There Are No Girls on the Internet - Fearless Fund, Black women’s entrepreneurship program, deemed “discriminatory” by court

Episode Date: June 4, 2024

Grant program for Black women business owners is discriminatory, appeals court rules: https://www.npr.org/2024/06/03/g-s1-2649/fearless-fund-grant-program-appeal-ruling Fearless Fund is a Black woman-led venture capital firm that offers investment, financial support, and mentorship to Black women-owned businesses.  But they are under attack for providing support for traditionally marginalized entrepreneurs. Edward Blum, the professional hater at the heart of the Supreme Court’s legal challenge of affirmative action, is suing them for what he says is racial discrimination.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter.

Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the IHeart radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting. Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than adds supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. Learn how podcasting can help your

business. Call 844-844-I-Hart. Life is full of hurdles. So how do you keep going? On Hurtle with Emily Abadi, we're talking with the most inspiring women in sports and wellness from professional athletes, and Olympic champions about the challenges that shape them and the mindset that keeps them moving forward. At our level, at this scale, being able to fail in front of the entire world. Like, I can do anything. I can do anything. Listen to Hurtle with Emily Abadi on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you get your podcasts. Presented by Capital One, founding partner of IHeart Women's Sports. There Are No Girls on the Internet is a production of IHeart Radio and Unbossed Creative. I'm Bridget Todd, and this is There Are No Girls on the Internet. After the Supreme Court ruling deeming affirmative action discriminatory, we were following the pending Supreme Court ruling on whether or not grant programs that support black women entrepreneurs are discriminatory too. And just like that affirmative action suit, this one was brought to us by certified enemy

of the show, conservative activist Edward Blum. Now, at the heart of this case is the Atlanta-based group Fearless Fund, a grant program that supports black women entrepreneurs. And I have a little sad news, which is that a U.S. Court of Appeals panel has suspended Fearless Fund's critical work of giving financial support to black women-owned businesses, a ruling that, I'm sorry to say, seems to suggest that Blum is likely to prevail in his lawsuit, claiming that such programs are discriminatory. This could have a ripple effect threatening any program designed to support certain marginalized or

underrepresented communities. Now, the ruling against Fearless Fund is just another victory for conservative groups who are waging a sprawling legal battle against things like corporate diversity. programs, and in doing so, have targeted companies and government institutions. So here's a conversation that I had with my friends, Samantha and Annie, over at the podcast Stuff Mom Never Told You, about how exactly we got here and what could be next. The man who brought us the legal challenge that struck down affirmative action earlier this summer is back, and this time he is coming for grants and fellowships that support marginalized people. So you all probably recall that earlier this summer back in June,

the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action, ruling that race can no longer play a part in college admissions. Notably, the decision just applied to race. It did not apply to gender or things like legacy status or donor status being considered in the college admissions process. Separately, some colleges like Harvard have signaled that they might start reexamining the role that things like legacy status plays in college admissions in light of that Supreme Court ruling. Do you all remember this? I remember when the ruling was struck down how big it felt, especially being a big Supreme Court ruling about a year after a row was struck down.

It felt like, you know, one big torrent of rain and then another big torrent of rain to continue your metaphor, Annie. Yes, good metaphor. Nicely done. Yes, yeah, no, it definitely did because that was at the end of the Supreme Court.

and there had just been a lot of, I mean, it turned out to be true, but a lot of fear around, like, what will they do? Right. They just made, like, all of these f***y decisions in one day. In one day, yeah. You know, it's odd because I was absolutely alive and I think, like, talking about trying to get into school and having this whole conversation when affirmative action was coming into debate to begin with. And to see it like this, I'm not going to lie, I'm going to be very transparent here, as growing up. in a white household who are very conservative, not around any marginalized groups outside of me, who they rescued and put that in air quotes, out of like a marginalized bad situation,

seeing what they were saying was fed into me and be like, yeah, I absolutely agree that I should not get, I don't want to be given a special spot because of my race, I want to earn it. Like I said that out loud to my family before I started college in any of that, not understanding what it really was. And I truly believe my parents believe that. I don't think my siblings believe that because they are educated and they understand. But I truly believe that because that was what was fed into me. So I have this real like, ugh, ick feeling about this whole action because the face of the suit was an Asian man who was bitter, bitter little baby, that I feel like so many ways about it. And then coming into college on my own and then understanding what it truly was and realizing, oh, yeah, that stuff that I spewed out as a kid was was.

actual white supremacy coming out of my mouth because I was trying to impress my white family and being fed a bunch of lies. So it felt like so gross to know that I was manipulated like that at my young age. At my young age, I'll say that. I think, I don't know how old this dude is. I guess he was trying to get into college. So I guess maybe around the same time. And then coming into this now that I'm like, oh my God, what have we done essentially? Like with allowing these types of lies to perpetuate and not looking at the true statistics behind these actual numbers and why affirmative action was and is necessary. But again, because of that rhetoric being around,

it wasn't surprising that it was undone because it was truly hanging on by a thread because of those types of lies. But yeah, I have like this ache and like mourning and guilt, guilt by association and guilt by like past actions that I'm like, oh my God, what is this? Like part of what I was spewing is part of the reason this is undone. Of course, the bigger picture is, again, white supremacist and their power that they wanted to play

and the overall arcing, like, who is doing the main grab in trying to make sure that marginalized people stay down and stay unable to get to any of these places because they do not have the connections, essentially just all connections, not even money anymore. It's like connections. And it's just disgusting. So, yeah, I have very strong feelings. Yeah, first of all, thank you for sharing that. And I can kind of identify. I know how you feel. I don't think that you need to have guilt for having felt that way because, first of all, we live in a society where it's so easy to pit marginalized people against each other in service of upholding white supremacy. Like that is a tried and true method that bad actors and people interested in upholding white supremacy have engaged for a very long time. And so, The reason they do it is because it's effective.

