Not just because of what Trump did in that Meet the Press interview. But because of what the machine did afterwards.

A woman asked the President of the United States for evidence, and somehow we were immediately invited to debate her tone.

Was she too forceful?

Was she biased?

Was she rude?

Was she making it about herself?

This is one of the oldest tricks in public life: train people to question the woman’s tone instead of the man’s threat. Because if we are busy litigating her delivery, we are not asking the actual question: Where is the evidence?

And that question matters even more now, because the conspiracy theory has already started doing what conspiracy theories do.

It has spread.

It has been repeated.

It has been dressed up as concern.

I saw someone say, essentially: if there’s no fraud, why won’t California just hand over its voter rolls to the federal government? What are they hiding?

And that is exactly the problem.

We have gotten to a point in our politics where not understanding something is treated as evidence that something sinister must be happening. But a state refusing to hand over sensitive voter information to the federal government is not automatically proof of fraud.

It may be proof of privacy concerns.

It may be proof of state law.

It may be proof of data-security concerns.

It may be proof that voter information is not a party favor to be passed around because one man feels cheated.

But feeling is easier than learning.

I feel angry, therefore I was robbed.

I feel suspicious, therefore they must be hiding something.

I feel uncomfortable with a woman being forceful, therefore she must be biased.

I feel aligned with his grievance, therefore his grievance must be true.

But democracy cannot run on vibes. Democracy requires us to learn. To read. To verify. To understand process. To tolerate complexity. To accept that slow vote counting is not the same thing as fraud. To accept that asking for evidence is not persecution and that a woman doing her job is not the scandal.

Because that is the trick: A man makes a baseless claim. A woman asks a basic question. The machine attacks the woman. And then everyone forgets the claim was never proven.

So this week’s class note is simple:

When they attack her tone, ask what evidence he provided.

When they say California must be hiding something, ask what private voter data they think the federal government is entitled to collect and why.

When they say they can feel that something is wrong, remind them: Feeling is not evidence.

Democracy requires more from us than that.

The full lesson and paid “Why It’s Important” essay are up now at Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women.

“Tell All the Other Girls like you and me what happens when you eat from the knowledge tree.” - Bossi

Today’s lesson teaches you how to respond when the President of the United States has a complete meltdown on live television.

Or, the CliffNotes version: A powerful man tried to bully a female journalist, got his ass politely handed to him, and then fled the scene like truth had a subpoena.

[Insert video of Trump walking off Meet the Press interview with Kristen Welker]

Step One: Explain democracy slowly.

When Trump claims election fraud in California because his candidates are losing, smile patiently and say:

Listen, you deranged claw machine trying to break the country because you can’t grab the teddy bear, California elections take time because California actually lets people vote.

By mail. In person. Up until Election Day. And that’s not fraud. That’s democracy in action.

[Removed from final video: But I understand why that confuses you, since your preferred electoral system is: One man, one vote…and the man must be you.]

Step Two: Do not let the toddler drive the narrative.

When he refuses to answer the question and pivots to insults, intimidation, and his usual clearance-rack dictator routine, use his own tactics against him and say:

Actually sir, I’m the smartest person this world has ever seen. People are saying it. Very important people. Tremendous people.

And you must be either stupid or corrupt, because you clearly have no idea how elections work, and yet here you are, spewing industrial-grade bullshit because losing makes your spray tan curdle.

Frankly, It’s difficult women, like us, who are constantly under attack by your fascist little administration because we keep doing the one thing authoritarians hate most:

Pointing at the lie and saying, “That’s a lie.

Step Three: Name the tantrum.

When the president storms off and ends the interview abruptly, turn to the camera and say:

Well, there you have it, America. Men really are just too emotional to lead.

Closing

Remember, ladies and gentlemen: the President of the United States is not our boss.

We are his.

And when a man is too weak, too emotional, and too immature to answer basic questions about the lies he tells, the elections he attacks, and the democratic process he keeps trying to burn down because it won’t clap for him on command, he is no longer fit for office.

So maybe it’s time America looked him right in the bronzer and said: You’re fired.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

Why It’s Important

Watching Trump’s behavior on “Meet the Press” with Kristen Welker should be a wake-up call for Americans that this man is unfit to lead.

Frankly, we did not need another one.

Many of us have known from the beginning that Trump would rather poison the well than accept a loss. But this interview laid the pattern bare: if he wins, the system works. If he loses, the system is corrupt.

California’s election process is not a mystery. It is not a conspiracy. It is a system designed to make sure eligible citizens can vote. Californians can vote by mail. They can vote in person. They can return ballots through Election Day. And under California law, ballots still have to be verified, processed, and counted after Election Day.

That is not fraud. That is counting.

But it only becomes a problem when Republican candidates are losing. If they were winning, we would be told it was “the greatest election California has ever seen.” The outrage is not about election integrity. It is about control.

Read more

That old house talks with its mouth full
Good bones are the only thing keeping the lights on
Sometimes I think you could lose yourself
Around every hidden corner
Till you’re back where you started alone in the dark

So tie your shoes and slick your hair back
Never let them see you’re a walking heart attack
But come on over

That picket fence is made out of paper
All the windows face out onto a wall
Every room is filled to the brim
With a picture of a happier time
That you just can’t seem to recall
But I know good bones
Lie underneath it all

Cracks in the sidewalk get stepped over
Make a mistake, you break your mama’s back
Sometimes I think it’d be easier
If you just stayed there safe on the inside
We could have the world
You’d find an escape

“Good Bones” has many meanings to me.

