell to protect your piece. Instead of recognizing that we can make more pie so everyone can have some. That’s capitalism at work too—maintaining power structures through scarcity.
Taina Brown: Yeah, totally. Scarcity mindset is so embedded, not just in how we think about finances but in everything. One thing I always tell my clients is that who you are at home is not separate from who you are at work or with your friends or your family. You are one person, and the mindset you carry in any area of your life will bleed into the rest. Whether it’s about how you work, build wealth, or raise your kids, it’s all connected. Capitalism embeds itself into every aspect of life.
I wanted to mention that I went to an info session for this other organization, a networking group for women entrepreneurs called Entreprenista. Have you heard of it?
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah, I was a member for a while.
Taina Brown: They have a lifetime membership—it's a one-time, low four-figure payment, nowhere near Chief's $8,000 annual fee. And for me, that already feels more aligned than Chief.
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah. I met some amazing women inside that community. There were also some women who were much more girl-bossy. But ultimately, going back to the beginning, when talking about values alignment and these murky things—communities have been a big piece of that for me. I think perfectionism is part of white supremacy. We know that perfectionism helps maintain white supremacy, so it’s not something we should aim for. There's never going to be a perfect anything, right? The only person who agrees with my values 100% is probably me, because they’re mine, right?
So, I can’t make every decision by saying, "This has to perfectly align with everything I believe." I mean, I could, but then I’d be on an island alone. And sometimes that’s what I want, and that’s okay. But if I’m looking for opportunities—whether it's to be on someone else's podcast, speak inside someone else's community, or join a community—I have to know that I can't expect perfection in values alignment. What I need to do is figure out what are the core values I absolutely need in a space. I’ve done that work. Sometimes I end up in spaces like Entrepreneista, where it’s not Chief—it’s more aligned, not perfect. But I’ve met some amazing people, and the community at least meets some higher-level values without going against others.
Sometimes that has to be enough for me. Then I get into spaces like that, and I start seeking out the people who align even more deeply with my values. I call those people in to find my own community within the larger space. If I’m waiting for perfection, I’m not going to have it. So when we talk about these murky decisions, it’s not about saying yes only when it’s 100% aligned.
Taina Brown: It’s never gonna happen.
Becky Mollenkamp: Exactly. It’s about understanding yourself well enough to know what the absolute no’s are and what the absolute yes’s are. Those rare unicorns where you’re like, "My God, everything seems aligned here." But most of the time, it’s that middle ground of, "Where am I willing to bend a little, and where am I not?"
Taina Brown: Mm-hmm.
Becky Mollenkamp: What does it mean if I bend a little? How will I behave inside of that space or opportunity? How do I want to show up? That’s the more challenging work, but it’s what we need to do. Most of our decisions fall in that middle ground—it's not always a clear yes or no. We need to ask, "Can I make this work? Is there enough alignment that I won’t lose myself?"
Taina Brown: Exactly. And that goes back to thinking of it as a spectrum. How close is it to a 100% yes or a 100% no? Because again, context is important. That’s where the nuance is, the messy work of figuring things out. If you can make those decisions with the smaller things, when it feels like there’s more on the line, it becomes easier because you’ve practiced making those values-aligned decisions.
I like to think we each have three or four core values that will never change. If you can hone in on what those are and keep them top of mind, filtering every decision through them—from the little things like where you live or how you decorate your house—those things might seem inconsequential, but they’re opportunities to practice living your values. The more you do that, the easier it becomes when bigger decisions arise. I was going to say something just now, but I totally lost my train of thought. Welcome to your 40s!
Becky Mollenkamp: That’s it. I can’t even wait to see what my 50s bring—probably even less memory! But maybe a great place for us to wrap up is to share our core values. What are your two, three, or four core ones? I’ll go first while you think. For me, liberation or freedom is a big one. I go back and forth between those words depending on the context. Liberation, in terms of progress and creating a world where everyone can succeed, is central to me. Personally, I sometimes think more about freedom in my own home—does something make me feel restricted or free?
Another one for me is curiosity. I want to be in spaces with people who are curious—who want to learn about each other, life, and ideas. If I had to pick a third, it’s probably peace or calm. Does this help create more peace or calm for me? So, those are my big ones: liberation/freedom, curiosity, and calm. How about you?
Taina Brown: Liberation is definitely one of my top three as well. It's about how things move the needle towards freedom for everyone. And as coaches and service providers, sometimes we forget that we’re part of the collective too. For the past couple of months, I’ve been thinking, "How does this affect me?" I’ve been restructuring things in my business to make them non-extractive for my community, but then I had a lightbulb moment—am I being extractive toward myself? Sometimes we self-extract, falling into hustle culture and productivity traps.
Liberation is one, justice is another. Justice is related to liberation but different. Liberation asks how we get to a place where we don’t need money to survive. Justice is about addressing the wealth inequality this country created. How do we get to reparations? How do we create wealth equity for Black people and people of color who didn’t have hundreds of years to build generational wealth?
And my third core value is beauty. It might seem superficial, but for me, beauty is about finding beauty in every situation and relationship. Sure, I love beautiful things—I’ll spend too much money on something I find beautiful, which drives my wife nuts. But it’s also about finding beauty in what some people might consider ugliness. I truly believe there’s beauty in everything, even in failure or loss. The world convinces us that’s not true, but I believe it is.
Becky Mollenkamp: I love it! I want to challenge you to find the beauty in Donald Trump, but we don’t have time for that! Let me know if you ever figure it out. But I love that. I think it’s not surprising that we share the value of liberation, considering we call the show Messy Liberation. For both of us, I think liberation is the ultimate value, and the other values are often in service of that. Beauty, justice, curiosity, calm—these things help get us to liberation.
For me, liberation is the core, and the other values help serve it. I think that's why it’s messy liberation because it’s not a straight path. For listeners, we’d love to know your core values. Email us at messyliberation@gmail.com with your core values and any ideas for topics you’d like us to cover.
And don’t forget, in one week, the day before the election, we’ll be doing a live episode to talk about whatever’s happening in the world. We’ll also have goddess Erica join us to help ground us with a calming session, especially since it might be a stressful time. That’s at 10:30 a.m. Central, 11:30 a.m. Eastern, 8:30 a.m. Pacific, and 9:30 a.m. Mountain time. You can find it on our YouTube channel, Messy Liberation, under the live tab.
Taina Brown: I’m excited about that!
Becky Mollenkamp: Yeah, me too! And if you want to work on your core values, Taina is hosting free sessions to help you get to the root of your values. It’s happening on October 30th, November 6th, November 8th, and November 17th.
Becky Mollenkamp: We’ll link to those in the show notes. Thanks for being on this liberation journey with me, and thanks for listening!
Taina Brown: We’ll see you all next time!