And so it's not surprising that it will be effective on you, a young person. Also, the way that we talk about it, I think just does not set people up to have a full understanding of the conversation. So we talk so much about affirmative action. And when we talk about affirmative action, usually the face of affirmative action is a black person. Right. And so we're talking about like, oh, well, do you think that black people should get a leg up in admissions processes? of course people are not going to agree with that. But the reality is that that is a myth because the Department of Labor

shows that the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action are actually white women. That is not what the way that we talk about it would lead you to believe. And so another idea is that when we talk about admissions, so I would say, this is just my opinion, but I would say that there is an outsized space given to conversations

about affirmative action, which, as I said, are sort of translated through like, oh, black people, like they're the face of it. And so much less space given to things like legacy status, which I had a stat earlier, but it's some astronomical amount of kids in college get there because they are, their parents went to that college or their parents are donors to that college or some sort of a leg up. And essentially what that is is like affirmative action for rich people. Yet we don't even, it's not even part of the conversation and certainly has not been part of the conversation the way that affirmative action has been. So I would argue that like you were not given a clear picture of the issue in order to be able to like thoughtfully come up with a critique or an opinion about it. Right. And I think that that has to be by design.

Right. Absolutely. I think in the understanding as you are saying is that the rhetoric I was given was all anti-black. Like we were going to be very, very specific in calling it what it was. It wasn't about anything else. It wasn't about me being a minority or like being Asian and a marginalized woman. It's literally they were trying to be anti-black. They were saying the quiet part out loud because that's all they see. That's the big enemy that is built up against white people, which is so disgusting and is very prevalent. Like that's the real understanding.

We need to have that whole fact and whole that conversation is, This is an anti-black movement. And in that it had, it did not, it did not actually help the black community that much at all. It really did not bring in, as you said, statistically, black people into colleges. It was, again, more white women, all white women, essentially. And then again, the legacy people, those are the people who are still remaining and going to colleges and still getting scholarships to get into these colleges and still getting like loans at a reasonable interest rate, all of those things. but for some reason they built this boogeyman, not some reason we know why,

but they built a boogeyman in order to make sure that they put down a specific group of people because they're like, hey, this is a battle we can win. We've always won with this battle. Let's do this. Anti-blackness is always, that is a train that is always on time. So what's interesting about what you just said

is that white women, despite being the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action, are also the most likely to be against it. So according to a 2014 cooperative congressional election study, nearly 70% of the 20,694 self-identified non-Hispanic white women surveyed either somewhat or strongly opposed affirmative action. Again, I think it's like one of those situations where because the way that it is framed is like this is a program that helps black people.

And if you don't think black people should be getting a leg up over you, you should not be into it. You should be against it. that rhetoric actually ends up hurting all marginalized people, whether you're a white woman, because it's one of those dynamics where the anti-blackness becomes a way to get people on board, but then that is not an accurate reflection

of who the beneficiaries of programs like a formative action actually end up being. Right. So, Annie, you were saying how Asian Americans were kind of made the face of the sort of victims of affirmative action, and that is very much by design because of this guy who is a conservative litigant named Edward Blum. I call him a litigant because that's like kind of what he is, like a professional lawsuit bringer. He is not a lawyer himself, but he basically connects

potential plaintiffs with attorneys who are willing to represent them in test cases, which he then uses to try to set legal precedence. He is the founder and sole member of an organization called Project on Fair Representation, which he found. in 2005, which focuses on voting, education, contracting, employment, racial quotas, and racial reparations. Basically, his whole thing is bringing legal challenges to strike down laws that I would argue protect non-white, non-straight, non-men, more on this later. However, if you were to ask him, he would probably say that it's not that he wants to elevate, like, one race over anybody else, but that he wants all laws and all, like, public considerations to be race or

identity neutral. He has described his ethos like this. Quote, our history has been tainted tragically by the use of race in various public and private arenas. Race discrimination is odious, something the founding principles of the civil rights movement were designed to eliminate. Personally, I would say that I don't know if I buy what he is saying. It seems like an awfully convenient way to justify the fact that he keeps gutting laws that protect marginalized people. But there you have it. That is what he says. His motivation is. He just thinks that everything should be race neutral. Right. The Guardian describes him as, quote, a human wrecking ball on a mission to destroy the landmark achievements of the

civil rights era and send the country back to a dark age of discrimination and harassment of minorities in the workplace and higher education and at the ballot box. I mean, this is that very basis of hitting that level of if everything was fair from the beginning, great. Great. If everything was equal and everybody had named equity, that would be a beautiful utopia. But as we know, this land, this country, most countries that have been colonized is not based on that level and that it has never been about equity. It's always been about who has power.

And those who have power really was like, but I love that time. That was a great time. Why can't we have that again? We're just like, you know, we know what you really say. Exactly. Right. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite.

Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman, help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer Streeter Seidel, help an acapella band with their between songs banter. There's the worst singer in the group. The worst? Yeah.

Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation. The yard birds, right? That's the name. The Harvard Yardt, but they're open. Do you have a name suggestion? We're open.

Since you guys are middle-aged, one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Humor me. I need some jokes. to make me seem funny. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ads supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined.

So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at IHeart Advertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. Last night, a blown call changed a game.

This morning, the internet lost its mind. Highlights are trending, opinions are flying, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where sports slice comes in. I'm Timbo. Every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the plays, the controversies, and the stories behind the headlines.

We go straight to the source, the athlete themselves, their locker room stories, their reactions, the stuff nobody gets to hear. The laughs, the drama, the triumphs, the moments that never make the high, From viral moments to historic games, from buzzer beaters to controversial calls, we break it down, give you context, and ask the questions everybody wants answered. SportsSlice brings you closer to the action with stories told by the people who live them.

Listen to SportsSlice on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slic Life 12 in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. The affirmative action ruling was Not Blum's first rodeo, a legal challenge that he brought, was what led to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. That was the Shelby County v. Holder case that he sponsored in 2013, and it led to the Supreme Court overturning a key provision in the 1965 Voting Rights Act. That legal challenge is when we saw the introduction of things like voter ID requirements, cutting back on early voting, eliminating same-day voter registration.

All of that was because of him. So thank you, Edward Blum, for ushering that in to our landscape. He's really the villain. Yes. in all the story. On my podcast, there are no girls on the internet. We've referred to him a lot as just like a professional hater. Like he's just someone who like just like hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate.

Like, oh, I don't like that. Hate, hate, hate, hey, hey, like, professional hater. Is he, is he very rich? I think he's wealthy. Like, I think I think that he, I've actually looked into him because I'm, he's one of those figures that I find so curious. He did not come from wealth, but I think that he has wealth now. And he's just interested in using that wealth and influence in those connections into creating these different legal precedents that I would say harm us all.

Right. He is that evil genius because we've seen that in a lot of conservative think tanks as well as essentially right-wing groups that have been building up the legal system to only help them, putting in those in law school that they know that they can pull back out, educating them and funding them to the full in order to come. back out and do these types of cases knowing that if they can do this, this is going to be the basis of how they win, essentially. Oh, yes. My God, did you all see that docu series on the Duggers on Hulu? No, I couldn't get to there yet. That's the whole thing, I feel like.

It's a real, like, doozy, as you might imagine. Sure. But one of the things they make very clear is that it's not just about, like, this one problematic, super religious family on TV, it is about this vast network of young people who are being trained and educated and also are very well connected

to reach the highest levels of government and influence to make laws for all of us. So it's not enough that their kids are homeschooled or that their kids live a certain way. They are training the next generation of political operatives and lawmakers

to make sure that all of us and all of our kids live the way that they think that they should be living. So it's pretty, I guess, diabolical is the word I would use. You mentioned earlier how when you were having conversations about college, you remember watching the first wave of the affirmative action legal challenge go down. And even if folks weren't following affirmative action very closely, they might remember Blum's earlier attempt to challenge it.

So Blum had been working to challenge affirmative action since 2013, when he worked with this woman, Abigail Fisher, who was the daughter of a good friend of his, who was a white woman. You might remember she had red hair. She did not get into University of Texas because her GPA was frankly mid. She sued the University of Texas at Austin in 2008

after it denied her admission. She had a 3.59 GPA as a senior, which put her just below the cutoff for a state law requiring UT to accept any graduate in the top 10% of their high school class. So, like, mathematically speaking, she was not in the top 10% of her high school class. She felt that she should have still gotten admission because of her extracurricular activities combined with her GPA and that she would have gotten into UT if the university had not used race as a factor in selecting its freshman class,

which she argued was a violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Do you all remember this? Like, she was, like, a very, like, memorable figure. Like I feel like when I hear about this, I can just see this one image of her standing at a podium outside of the Supreme Court, which is like burned in my mind. I do remember this because I remember thinking this is the dumbest argument I've ever seen because I'm like, girl, you didn't make it. Like even without affirmative action, you wouldn't have made it. Do you not understand how many people are struggling to get into college today because a little more access has happened, not just because of affirmative action, but like the lottery and all of it. those things when we had more scholarships. I was just like, why are people listening to her?

I think that was the biggest question in my head. I was like, why are we paying attention to this? Like, she has no case. I think I thought, I remember thinking, like, is this an onion headline? Like, she didn't get it. She's grades are bad and how she's suing. I think that was the beginning of like, oh, this is a Becky. Sorry, Becky's in the world. That's really just whining because she couldn't get her away. Like that, I remember, like, that was the beginning of that of like, oh, sorority girls. Again, no hate to sorority people, I'm so sorry. But you know,

that level, like, stereotype in that my daddy said that I could get in and now I'm not in. Why? So the way that y'all are reacting is exactly how I remember... This is validating because I remember her being treated like kind of a joke. Like, her GPA was like fine,

but certainly a three point... It was a lot higher than my GPA was when I was in high school, so like I'll own that. But like, you know, it's not... 3.59 is not an automatic entrance to wherever you want to go to college. It's like a fine GPA. And so I remember people calling her Becky with the bad grades. And the vibe around her was like she was just salty that she didn't get in.