It speaks to mental health. It speaks to those seasons when we find ourselves stuck in a rut, moving through the rooms of our own lives like strangers. It speaks to how easily we can get swept up in the momentum of what we are supposed to do without ever stopping to ask whether the path we are on is one we actually chose.

Songwriting is often ambiguous. Some songs are meticulously crafted around a clear message. Others float up from the subconscious before they are ready to explain themselves, leaving you to spend years discovering what they meant.

“Good Bones” is one of those songs.

It came to me while I was sitting at the piano, listening to our house creak and crackle as the wood beams absorbed the heat of the afternoon sun. Then the first line appeared:

That old house talks with its mouth full / Good bones are the only thing keeping the lights on.

As the rest of the song came through, I didn’t analyze it. I let it tell the story it came to tell.

But for this essay, I want to focus on one interpretation of the song as it relates to Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women. This is not the “correct” interpretation. It is not the only one. It is simply the one asking to be examined today.

I have long been infuriated by the fact that a woman’s need to fulfill her intellectual curiosity, creative hunger, ambition, and purpose is still not given the same respect as a man’s.

Women are still largely defined by the roles they fill: daughter, wife, mother. And while those roles are beautiful, sacred, and can be deeply chosen, society has a way of treating them not as possibilities, but as assignments.

A man is rarely asked how he expects to handle a demanding job with two children at home. Women are asked that question all the time, whether directly or through the raised eyebrow of expectation.

Women still carry the majority of domestic labor, even in households where both partners work outside the home. Women are still defined by marital status in ways men are not: Miss or Mrs., available or claimed. And women who choose to opt out of marriage, motherhood, or traditional domestic life often have to justify that decision endlessly.

And things are not exactly moving in the right direction.

We are watching the religious right work overtime to force women back into dependence, back into the home, back into lives where our choices are narrowed and then repackaged as virtue.

But before I go further, I want to be very clear: motherhood is worthy. Marriage can be beautiful. Homemaking is valuable, serious, life-sustaining work. To build a home, raise children, nurture a family, tend to the daily architecture of care is not small, lesser, or a failure of ambition.

If it is truly chosen, if a woman is safe, respected, supported, and able to make that choice freely, then it deserves the same reverence we give the woman who becomes the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.

The problem is not the home.

The problem is the cage pretending to be a home…

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond to Fox News’s latest attempt to use misogyny and homophobia to win elections.

Otherwise known as their recent, and frankly pathetic, attacks on James Talarico.

[Insert Fox News Clip of Jesse Watters and Stephen Miller bashing James Talarico. WATCH THE FULL CLIP BELOW] :

Step One: Compare the size of the dicks in the room

When Jesse Waters and Stephen Miller joke with each other suggesting that James Talarico isn’t man enough to win the state of Texas, smile condescendingly and say:

Jesse, sweetheart, you’re a cable news host in makeup under soft lighting, not a Marlboro Man riding bareback through a thunderstorm.

And Stephen, darling, you’re not giving “alpha male” either. You’re giving Vice President of the Wedgie Committee.

So maybe ease up on deciding who is and isn’t man enough.

Step Two: Interrupt the self-stimulation

When Stephen Miller takes it a step further and says James Talarico is “transitioning to a woman,” while Jesse Watters giggles along like a smitten teenage boy who just discovered locker room homophobia, correct the record:

Stephen, “woman” is not an insult, empathy is not estrogen poisoning, and masculinity doesn’t require you to publicly panic every time another man seems capable of kindness.

The fact that you think calling a man feminine is the most devastating thing you can say doesn’t make James Talarico look weak. It makes you look pathetic for mistaking cruelty for masculinity.

Step Three: Check The Definition of God-Fearing

When they refer to Talarico’s Republican opponent Ken Paxton as the real patriotic, God-fearing man, laugh in their face:

Stephen, if you’re going to use the word “Godly” to describe a man impeached by his own party for corruption, tangled in extramarital affairs, and eager to criminalize same-sex relationships, then I’m going to need you to stop using the word “God” when what you clearly mean is “useful bootlicker with a Bible prop.”

CLOSING

Remember, ladies and gents: when your policies are so rotten and your masculinity so fragile that you have to invent lies about your opponent’s sexuality, testosterone, and dairy intake just to make your candidate look strong, you haven’t proven he’s the bigger man.

You’ve only proven that you’re the biggest dick in the room.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t make you a leader. It just makes you a warning label in a suit.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

Clearly James Talarico is making the right nervous, because he’s a great fucking candidate.

He’s smart, compassionate, and the kind of faithful Christian who makes you say, “You know what… maybe there are some men who actually read the book they claim to follow.”

So of course, cue the MAGA henchmen, swooping in to demonstrate in real time exactly why more and more women are swearing off men altogether.

Because these two clowns seem to think being manly means punching down on anyone who isn’t straight, white, male, and willing to confuse cruelty with strength. Apparently, masculinity now requires lying about another man’s sexuality, obsessing over his testosterone levels, and making jokes about soy milk like a bunch of middle schoolers who just discovered dairy propaganda.

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when the President receives a $1.8 billion slush fund from his own Justice Department.

Otherwise known as: Insurrection, but make it reimbursable.

[Insert Video of JD Vance speaking about the fund]

Step One: Point out the Persecution Hypocrisy

When JD Vance says this taxpayer-funded money will be used to compensate people who were “wrongly mistreated” by the government, make the word “mistreated” do a push-up:

Wonderful. Does that mean legal immigrants and asylum seekers who were wrongfully detained, separated from their families, or denied due process will also be receiving checks?

