Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Why is a woman’s absence of a father used to explain her “behaviour,” while a man’s absence from his own child is barely questioned at all?

 In this episode, we’re unpacking the exhausting double standard where women are held responsible not just for what happens to them, but for how they respond to it.

Inspired by Jasmine Gaziza Müller’s essay “Gateway Misogyny & Red Pill Microdosing,” we dig into how small comments, jokes, and stereotypes act as a gateway to bigger beliefs about women and how the phrase “fatherless behaviour” shifts blame onto the woman carrying the wound instead of the person who left it. 

We talk about absence in all its forms: physical, emotional, and the quiet refusal to take accountability and why someone else always seems to pick up the slack.

We also get into the strange double standard around softness: how “soft” is used to mock men for showing empathy, yet somehow becomes an insult when thrown at women too. Plus the tired “feminist vs. relationship material” myth, why gold digger accusations don’t add up, and a few real tangents on friendship, independence, and the Oscar Pistorius case – Reeva Steenkamp that still sits with us.

This isn’t about blaming all men or excusing women’s mistakes. It’s about asking why we keep applying different rules depending on gender and what it would actually look like to hold everyone to the same standard of emotional accountability.

Resources from today's episode

Work with Phi

Phi Dang