And so she was like blaming black people. And so obviously she was not a very, I guess, sympathetic legal challenge to affirmative action. And so obviously Abigail's legal challenge did not work. So Bum regrouped and made the strategic choice to make the face of affirmative action or the people being harmed by affirmative action, according to him, Asian Americans. According to an NPR article, he told a gathering of the Houston Chinese Alliance in 2015, quote, I needed plaintiffs. I needed Asian plaintiffs. MPR spoke to Henei Lopez, a race and constitutional law scholar at Berkeley, who described this as a deliberate switch in strategy,

and that the argument was no longer centered on how affirmative action impacts white people. Instead, quote, there's this move to strengthen the surface argument that this is is racism against minorities. I think it's part of the appeal. And so I've read like Asian American activists and advocates saying that like he what he was doing was this intentional shift to make Asian Americans like a proxy stand in for white people to be like, oh no, like I, this can't be about racial animus because I am trying to advocate for Asian Americans. And again, I think it's a really great example of how effective a strategy it is to pit. marginalized groups against one another in service of white supremacy? Because in the end, it's not like,

I think since affirmative action has been struck down, we've already seen data trickle in. That wasn't that long ago, but already we've seen data trickle in that suggests that like, yeah, it's white people with connections. It's white legacy students who are continuing to get more slots in admissions. It's certainly not helping the Asian Americans who brought this challenge. It's actually just opening up more slots for more rich white people because that's how college works in the United States. Right. And of course, this play is being used by other places such as Florida doing the Asian American history instead, but blacklisting African American history.

And we know what that play is. That's that same type of narrative. They're like, oh, this is working. Let's try this. Let's keep this going. Exactly. So I really wanted to talk about, so after on the heels of successfully getting the Supreme Court to strike down affirmative action, what is Blum's next move? Well, he is back after gutting affirmative action. His next move is going after fellowships and grant programs that support marginalized people. He is suing two corporate law firms on the grounds at their fellowship programs that are aimed at students of color, those who identify as LGBTQ plus, and students with disabilities, exclude applicants based on race, and he is demanding that those programs be shut down.

He is also suing a black venture capital firm called the Fearless Fund. So this is kind of the meat of why I wanted to bring this conversation to the table today, because he is alleging that the Fearless Fund is practicing unlawful racial discrimination. Blum claims the Fearless Fund is engaged in explicit racial exclusion by operating a grant program, quote, only open to black females. According to the Washington Post, the lawsuit is asked to prevent the fund from selecting its next round of grant winners. The claim states that the firm is, quote, violating section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, a U.S. law barring racial bias in private contracts by making only black women eligible in the grant competition.

So, yeah, he's just like coming after anything that he sees as supporting non-white people. The Fearless Fund was launched in 2019 by three prominent black women, Keisha Knight Pullman, who you might remember as Rudy Huxable on The Cosby Show, entrepreneur, Arian Simone, and corporate executive Ianna Parsons. They have a strong and impressive list of investors like Bank of America, Costco, General Mills, MasterCard, J.P. Morgan. They've invested in over 40 businesses in the past four years, including Atlanta favorite, the slutty vegan.

Have you all eaten there? Oh, yeah. It was near my house. Oh, but I lived. Yeah. Samantha was smart and went during the Super Bowl. So there was no one there. So they stay open until 2 a.m.

And so when the Super Bowl, because it's always packed out. And we went at, it still took forever. They made good food. It takes a while. But yeah, we went. I think they only been once, though. I don't stand in lines. It was a long line.

I've never been, but I want a day. And she has expanded that business everywhere, especially in Atlanta and then Georgia. So good on her. And it owns a lot of property. That wouldn't be possible without the fearless fund. And so the lawsuit that Blum is bringing centers on the fearless funds, fearless drivers grant contest,

which awards black women who own small businesses $20,000 in grants and digital tools to help them grow their businesses and mentorship opportunities. So interestingly enough, Blahma did not seek out the fearless fund to sue, but rather he says that a non-Black woman, woman who runs a business reached out to him via email and flagged like, did you know that these black women are running a grant program that I can't be part of? And so the Washington Post reports at the lawsuit cites three female business owners, one from New York and two from Virginia, who argue that they could have benefited from the Fearless Funds grant program, but they were

ineligible because they are not black. So yeah, these non-black women basically just felt like they should be entitled to this grant program that black women established for themselves to support black women. They were like, we should have a piece of that. That's such an interesting take because I'm like, well, you also didn't get it from every other business grant ever. So why are you choosing this? Like, did you try for it? This seems like a lazy part of like, I want this one thing. I couldn't get it. I quit. They're biased. He's like, what? I mean, this is just my opinion.

But, like, it's so hard to not see this as like just hater vibes. Like, everything has to be for you. And if it's not for you, you have to shut it down. I think it goes back to what we were saying earlier about the women who benefit from affirmative action are also the ones who are the most likely to be against it. I firmly believe that there is enough out there for all of us. And I'm an entrepreneur, right? So I know how hard the funding space is for women, all women.

But I know how hard it is for black women in particular as a black woman. We'll get into some of the stats in just a moment. But I believe that despite that, there is enough for everyone. Everyone will find their lane. Everyone will find their people. Everyone will find what they need to make what they want happen. I believe that as like a meditation that keeps me in this work and keeps me being an entrepreneur. But I feel like the dynamic that says that women need to be pit against each other, that if you're a white woman, you need to be trying to shut down a grant that is for black women.

That's not a dynamic that helps anybody, right? And so I think that we all have our place. We all have our niche. There's enough for all of us. but that dynamic that we are enemies that does not serve anybody. It doesn't serve me. It ultimately won't serve them either.