Or is it your motto that if you flee violence, you get a cage. But if you bring violence to the Capitol, you get a claims form.

Step Two: Audit the Mouthpiece

When Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer, who’s now the Acting Attorney General says “There’s nothing to be outraged about” smile like you can already see how bad he’ll look in an orange jumpsuit and say:

Listen, you schmarmy sock puppet with Trump’s hand shoved so far up your ass he can check your tonsils, there is, in fact, quite a bit to be outraged about.

Because when the DOJ starts talking like Trump’s personal defense team, and rerouting taxpayer money to Trump’s loyalists, that is not public service. That is a hostage video with a government seal.

Step Three: Read the Fine Print

When you discover this same settlement also “forever bars” the IRS from auditing Trump, or his sons for past tax filings, feel free to completely lose your shit and say:

I see. So this is less a Justice Department settlement and more the season finale of The Sopranos, if Tony got to write the tax code.

Because the rest of us get TurboTax and a panic attack every April. But Trump gets a federal chastity belt for his tax returns.

Closing

Remember ladies and gents, this level of corruption is a signal before an election to every henchman in America that intimidation and lawlessness won’t just get you a pass. It will get you paid.

Because when a government starts reimbursing people for attacking democracy, that is not justice.

That is a loyalty program for authoritarianism.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

The first question is the obvious one: is this even legal? Two Capitol Police officers who defended the Capitol on January 6 have already sued to block the fund, arguing that it is unconstitutional, illegally created, and could be used to reward the very people who attacked them.

The second question is: who decides where the money goes? According to reporting, the payouts would be decided by a five-member panel appointed by Trump’s Justice Department, with members who can be removed by the administration. That means the people distributing the money are not meaningfully independent from the president whose loyalists will likely benefit.

And the third question is the most dangerous: what message does this send? If people who participated in, defended, or enabled political lawlessness can later be compensated by the administration they served, that is not justice. That is recruitment.

Because once a government starts rewarding loyalists for intimidation, violence, and attacks on democracy, it is not just rewriting the past.

It is advertising for the future.

It has been giving me life in these absurd times. It has given me a place to channel rage into something useful. Something funny. Something sharp. Something that might help women, and the men worth keeping, resist the narratives being thrust upon us: be smaller, be quieter, be grateful, be palatable, be productive, be obedient, be easy to control.

But the Finishing School did not appear out of nowhere.

It grew out of my album, Tell All The Other Girls.

Music is how I process myself and the world. It is where the things I’m still trying to understand often reveal themselves first: through instinct, through melody, through a lyric that arrives before I fully know what it means. Through that strange alchemy of conscious effort and unconscious magic that allows deeper truths to rise to the surface before the mind can edit them into something polite.

And performing this music is where I get to shed the layers of expectation and containment that have followed women, myself very much included, for generations.

Because rock and roll is not polite.

When I perform these songs, I get to let loose. I get to take up space. I get to be loud, ugly, beautiful, furious, funny, sexual, wounded, defiant, and alive, sometimes all in the same breath. And when one person gives herself permission to break containment, it can remind others that they are allowed to do the same.

That, to me, is political.

Not because every song is explicitly about policy or power, but because every song is about the inner architecture that power depends on: shame, obedience, silence, fear, femininity as a cage, and the long, difficult work of becoming ungovernable from the inside out.

So, because I am a musician first and foremost, I want to take you through the backstory of each song on Tell All The Other Girls: where it came from, what it revealed to me, and how it connects to the larger spirit of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women.

Because before there was a classroom, there was a record.

Before there were lessons in how to respond, there were songs about what it costs to stay quiet.

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when Speaker Mike Johnson says members of Congress need to trade stocks in order to “feed their families.”

Bold take from a man making nearly three times the salary of the median full-time worker and still asking America to Venmo Congress some sympathy.”

[Insert video of Mike Johnson speaking about stock trading]

STEP ONE: Spot the Sympathy Scam

When Mike Johnson holds a press conference to say he’s personally in favor of banning stock trading for Congress, but totally understands the argument for allowing it, smile like you just watched a man trip over his own moral compass and say:

Mike, I’m personally in favor of ethics, but I totally understand why Congress might find ethics financially inconvenient.

STEP TWO: Adjust His Bootstraps

When he says he has sympathy because congressional wages haven’t changed since 2009, contain your fury and say:

Honey, I’m confused. When someone can’t survive on minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, which also hasn’t changed since 2009, you tell them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. But when Congress can’t survive on $174,000 a year, suddenly the bootstraps need a brokerage account?

STEP THREE: Correct The Job Description

When he implies that if we don’t allow members of Congress get rich, we’ll stop getting the brightest minds running for office, recalibrate him:

Actually, sir, what we’ll stop getting are people who think public service is a hedge fund with better parking. If your brightest minds won’t serve the public unless they can privately profit from the information they get while doing it, those are not public servants. Those are leeches with lapel pins.

CLOSING

Remember, ladies and gents: serving in Congress is supposed to be public service, not a side hustle with national security clearance.

So if Mike Johnson is suddenly worried that politicians can’t survive on $174,000 a year, perhaps it’s time to tell them what they tell everyone else: get a second job, skip the lattes, and stop expecting handouts.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

Why This Is Important

Sometimes I wonder if these men ever listen to the things coming out of their own mouths, or if they’re simply soothed by the sound of their own authority echoing back at them.

Because it takes an Olympic-level of audacity to stand in front of the American people and suggest that members of Congress need to be able to trade stocks, despite the blinding ethical problems, so they can “take care of their families.”

This is not a small issue. Members of Congress are privy to information the rest of us do not have. They vote on legislation that can move markets. They receive briefings, meet with industry leaders, shape regulation, and then, under the current system, can personally profit from financial decisions made while holding public office.

That is not public service. That is a hedge fund with legislative power.

And what makes this particular argument so grotesque is not just the ethical rot. It is the selective empathy…

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when Dr. Oz says Americans are “under-babied”...otherwise known as the MAGA administration’s latest… ahem… flaccid attempt to drag women back to the 1950s.

[Insert Clip of Dr. Oz speaking at The White House]

STEP ONE: Make Him Swallow His Own Wad

When Dr. Oz diagnoses America with a baby shortage instead of a policy failure, remind him:

Doctor, Americans aren’t under-babied. We’re underemployed, underinsured, underpaid and under-prioritized by our own government.

Meanwhile, the one percent is undertaxed, your administration is under-qualified, and big money’s dick is so far down your throat, you’re gagging on the talking points.

STEP TWO: Spit The Facts

When he explains that America needs 2.1 babies per woman to “replace the population,” as if families need to start restocking the shelves, give him a history lesson:

“Honey, women aren’t factories, children aren’t inventory and the uterus is not a national supply chain. The original Baby Boom didn’t happen because women were nagged into breeding, it happened because people had stability: federally backed mortgages, labor protections, affordable tuition, and wages that could support a household.

Your version expects women to repopulate the nation with no rights, no healthcare, and wages so soft they need a prescription.

STEP THREE: Use Your Teeth

When RFK Jr. chimes in to blame the falling fertility rate on “toxic soup,” while Trump nods off like a sedated ham in a necktie, bite down:

Toxic soup? I’ll tell you what’s toxic soup:

Women dying during pregnancy because your laws deny them care. Groceries priced like luxury goods. Wages that can’t support a houseplant, let alone a child. And a misogyny epidemic, stoked by your administration’s pathetic tough-guy cosplay.

So maybe for once in your limp little policy life, why don’t you try satisfying a woman’s needs before demanding she satisfy yours.

CLOSING

Remember, ladies and gents: MAGA’s policies don’t build strong families. They build a broke, desperate workforce trained to get on its knees for big corporations.

So in the midterms, let them know we’re done pretending their failure to perform is our responsibility.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

I am a musician. I should be spending my time writing songs, making art, and figuring out which eyeliner can survive both rage and stage lights.

But lately, I am an enraged woman and a concerned citizen first.

So yes, I’m digging my heels into policy this week, because in one way or another, everything I sing about on Tell All The Other Girls relates to this:

The right doesn’t want more babies. It wants more workers. And all this fertility panic is just market panic dressed up as moral concern.

Because when politicians start talking about birth rates as if children are inventory and women are malfunctioning supply chains, they are not talking about families. They are talking about production. They are talking about labor. They are talking about the terrifying possibility that fewer people may be available to work longer hours for less money while billionaires continue treating the American economy like a personal lap dance.

Which is why the word “underbabied” is so revealing…

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School teaches you how to respond when a tech billionaire tries to buy his way into your cultural relevance.

[Insert videos of relevant Met Gala red carpet clips]

Step One: Return Invitation to Sender

When Jeff Bezos drops over $10 million to sponsor and co-host the Met Gala, furrow your brow and say:

Jeff, no amount of money is going to turn you and your wife into cultural icons. When your workers can’t make ends meet, have to pee into bottles, and are punished for trying to unionize, a tux doesn’t quite cover the black hole where your soul should be.

Step Two: Remind Them of The Stakes

When celebrities show up draped in diamonds and money masks like they’re making a statement while partying with the Bozos like they’re culture instead of capital, remind them:

Honey, people are choosing between rent and groceries, gas is pushing seven dollars a gallon, and the average American makes less in a year than your ticket costs for one night.

So if the public isn’t applauding your “statement,” it’s because this isn’t activism. It’s dystopia in couture.

Step Three: Add Some Windows To Her Ivory Tower

When Anna Wintour is reportedly shocked by the backlash, tilt your head and say:

Anna, you handed the night to a man whose company copies independent designers and boosts its own knockoffs. So forgive us if watching Lauren Sánchez glide down the carpet like wealth is a personality trait, doesn’t exactly scream high fashion.

You don’t get to dress up fast-fashion in couture and act surprised when people call it tacky.

Closing

Remember Ladies and Gents: The Met Gala may benefit the Costume Institute, but somewhere along the way it stopped being about artistry and became a red carpet for oligarchs laundering their image. And when tickets have gone from $3,500 to $100,000, it’s no longer a celebration of fashion. It’s a receipt.

And nothing is less stylish than confusing wealth with taste.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

Ugh, where do I even start with this one.

The irony of Jeff Bezos chairing a night meant to celebrate artistry and couture against the backdrop of American wealth inequality is almost too on-the-nose to parody. If I wrote a supervillain into a dystopian film, I still don’t think I’d come close to this level of audacity, heartlessness, and tone deafness.

The Met Gala used to feel whimsical. A celebration of artistry, imagination, and the sheer theatricality of fashion. And to be fair, it still raises money for the Costume Institute, which absolutely matters. I am deeply in favor of supporting the arts through philanthropy.

But not all money is clean…

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when a horrifying act of violence is immediately repackaged into a real estate pitch.