It just keeps us pit against each other as opposed to these larger systems that are actually holding us all down. It's such a mindplay that people have to go through to be like, okay, I can't get this one thing because they say I can't have it. So that means no one should have it because I'm going to be miserable,

and so are you. Misery loves company. We're going to keep this mentality going. And then also not look at the like, here's the small thing versus the giant amount of stuff that you also can't get because you're not a rich white man

but you don't care about that thing. Like that's the one thing. It's a little bit more accessible to tear someone down who other people will help you tear down with instead of this big giant amount of cash that's just sitting here for the white man. Like it's just, I said for the white man

like I'm a native. But like, you know, that's just like mind level of like how much you're willing to ignore to be like, okay, I'm at the body, who can I make lesser than me? Who can I push down further than me? So at the very least, I'm not at the very bottom. Oh, my God.

That's just such a mind trick. This reminds me of when I was a little kid and my brother had this, like, free coupon for an ice cream from McDonald's that he got from school. So we went to McDonald's together, and he got one ice cream, and I didn't have any money because we were little kids. And so they gave him his ice cream, and I got very jealous. And so I smacked it out of his hand onto the ground.

And he was like, I was going to give you a bite. And so, like, because I was like, I don't want. want him to get something that I can't have. It's not a flattering story, but I was like seven years old. Right. Because I, like, he was going to give me a bite. So I missed out on getting my bite because I could not just let him have something that I wanted and felt entitled to.

Immediately. And probably earned. I'm thinking about accelerated reader. Like, you get those pizza. It was exactly what it was. Like, it was like a, like, if you read X amount of books, you get an ice cream coupon or something. I have word for this. But yeah, I think this was so interesting.

And the fact that he, of course, Blum had to pounce on this. I'm sure it was like, a gift for him. I must take this. He was like, ooh, I was looking for a way to spread my hater vibes. And after that Supreme Court ruling, and now this gift lands in my inbox. And also it makes me stronger, stronger than the women who's complaining.

Exactly. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends, me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and headwriter, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter.

There's the worst singer in the group. The worst? Yeah. Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation. The group. The yarn herds, right?

That's the name. The Harvard Yard. They're open. Do you have a name suggestion? We're open. Since you guys are middle aged, one erection. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Humor me.

I need some jokes to make me seem funny. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad-supported streaming. music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business.

Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Let us show you at iHeartadvertising.com. That's iHeartadvertising.com. Last night, a blown call changed a game. This morning, the internet lost its mind. Highlights are trending. opinions are flying, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened.

That's where Sports Slice comes in. I'm Timbo. Every episode, we're cutting through the noise. Breaking down the plays, the controversies, and the stories behind the headlines. We go straight to the source, the athletes themselves. Their locker room stories, their reactions, the stuff nobody gets to hear. The laughs, the drama, the triumphs, the moments that never make the highlight real. From viral moments to historic games, from buzzer beaters to controversial calls, we break it down, give you context, and ask the question.

questions everybody wants answered. Sports Slice brings you closer to the action with stories told by the people who live them. Listen to SportsSlice on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo SlicLife 12 and the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. So Blum is using what he has called, quote, the shoe on the other foot test. The rhetorical strategy that he asks himself is, if a grant program funded white male business owners, would it be considered fair? But that test, like you were saying, Sam, really assumes that we are all equal and all have equal access,

which the data could not paint a clearer picture about the fact that that is not happening. Black women are the fastest rising group of entrepreneurs in the country. According to the Harvard Business Review in the U.S., an astounding 17% of black women are in the process of starting or running a new business. That's compared to just 10% of white women and 15% of white men. Yet, despite this lead, only 3% of women are running mature businesses. Why? Well, one big reason is access to capital. Harvard Business Review's research found that 61% of black women self-fund their total startup capital.

This is in spite of the fact that in their finding, only 29% of black women entrepreneurs live in households with incomes over $75,000, compared to 52% of white men. This data is also combined with data suggesting that black women are less likely to own our own homes. take on a higher level of debt to do things like go to college and are often like saddled with debt to go to college, right? And so ultimately, that leaves us saddled with more debt and having fewer personal resources and low collateral. Black entrepreneurs typically receive less than 2% of all venture capital dollars each year, while companies led by black women receive less than 1% of all funding. This is according to crunch base. So yeah, the funding landscape is not great for black women.

Less than 1% of funding goes to us. And so the fact that we already don't get that much, that there are grants and investment funds specifically aimed at shifting those numbers just a tiny bit like the Fearless Fund and that people are saying, no, we need to go for that too. That less than 1% that goes to y'all,

that needs to go to us now. In 2020, Pew found that just 3% of U.S. businesses is we're black owned, while 86% were white owned. And so, yeah, as I said, like, as an entrepreneur, these kind of dismal numbers completely aligned with my own experiences, trying to raise money for projects that I want to do. There's just not a lot out there, and you really have to stay focused and stay positive and not really let the sort of numbers around how dismal things can be, kind of get in your head.