[Insert Trump clip about needing a ballroom]

STEP ONE: OFFER THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS

When Trump and his band of gutless goons suggest that an active shooter is actually a compelling argument for his $400 million ballroom, clutch your pearls and say:

“I’m sorry…now is really not the time to politicize this. We should all just hold hands, and pray for the victims. Because nothing says leadership like aggressively doing absolutely nothing.”

STEP 2: AGREE WITH THE COMPARISON

When he explains that assassination attempts only happen to the most impactful people, nod enthusiastically and say:

You’re absolutely right, sir. Abraham Lincoln ended slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for civil rights. And you…you’ve been incredibly impactful at dividing us, alienating allies, stripping rights, and speed-running democracy into the ground like it’s a limited-time offer.

STEP 3: RECALIBRATE THE GROUP CHAT

When the internet starts getting a little too comfortable cheering for violence, take a deep breath and say

Look, this administration makes me want to lie down on the floor and let evolution take me back. But the assassination of a president would be catastrophic. If we actually want change, it doesn’t come from a bullet. It comes from organizing, voting, and doing the slow, unsexy work of fixing what’s broken.

CLOSING:

Remember ladies and gents, violence isn’t a solution. It’s a symptom. And if we actually want change…we’re going to have to do the work.

But sure, let’s build a ballroom.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

When the shooting unfolded, I was sitting in a café in London, feeling more calm than I had in weeks. And then, just like that, another alert, another headline, another reminder of how quickly the United States can lurch from uneasy to unhinged.

Thankfully, no one was killed. But the images of political leaders and journalists being rushed out, surrounded by security were jarring. Not just because they were frightening, but because they felt… familiar. Routine, even.

And that’s the part that should alarm us most.

It made me wonder what the rest of the world sees when they look at us now. The so-called “beacon on the hill” increasingly looks like a country defined by political violence, fundamentalism, and a profound mistrust of its own institutions.

Read more

Today’s lesson teaches you what to say when the Secretary of War recites a Pulp Fiction Monologue and calls it scripture.

[Insert video of Pete Hegseth delivering Pulp Fiction Monologue at Pentagon Service]

STEP ONE:

When America’s least favorite frat boy with a God complex passes off Pulp Fiction as the Book of Ezekiel, stand up and say:

Pete, if God wanted to speak through you, I don’t think He’d choose a monologue best known for preceding a shooting.

STEP TWO:

When you realize he’s confusing cinematic violence with divine purpose, smile sweetly and ad:

Sir…with great power comes great responsibility. But what do I know—I’m just a girl, standing in front of a boy…asking him to shut the fuck up.

STEP 3:

When he finishes with “I will strike my vengeance upon thee,” show your confusion and say:

Uh, Jesus actually went in a slightly different direction. But I understand that “blessed are the peacemakers” doesn’t really land when you’re rebranding the service as a war briefing.

CLOSING

Remember ladies and gents: God doesn’t need a script. Men do. And when they start using Him to justify it, it’s not faith, it’s theater. And frankly, the acting sucks.

Class Dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

It would be easy to laugh at this display of audacity and idiocy and move on.
But doing so misses the more insidious undertone woven through Pete Hegseth’s words.

Whether he knew that was a Pulp Fiction monologue or not is almost beside the point. He was fully aware of its intended impact: to invoke the authority of God in order to justify violence and vengeance. To suggest, as he and others like JD Vance have done before, that God is aligned with U.S. interests. That God is aligned with the wielding of the sword when it is used against our enemies.

This is not new. It is a framework.

Read more

Trump just called Bruce Springsteen a dried-up prune.

Bold critique from a man who looks like an orange that’s been microwaved, shellacked, and emotionally abandoned.

[Insert Trump’s tweet]

STEP 1: RECALIBRATE HIS EGO

When the President ironically logs on to cyberbully a 76-year-old rock legend, furrow your brow and say:

Sir…when your complexion is giving traffic cone left in a tanning bed and your hair looks like it was applied with a spatula, you do not get to enter the chat on anyone else’s appearance.

Sit this one out. Hydrate. Reflect.

STEP 2: CLARIFY WHAT LOSER MEANS

When he doubles down and calls Springsteen a total loser correct the record:

Oh interesting, I thought success looked like selling out stadiums for 50 years, writing anthems that actually mean something, and having the stamina to perform for three and a half hours at 76.

[CUT FROM FINAL VIDEO: But you’re right, the real winners are the ones who bankrupt casinos, get booed at their own rallies and can’t finish a sentence… let alone a complete thought.]

STEP 3: ACCEPT THE GIFT

When he tells his followers to boycott Springsteen, conceal your excitement and say:

Wait…so I get 3.5 hours of iconic rock and roll, surrounded by people who believe in art, empathy, and basic human decency…and none of your MAGA misogynists will be there?

Oh my god. He finally did something for women.

CLOSING

Remember ladies and gents: Some men demand attention. Some men earn respect. And the ones who earn it? They don’t have to beg for it online.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

Why It’s Important

God. Let me just say, on a very human level, how absolutely ridiculous it feels to even have to respond to this level of childishness.

It should feel like we have bigger things to worry about than how Trump feels about a rock star. Because we do. There is a literal war going on. And yet here we are, watching the President of the United States log on to take cheap shots at Bruce Springsteen.

But that’s exactly why this moment matters.

Because it’s a clear, undeniable example of how petty, fragile, and fundamentally unserious he is.

The fact that he’s fixated on what Springsteen thinks of him while the world is on fire isn’t just embarrassing, it’s disqualifying. It’s unprofessional on a level we would never tolerate anywhere else. If the CEO of a company behaved like this, they’d be gone before the end of the day.

And yet this man continues to sit in the Oval Office, spending our tax dollars to rage like a petulant child every time someone dares to disagree with him. That alone should be reason enough to remove him from office.

But it’s not just about ego. It’s about what he’s targeting.

Read more

Trump just threatened to wipe out Iran. Which means we’ve officially rebranded war crimes as content.

So today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond.

[INSERT VIDEO OF TRUMP’S TWEET]

STEP ONE: LOSE YOUR SHIT

When Trump casually floats genocide like he’s pitching a new season of reality TV set in hell, pick up your phone, dial your senator, and say:

While you’re enjoying your piña colada in Cancun without a care in the world about the child you left unsupervised, the rest of us are at home, smelling gas during a heatwave while watching him fumble for a matchbook.

So I suggest you drag your ass back to Washington and put out the fire before he burns down the house, the neighborhood, and whatever’s left of our international credibility. Might I suggest the 25th amendment.

STEP TWO: LOSE YOUR SHIT AGAIN

When Iran starts playing hardball with the Strait of Hormuz and flirting with oil deals outside the U.S. dollar, call your House representative and say:

Listen, you spineless sack of expired mayonnaise, Iran is out here playing global chess, while our guy is trying to eat the pieces.

If the world shifts away from the U.S. dollar, it’s not just gas prices, it’s the entire economic foundation of this country going up in flames. So maybe stop clapping like a trained seal and start acting like someone who understands consequences.

STEP 3: EDUCATE YOUR PEERS

When Trump and his band of discount dictators keep talking about war like it’s a video game, find your voice and say:

This isn’t Call of Duty and there’s no reset button. Just real people, real fallout, and a giant bill with our name on it.

CLOSING

Remember ladies and gents: a man who’s bankrupted multiple businesses doesn’t suddenly develop strategic brilliance because you handed him a bigger, shinier toy.

And the politicians cashing in while looking the other way? You may want to consider what happens when the rest of the world decides the U.S. dollar, and the U.S. itself, are no longer worth the investment.

Class dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday. (I hope)

WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

The President of the United States openly threatening genocide is not just dangerous because of what he might do. It’s dangerous because of what it signals.

You don’t have to follow through on a threat like that for the damage to be done. The threat itself tells the rest of the world that the United States is willing to abandon its own stated values (human rights, restraint, basic decency) whenever it’s convenient. And once that signal is sent, it cannot be unsent.

Trust is the foundation of global leadership. And right now, we are actively lighting that foundation on fire.

And while all of this is happening, Congress, the body tasked with checking presidential power, especially in matters of war, is largely absent.

No urgency.
No accountability.
No meaningful intervention.

At a moment that demands seriousness and restraint, we are watching a vacuum of leadership.

What we are seeing instead is something far more familiar: a bully mistaking volume for strength.

Because that’s the thing about bullies. They often overestimate their own power. They push too far, assume no one will push back, and walk into situations they don’t fully understand.

That appears to be exactly what’s happening here.

And the consequences of that miscalculation are far bigger, and far more personal, than most people realize.

Read more

It’s the first time I’ve seen that comparison, but it reveals something deeper about how satire, power, and gender are still being misunderstood.

His argument was that I am indoctrinating women to hate men. That if he were to make a video saying similar things about women, it would be widely condemned. That women are now becoming the oppressors.

As with most criticism that comes my way, I try to look at it honestly and consider what’s underneath it. Satire can be a blunt instrument, and in an already polarized landscape, I am intentional about where I aim it: at ideology and systems, more than individuals.

But satire doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
Context matters. Power matters. History matters.

We still live in a culture shaped for centuries by patriarchal systems (legal, economic, and yes, religious institutions) that were built largely by men, for men. Systems that codified women as property, positioned obedience as virtue, and used moral authority to justify control over women’s bodies, labor, and autonomy. Those foundations don’t disappear overnight. They echo forward.

We are not operating on a level playing field. And, we are watching many of our hard-won gains begin to erode.

For example:
Women have lost the right to make decisions about their own bodies.
They receive roughly 2% of venture funding.
They hold around 29% executive and board positions.
A woman has still never held the highest office in the United States.
White women earn about 82 cents for every dollar a man makes. Only 55 - 62 cents for women of color!
Women continue to carry the majority of unpaid domestic labor and are judged for it no matter how they navigate it.
Women’s health has been chronically under-studied and misunderstood.

We are discredited, belittled, and expected to absorb both subtle and overt forms of misogyny as the cost of existing.

And at the most extreme end, we live in a world where powerful men have committed horrific abuses against women and girls and have been protected by wealth, influence, and silence.

The scale is not balanced.

Read more

Today’s lesson teaches you what to say when the US President threatens to bomb Iran’s power and water systems and calls it strategy.

Because apparently we’re workshopping war crimes now.

[Insert Video of Trump’s Tweet saying he will strike power infrastructure if Iran doesn’t open the Straight of Hormuz]

Step One: Identify the Regression

When a man who built his brand on “The Art of the Deal” suddenly pivots to bombs instead of bargaining, tilt your head and say:

I’ve seen this strategy before. It’s usually followed by crying, finger-pointing, and someone’s mom getting involved. Really cutting-edge diplomacy.

Step Two: Name the Crime

When he starts threatening to take out power and water infrastructure like it’s just another bullet point in a business plan, smile sweetly and say:

Hmm. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that what we call terrorism when someone else does it? Or is it only terrorism when it comes with an accent?