But then on top of it, you have people like Blum and these women that he's representing in this case to challenge these funds, to challenge what little is out there for black entrepreneurs who are women, it's hard to internalize that as anything other than they don't want us here. They don't want us to have anything, you know? Yeah, absolutely. And it's so frustrating too because a lot of companies like to act like they are supporting marginalized people. They are supporting. supporting black people and they make these like outward promises and then just don't really follow through with them. Yeah, y'all might remember or be thinking like, I thought in 2020, like after

all the racial justice uprisings in the wake of the murder of George Floyd, I thought that all these businesses and funds and grants were like going to start funding more diverse people and like having a more inclusive portfolio. Well, I remember all those promises too. Businesses committed $340 billion between May 2020 and October 2022, according to McKinsey. And the Post also reports that investment swelled in the startup world. A record $5.1 billion in funding was allocated to Black-founded startups in 2021. That sounds like a lot. However, all of that interest and excitement and commitment pretty much eroded very quickly

with funding for Black-founded startups plunging 50% in 2022. So remember, this is all happening against the pendulum kind of swinging back the other way where all of these corporate diversity efforts became a political lightning rod and these employers just sort of backpedaled, right? And so I think that that's where we're at now where in 2020 people talked a lot of big games about money they were going to give and funds they were going to give and how they were going to support inclusive people and startups and yada, yada, yada. And all of those promises just fizzled out, right? And I think that we're sort of seeing, I would argue, like a backlash to that now where diversity and inclusion staffers are being let go. I think like recently Chick-fil-A just like happened to have a diversity and inclusion person on their staff. And like there was a flurry of like online protests because of that. Like just having somebody thinking about that on staff is now a lightning rod.

And so obviously in that kind of climate, these organizations are not. going to be funding black women, even though they committed to it, even though it seemed like that was, there was a lot of excitement around that. Like, yeah, I just think that we're in a completely different landscape than we were in 2020. I mean, this is definitely that whole level of they want good publicity, but they're not going to follow through. It's the black square. Let me pretend like I care.

And at the very least, I'll be like, hey, let's tell the black people. End the story. Like, that's as far as their actual actions went, was putting something on. that they obviously deleted soon after because they wanted to look okay for one group of people. And I found that interesting that people are mad at Chick-fil-A because it's like, they're anti-LGBQ plus. So that's not enough for you. They need to be racist. Like all of these things have to be in line for us to support you. You better be super, super, super racist and super, super homophobic in order for the conservatives.

You better hate everyone except for white says people. Yeah. If that, we're not going to support you, even if your chicken is okay. So it. And like, this is a little, like, unrelated, but, like, I think that with a lot of these people, the Chick-fil-A example that you just gave is a great example. A lot of these people, like, just they'll find anything to be aggrieved about. Like, you know, I saw, like, Cracker Barrel was adding plant-based sausage to their menu, and people were like, plant-based sausage, I'm not going to shop at Cracker Barrel, and I'm never going to go to Cracker Barrel again.

And it's like, they're not taking regular sausage off the menu. You don't have to order it. Just because they're putting food on the menu that, like, someone else might like that's not you, that's caused for upset. And so another thing I wanted to say about your point, Sam, is that there's a makeup company tart. They got in hot water earlier this year because they were doing these brand trips that looked, it looked as if they were not being inclusive of black influencers, that they were asking black influencers, like after the fact to come and, like, giving them substandard accommodations and all of that. And somebody found that in 2020, you know, when they posted their Black Square, this company was like, we pledge that we're going to be more inclusive and do more partnerships with black and brown models and blah, blah, blah. And then they quietly removed that from their website. But somebody found it on the Wayback Machine.

It was like, oh, let's get a update on all of these, like, very specific commitments that you made. And it turns out that they basically just, like, didn't do any of that stuff. But the thing is, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to make these commitments. You made these commitments and just to quietly be like, just kidding. Like, that doesn't sit right with me. Like, nobody told you to do this. Nobody told you to post a Black Square. You did it.

You volunteered to do it. So when people expect a little follow-through, that should be a given. Yeah. And I think about this a lot, too. We talked about this with a lot of the, like, what happened with Bud Light and what happened with Target. And, you know, then they just backtrack and make everyone angry. But is I feel like there's a fundamental misunderstanding of, in this case, what it's like to be a trans person. And then when they get like a little taste of that, the company is like, oh, my God.

Oh, never mind. Like they can't even, just for that one second, like, if they get this online hate at the call. the person, the community they're saying they support gets. They get it. And then they're like, never mind. Actually, they have that privilege, that right, that ability to step out and be like, okay, I don't want to deal with this anymore, which I think is just very telling of ignorance. And just like a, oh, sure, let's do this.

And then they get that hate and they're like, oh, oh, never mind. Backtracking. The Dylan Mulvaney thing that you just mentioned, the thing that I will never be over is that Dylan Mulvaney when she left social media at the height of all of this and came back and made that video, said that nobody at Bud Light even called her to be like, hey, are you all right? Like, I'm seeing what's going on. I, that is something that will stick with me forever. that this brand, because she said, happened to say yes, when asked to do a brand collaboration with Bud Light, she had to go dark, had to probably go into hiding,

like was the target of very severe attacks. And that Bud Light, the company who came to her to bring her into this, couldn't even follow up with an email when they saw all of this happening, how quickly they abandoned her. And I feel like if you are a brand or an institution who is working with marginalized people, if you're not going to stand by them when this kind of stuff happens and when they get into situations that really, like you have put them in by offering them this, you know, these partnerships, that's just not how you engage people. Like that at a certain point it's like, I understand that Bud Light is a corporation and I don't expect corporations to like care about any of us,

certainly not marginalized people. but the people who run Bud Lights marketing or influencer partnerships should really be taking a good hard look in the mirror because that's just like a failure of like how to be a human to be each other like I like because that's a stick with me I could not believe that she said that that nobody even ever reached out to her after they just like dropped her

and never ever followed up again. Yeah and that's going back to your point you know companies are not big companies, especially, are not allies, and we shouldn't think of them that way. But they, if they posted the Black Square, if they take these stands, if they say they're going to do something,

then, yeah, they should absolutely be held accountable. That's just backing away and causing real harm. We were telling you a story before we started this. Out of nowhere, someone bought that up. And, like, making these things so politicized that just to have a diversity, inclusion person at your company becomes, oh, well, then hate.