Step 3: Expose the Fantasy

When he insists this is all about keeping America safe, take a breath and say:

Ah yes. Because nothing stabilizes the world like a toddler with no plan, a bruised ego, and access to missiles. And nothing projects “safety” like a tantrum with a weapons budget.

CLOSING

Remember ladies and gents: Toddlers escalate. Leaders Don’t.
And when a man can’t even control his impulses long enough to stop his own thumbs from throwing Twitter tantrums from a porcelain throne, perhaps it’s time to move him out of The White House and into a white padded room.

Class Dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

Why This Is Important

When the President of the United States publicly threatens to bomb another country’s power systems, it should send a chill down everyone’s spine.

Because those are not military targets. They are civilian infrastructure.

And deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure is prohibited under international humanitarian law. These rules weren’t created to make war polite. They were created because history has shown, again and again, what happens when there are no limits at all.

It’s worth being precise here. The term terrorism is often used to describe violence or threats against civilians to instill fear and coerce political outcomes. Whether carried out by non-state actors or governments, the underlying logic is the same: target civilians to achieve leverage. That is exactly why international law draws such clear lines around civilian protection.

The United States is far from perfect. Its foreign policy history is complicated, and at times deeply flawed, including in its relationship with Iran. But there has long been at least a stated standard: that intentionally targeting civilians crosses a line.

Not because we have always lived up to that standard.
But because abandoning it entirely is far worse.

The moment that line is erased, it doesn’t just disappear for one country. It disappears for everyone.

We’ve seen this play out in real time. Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s power grid and civilian infrastructure have been widely condemned, sanctioned, and used as evidence of moral and legal violation on the global stage. Those consequences may not stop the behavior entirely, but they matter. They establish a baseline. They signal to other nations that there are still rules, and that breaking them carries a cost.

But those rules only hold if the countries claiming to uphold them actually do.

If you’ve been enjoying these lessons, the deeper breakdown is where I connect the dots, and that’s what supports this work.

Keep reading for why this moment matters more than it seems.

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when the Department of Education displays a banner of Charlie Kirk next to the word hero.

Reminder: this is the same man who told a room full of middle school girls that the sole reason they should attend college is to earn an MRS degree.

[Insert clip of Charlie Kirk]

Step One: Make a Vow of Celibacy

The next time someone complains about the male loneliness epidemic, smile sympathetically and say:

Honey, men aren’t lonely enough. When your response to declining marriage and birth rates is to force women back into dependence, don’t come crying to me when you’re left with nothing but a podcast microphone and a jar of Vaseline to reassure yourself you still matter.

Step Two: Identify the Real Diversity Initiative

When the state canonizes a man whose most advanced intellectual offering is ‘How to Use Religion to Justify Racism and Misogyny 101,’ you know education has officially been dragged behind the gym and beaten with a Bible. So take a deep breath and say:

Oh I see what’s happening. This isn’t about tradition, it’s DEI for fragile male egos.

Because when women start outperforming you in school, the solution apparently isn’t to study harder… It’s to tell the girls their real major should be Mrs.

Step Three: Tell a Story of Your Own

When someone parrots the banner and refers to Charlie Kirk as one of our nation’s “heroes in education,” correct the record and say:

That’s not a hero. That’s a man who looked at a fourteen-year-old girl and thought the safest future for him was one where she never became smarter than he is. Because nothing terrifies fragile men more than an educated woman who knows they’re full of shit.

Closing:
Remember ladies and gents: misogyny isn’t policy, it’s what you fall back on when you don’t have ideas. Because a country that sidelines half its population doesn’t become stronger. It just becomes less competitive.

Class Dismissed. C.U.Next.Thursday.

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT

When a government institution hangs a banner and calls someone a hero, it’s not just decoration, it’s endorsement. It tells every student walking past that building: this is who we value, this is who we want you to listen to, this is what we believe education should produce.

And that matters, because the message embedded in that endorsement isn’t subtle.

It’s a worldview that says a girl’s highest aspiration is not knowledge, independence, or contribution, but proximity to a man. That her education is optional, but her obedience is essential. That her future should be shaped by limitation, not possibility.

And when that message is platformed by the very institution tasked with expanding minds, it doesn’t just reflect culture, it actively reshapes it.

Read more

They’ve been feared, punished, rewritten, and contained. From Eve, to Medusa, to Cassandra, to the modern-day “childless cat woman,” the message has always been the same: a woman who cannot be controlled must be discredited, diminished, or destroyed. And if she can’t be destroyed, she can at least be turned into a story. Something you observe from a distance, instead of something you’re allowed to become.

The original version of She’s Wild followed that same pattern. It told the story of a woman like that. A woman who refused to be contained.

She was wild
She was wild
You couldn’t tame her if you tried
I knew sooner or later she was bound to recognize
She was wild

It painted her as someone you could recognize, maybe even admire. But she still lived at a distance. A character. A myth. The kind of woman you point to and say, she’s different, instead of asking what it would mean if you weren’t.

(Original voice note of She’s Wild - FYI I never learned to play guitar so bear with me.)

And that’s where it started to break for me.

Because even in writing her, I could feel that subtle, familiar separation. The one that lets you revere a certain kind of woman while quietly believing her life isn’t available to you. That she’s the exception. The outlier. The cautionary tale.

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond to the Olympic level of irony when a DOGE Bro is asked to explain DEI… while demonstrating in real time exactly why DEI exists.