Like, all of this hate, like you keep saying. It's irresponsible. And it's not taking into account, like, the reality of working with these groups. Yeah. I think that's ultimately what these people want. I think that they want just working with a trans woman to be a lightning rod. She's not saying anything untoward.

She's not doing anything untoward. She just is because her existence is a lightning rod. Her existence is politicized. I think just having a DEI person, just providing a grant for black women, they want that to be toxic. They want people to know that if you do that, you might be in court. You might, you know, be targeted for a hate campaign. And so to just make it not something that anybody would want to risk. And these companies are so spineless that they're going along with it.

It is that they're being held hostage and they're just like, okay, well, they don't want us to have the chicken sausage. They don't want anybody who doesn't eat sausage to be fed at our restaurant. So, okay, we'll drop it. Actually, Cracker Barrel did stand by their sausage choices. I will say that. But I have been surprised by how these big, huge corporations just cowtow to people who are not serious people who are just interested. in flexing their power, their political power for no real reason. I mean, absolutely.

We see all of these things actually hurting people. They don't even want to be the face of anything. They just want to exist. Funds like Fearless Fund is to exist and to help and lift up people that they know need lifting up. The same thing with Target when they had the small businesses with the LGBTQ queer content and then taking them off the shelf. They're like we just, we were just existing and feeling like we wanted to be the representation that no one else is willing to look at or see or stand behind. And you literally came after them, taking away their money, taking away their existence, causing harm because, again, the Mulvaney thing, she was just holding a beer.

Yeah. She said, I like Bud Light. Simple. Why can't she choose to do that? And that ended up being a thing of like, well, she is hurting the beer industry. And she is doing these things. No, she's just existing with a product that they sent her. They're not like giving her 50% of the shares of Bud Light.

Like that's what is happening? Like this whole level of like what people are having to do. And they're having to come back and being like, instead of existing, we have to fight for our place to exist. And that's such an absurd ideal. Like the fact that this has to be done. Another podcast from some SNL late night comedy guy, not quite on humor me with Robert Smygel and friends, me and hilarious guests from Jim Gaffigan to Bob Odenkirk, to David Letterman, help make you funnier.

This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and headwriter, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. The worst singer in the group? The worst? Yeah. Me. Is there anything to the idea that because you're from Harvard, uh, you only got in because your parents made a huge donation.

To the group. side to the group. The yard birds, right? That's the name. The Harvard yard, but they're open. Do you have a name suggestion? We're open. Since you guys are middle aged, one erection.

Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and Friends on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Huber me. I need some jokes to make me seem funny. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans. listen to podcasts, then add supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only IHeart can extend your message to audiences

across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business. Think IHeart. Streaming, radio, and podcasting. Call 844-4-4-I-Hart to get started. That's 844-844-I-Hart. Last night, a blown call changed a game. This morning, the internet lost its mind. Highlights are trending, opinions are flying, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where Sports Slice comes in. I'm Timbo. Every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the plays, the controversies, and the stories behind the headlines. We go straight to the source, the athlete themselves, their locker room stories, their reactions, the stuff nobody gets to hear. The laughs, the drama, the triumphs, the moments that never make the highlight real. From viral moments to historic games,

from buzzer beaters to controversial calls, we break it down, give you context, and ask the questions everybody wants answered. SportsSlice brings you closer to the action with stories told by the people who live them. Listen to SportsSlice on the IHeart Radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Sliced Life 12 in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok. So this is what Tony Morrison says about racism, and I think it fits to all of what you're saying. The function, the very serious function of racism, is distraction.

it keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining over and over again, your reason for being. Somebody says you have no language and you spend 20 years trying to prove that you do. Somebody says your head isn't shaped properly, so you have scientists working on the fact that it is. Somebody says you have no art, so you dredge that up.

Somebody says you have no kingdom, so you dredge that up. None of this is necessary. There will always be one more thing. So that quote really speaks to what I think is happening. You know, the fearless fund, the stats that I just read about black women entrepreneurs and how little of the funding we get, it shows that the women who are running the Fearless Fund,

they have work to do. They have serious work to do to write the wrong and to bake a little more equity into the funding landscape. So they don't really have time to play around with these legal challenges. But yet, here they are having to spend their money, money that could go to the funding landscape, staffing up a legal team, holding press conferences. All of this, it is such a...

distraction at a time when marginalized people have real work to be doing. Fearless Fund is fighting back. They have a beefy legal team, including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Gibson, Dunn, Crutcher and Ben Crump, the attorney who represented families of George Floyd and Tyree Nichols in their civil suits over the men's killing at the hands of the police. And I feel confident, like, these women are, like, bad asses women. They are not going down without a fight. But also, they shouldn't have to, right?