[Insert clip of DOGE bro deposition]

Step One: Define His Role

When a DOGE Bro is asked to explain what DEI is and begins spinning in circles like a Roomba stuck under a chair, smile reassuringly and say:

“Justin, since you seem unable to form a coherent thought without ChatGPT, why don’t you log back in and ask it to give you a comprehensive definition of the word tool.”

Step Two: Take Him to School

When he dismisses a grant as “crazy” because it references feminist research, correct the record.

“Honey, one reason we fund research specifically about women is because they’re systematically ignored.

For example: In 80s, scientists were studying how obesity affects estrogen and its link to breast and uterine cancer… using only male test subjects. So yes, it’s important to fund research that mentions women. But in the meantime, perhaps you can greenlight a grant for studying mediocrity and the male ego.

Step Three: Let Him Teach You A Lesson

When he refuses to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, someone with zero academic background and no peer-review experience shouldn’t be deciding what research survives. Take a deep breath and pray:

“Lord, grant me the confidence of a 20-year-old DOGE Bro. Because if this kid can wander into the federal government and make 150K with nothing but a résumé that says, ‘I skimmed some books I didn’t understand’…I might actually be capable of running the entire goddamn world.”

Closing

Remember ladies and gents: DEI doesn’t exist to replace qualified people. It exists to make sure opportunities and funding aren’t automatically handed to the next mediocre white man who wandered into the room.

So when you hear someone complaining about DEI, know this: They’re not protecting competence. They’re protecting privilege.

Class dismissed. C.U. Next Tuesday.

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT

Some of the most important breakthroughs and life-saving policies of our lifetimes have been funded by the federal government:

Read more

These days, I listen almost exclusively to rock music. My taste is wide-ranging. I love everything from folk to classical to pop, but rock is the genre that speaks most directly to the rebellious part of my spirit. It reminds me that anger can be righteous, that defiance can be beautiful, and that sometimes the most honest response to the world is simply to turn the amplifier all the way up.

In some ways, rebellion has always come naturally to me. As a child, I remember standing up to teachers or peers whenever my sense of fairness was challenged. If I saw someone being treated unjustly, something in me rose immediately. I didn’t always win those battles, but I rarely stayed quiet.

And yet, like most girls, I was raised inside another set of expectations.

Be polite.
Be agreeable.
Don’t raise your voice.
Don’t talk back.
Be a lady.

The contradiction was constant.

I had little interest in fitting in with the provincial rhythms of my small-town peers, but I devoured fashion magazines and dreamed of belonging to some larger world where creativity, beauty, and expression felt expansive rather than restrictive. My refusal to conform made me an easy target. I was bullied relentlessly through much of my youth for being different and for not smoothing myself into whatever shape the social order demanded.

Looking back, I realize many of those pressures had less to do with fitting in and more to do with containment.

Women are taught early that likability is a form of survival. We learn to soften our anger, moderate our opinions, and make ourselves easier to digest. Even when we are passionate or certain, we are encouraged to package those qualities in ways that feel polite and non-threatening.

The problem arises when women become so accustomed to quiet that we forget what our full voice sounds like. When our default is to speak softly, or not at all, even in moments that demand something louder.

Read more

Today’s lesson of Bossi’s Finishing School for Difficult Women teaches you how to respond when the President refers to a 6-year-old girl as “of age” while talking about the SAVE Act.

Side Note: If a politician starts describing six-year-old girls as ‘of age,’ congratulations, you’re no longer in a policy discussion. You’re in a crime documentary. [Removed from final video]

[Insert Clip of Trump talking about The SAVE Act]

Step One: Throw Up In Your Mouth

When the President suggests your six-year-old daughter is “of age” to hand you a voter ID card, swallow the bile just long enough to say:

First of all, what the actual fuck are you talking about?

Second, when someone who appears thousands of times in the Epstein files starts talking about little girls being “of age,” the appropriate response isn’t applause. It’s a subpoena.

Step Two: Put Your Resting Bitch Face on Autopilot

When one of his MAGA minions starts ranting about immigrants stealing elections, lean in and say:

Todd… in addition to the fact that your ‘midnight hammer’ barely rises without meds, this bill is exactly why women should stop taking their husbands’ names.

Because if I have to choose between tradition and bringing a filing cabinet of paperwork just to vote, trust me, the only tradition you’re getting is a headache every night of the week.

Step Three: Raise Hell

When the President threatens not to sign any legislation unless the SAVE Act passes, call your senator and say:

Oh no… don’t threaten us with a good time.

Because in the year this clown’s been in office, the only people benefiting from his signature are his donors and his friends. So the only one I’m interested in seeing from this man is on a confession, signed from a jail cell.

Closing

Remember ladies and gents: When a politician tries to rig the rules instead of winning the vote, it’s not strength. It’s the political equivalent of flipping the Monopoly board because you’re losing.

And if your ideas are so unpopular that you need to make voting harder just to survive…

Congratulations. You’re not a leader. You’re a loser.

Class dismissed.
C. U. Next. Thursday.

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT

Every generation inherits stories about power.
Stories about who belongs in the room.
Who deserves to speak.
Who deserves to vote.

And who doesn’t.

The SAVE Act is being sold as “election security.” But like so many policies wrapped in the language of protection, its real effect is something much older and much uglier: making participation harder for the people that power would rather not hear from.

Women.
Naturalized citizens.
Working people who don’t have the luxury of time, money, or legal expertise to assemble layers of documentation just to exercise a fundamental right.

Read more