Like, they should be able to just do their work and focus on that work. And they should not have to be spending their money on these bogus legal challenges just because they want to exist, just because they want to support other black women. And I find that, again, we're in this situation that black women are the ones that have to be the ones to fight. Like, they don't want to. They're tired. They've been doing this. And now we're back again because we know there's a lot. And I know there's a lot of fun specifically to women.

Like, point blank women. And they surely didn't have to go after them. And I bet they were denied some of those. And they're probably better at that. But yet, if they didn't, that seems silly and that seemed very targeted. Yes. So that's very telling. But, like, again, it has to be black women that has to put up this fight in order to get anything done.

I mean, tail as old as time, right? And I think... Right. I'm worried about this for a couple of reasons. One is that I think that if these grants and funds that specifically are meant to boost black women entrepreneurs are deemed unconstitutional. I really don't know what the landscape is going to look like because, as I said, like already so little of that funding goes to us in the first place.

But further, one of the reasons I wanted to talk about it on the show today is that I don't think it's getting near the same amount of traction and attention that Blum's affirmative action challenges did. And I really think that we need to see white male and white women and really everybody in the startup space. we need to see VCs and entrepreneurs speaking up about this, because Blum is essentially arguing that the startup space should basically just be for white people.

And I think it's up to everybody in the space to push back and say, like, that is not the kind of funding space that we want, that is not the kind of startup space that we want, and to really make that really clear, like what kind of a space do we want to have for the next generation of entrepreneurs? We want to tell them that the tiny little bit that might go to them isn't even for them anymore. I don't think that's the space that we want.

Right. And absolutely in the same space, again, this is going to hurt white women as well. And like, if we're saying that all of this is too specific and it leaves out other people of race, it's going to hurt gender as well. So this is not even just for white people. It's going to be for white men.

We're going to have more Elon Musk's running programs into the ground. That's what we're going to see. A thousand percent. And I mean, kind of like what you were, alluding to before, time and time again in tech, particularly when black women challenge things or do things or start things, they uplift all women. And so even if that specific program is for black women owned businesses, you're going to tell me that a black woman who is financially

supported is not going to go on to do something that's going to lift up all women and all marginalized people. Time and time again, we see that that's how it goes with black women. And so, yeah, I just think that this is just, this is me smacking that ice cream out of my brother's hand when I could have gotten a bite instead. I really want to see more folks in the space speaking up about this because what the Fearless Fund has done has been really great. And it's, they're really like a good force in the space. And I think that they, we need them, frankly. We need them. We do. And it's a drop in the bucket. Let's just be real honest. Like it's, it's nothing in comparison to what other people get, essentially.

And it's like, wow, you really are going after the little groups for nothing, just to make a point. And obviously, to keep that little bit, as you were saying, in your pocket, instead of seeing what this is actually could do for the entire humanity. Humanity is lost. I'm sorry, what? Yeah. And I mean, this is very important, too, because obviously professional litigant Blum here is going to keep trying. And if this succeeds, then it's going to make things worse for everyone, except for certain people, and then easier for him to win the next thing and the next thing. So, yes, this is really, really important. And thank you, as always, Bridget, for bringing it to us.

Oh, thank you for having me. Everyone who is listening should go out and buy stuff. I never told you the book. I just thought it. Let's read it together. Yay. Yes. Yes, we're hoping to do a little crossover. We'll get to go on your show. Yes. Yes. Oh, I'm so excited. But in the meantime, Bridgett, where can the good listeners find you? You can listen to my podcast. There are no girls on the internet. You can find me on Instagram at Bridgett Marie in D.C. or on Twitter at Bridgett Marie. And you can find me on TikTok at Bridget Makes Podcasts. Yes. And we really do appreciate your support with a book. We love it so much. Thank you.

Yes, thank you. I'm having you on, as always. Feeling is so mutual. Yay. So listeners, if you would like to contact us, you can. Our email is Stephanie and Mom Stuff at IHeartMedia.com. You can find us on Twitter at MomStub Podcast or on Instagram at TikTok at Stephon Never Told You.

We have a T-Public store and we, yeah, we have a book. You can get it at Stuff, you should read Books.com. Thanks as always to our super producer Christina, our executive producer Maya and our contributor, Joey. Thank you. And thanks to you for listening. Stefan Never Told You's production of IHeartRadio. If more podcasts with My Heart Radio, you can check out the A Heart Radio app, Apple Podcast,

or every you listen to your favorite shows. Another podcast from some SNL, late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest, SNL's Mikey Day and head writer, Streeter Seidel, help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes.

Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with. Robert Smygel and friends on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Wife is full of hurdles. So how do you keep going? On Hurtle with Emily Abadi, we're talking with the most inspiring women in sports and wellness from professional athletes, coaches, and Olympic champions about the challenges that shape them and the mindset that keeps them moving forward. At our level, at this scale, being able to fail in front of the entire world. Like, I can do anything. I can do anything. Listen to Hurtle with Emily Abadi on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Presented by Capital One, founding partner of IHeart Women's Sports. Last night, a blown call changed a game.

This morning, the internet lost its mind, and nobody's telling you exactly what happened. That's where Sports Slice comes in. I'm Timbo, and every episode, we're cutting through the noise, breaking down the biggest moments in sports and giving you the real story behind the headline. And we're going straight to the source, the athletes themselves. Their locker room stories, their reactions in the moment, and the stuff nobody gets to hear. Listen to SportsSlic on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. And for more, follow Timbo Slicalife-Life 12 in the TikTok podcast network on TikTok.

This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.