Podcast Transcript: Preparing for Challenging Conversations

Series' Guests

• Loretta Frederick, JD, the former Senior Legal and Policy Advisor of the Battered Women’s Justice Project
• Associate Justice Anne K. McKeig, Minnesota Supreme Court
• Ret. Judge Jeffrey Kremers, Milwaukee County Circuit Court
• Gretta Gardner, JD, the Deputy Director of Ujima Inc.: The National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community
  
  
   

AARON POLKEY: There are circumstances where I have to put aside for a brief moment the fact that something has hurt my feelings, to see if there's an opportunity there to convert that moment into a moment of growth for everybody that's involved.

DANIELLE PUGH: Welcome to the second podcast of our three part series on facilitating complex topics with complex audiences, namely judges and court staff, on the issue of intimate partner violence. Now, you might be joining in on this series because one, you are surprised in or curious that judges and court staff are considered a complex audience of learners. Two, have had difficulties engaging this group and need some pointers or three, experiencing difficulties engaging another group or anyone or everyone and could use some inspiration.

Our first podcast explored the art and importance of engaging judges and court staff. I'm Danielle Pugh, director of judicial education and leadership at the Center for Court Innovation, and I'll be hosting the second podcast, focusing on preparing for challenging or courageous conversations. My guests today are Greta Gardner of Ujima, the National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community, Justice Anne McKeig of the Minnesota Supreme Court, and Aaron Polkey of Futures Without Violence. Welcome everyone.

GRETA GARDNER:    Thank you for the invitation.

JUSTICE ANNE MCKEIG: Thank you.

POLKEY: Thank you.

PUGH: Aaron, what do we mean by facilitation and why is it important?

POLKEY: Well, I really love the word facilitation because it speaks of a process. It speaks of a journey, taking someone somewhere, that you're part of it, that you are helping to move the process along. It's such a preferable word over teaching or lecturing because it's not didactic. It's a journey that you're taking with someone. When I think of facilitation, I think that my role is to actually be my audience's servant. For the process not to be about me, for the discussion not to be about what I think. My job is to create a safe space where other people can educate each other and other people can feel safe enough to talk about difficult topics. My job is just to make sure that things are flowing, that things are in fact being facilitated.

PUGH: Thank you. Greta, your take on facilitation.

GARDNER: Yeah, I would agree with Aaron. I think that I have always perceived it as guiding. Whether that's a person or an event or a conversation, but not intervening. Making sure I am the conduit through which this event is happening so that people can be engaged without feeling put upon. That I'm just moving the flow of what's going on, much like Aaron said. I think the storytelling piece is really important because a good facilitator will make sure that all of the pieces come together in a way that the participants are not only hearing it, but absorbing it, so that it can move into whatever next lesson or module or event is happening next. It has to all flow, not just what you're facilitating in that moment, because somebody else might be facilitating another section or piece, and you have to make sure that there's some level of continuity to make sure that the lessons are learned.

PUGH: Thank you, Greta. Anne, as a justice of the Supreme Court and being in many roles in the judiciary, what do you think when you think of the word facilitation? Especially when we're thinking about judges, judicial officers, when Aaron mentioned creating that safe space. Why is that important for your peers?

MCKEIG: Well, for many reasons, but I would back up even and say that in listening to both what Greta and Aaron have said, I think that's the challenge with judges. Particularly if you're going to have judges leading the conversation, and I use the word leading because I think judges have a harder time perhaps in that facilitator role just because they're used to being the one in charge of a courtroom, making decisions and being the final word. I think it's important to have judges in that role, but I also think you have to be very clear about what facilitation means in that realm.

The safe space is really important because you want judges to express their opinions honestly and openly. That's not always easy for judges to do because we're so used to being watched by everyone where every word that you say, if taken out of context can mean something else. Particularly if you are in a office or in a position where you're going to have to stand for election, which many of us are. There's been a move where some are retention or not retention, but there's still also many of us who do have to stand for elections. So we have to be very careful about what is said and how we say it. I think creating an environment where you can trust, particularly in this day of social media, that what has been said is not going to leak out somewhere else is really, really important, particularly for judges.

PUGH: Thank you for that insight. As we lead into our next discussion, our next topic around challenging and courageous conversations, I'm going to talk about for a moment, preparation. Preparing yourself for these conversations, difficult audiences or diverse audiences. What's your process? And you can talk about it either in prior to or during or after the training. But maybe let's just focus on that getting ready, getting geared up for educational event. Greta.

GARDNER: Sure, I don't know if it's just the lawyer in me, but preparation, preparation, preparation. Making sure I truly understand what's being asked of me, what the curricula is or what the conversation should be. What the outcome is anticipated so that I can have some guardrails as to how to drive the conversation so it doesn't go sideways. What is the topic? Am I an expert on the particular topic that I will be facilitating? If not, what are my learning gaps or deficits that I need to talk about with the host or the sponsor and/or do my own research? I generally like to do climate surveys before I walk into a room a couple days before about just checking the temperature of the level of education that the group has on the topic so that I can tweak what we're talking about in a way that doesn't under serve the folks that I'm talking to or with and/or over serve the community I'm talking with.

I think also the geography. I like to know the demographics and just ask a lot of questions. I ask a lot of questions up front so that I can be prepared in the moment. But the demographics, particularly in a lot of the work that I talk about, are important to me. If I'm talking about domestic violence or helping to facilitate a conversation about domestic violence, what are their stats in that community or that state or that region? What are their response rates like? What are the protection order numbers looking like, et cetera? Just so that I can get a feel and anticipate maybe some of the responses so that I know how to guide the conversation.

PUGH: Thank you. And Aaron?

POLKEY: Yeah, the preparation is key, as Greta just said. I want to affirm the notion of trying to align in advance your audience's goals. Your learning needs, the destination. By the end of this experience, you want your audience to be better able to or have an opportunity to do certain things. To really internalize that in advance I think allows me while I'm up there, to continuously check with myself and say, "Okay, I've got a place that I'm trying to go to with this group of people." Obviously that should be done in consultation with the individuals who invited you, any questions that you asked in advance or why they invited you so that you aren't derailed by a provocative statement that might be irrelevant or off topic. That you're always sojourning towards that goal.

I think another thing that I like to do is take a look at hot topics right now. There's really two types of hot topics that could impact the conversation. One could be something that has happened with this group of people. Everyone in this room knows that their colleague, as an example, was involved in something very much related to the reason why we're here today. If I don't know that, that's really going to matter if that comes up. Or even if it doesn't come up, I may be clueless that the way that people receive what I'm saying is being influenced by experiences that they all share. I often like to ask the hosts, whoever invited me, or if they have a small group of participants that I can consult with before I come, "What's going on? Is there anything that's been a topic of conversation with this group of people? What's on their mind?" Usually there is something that they'll say.

Then the final hot topic or the second half of the hot topics that I like to analyze is really what's in the news that day and that week. What's happening right now? What's related to our topic that people might be thinking about because it's at the top of the news or even pop culture. Because not only does that allow you to be prepared for questions or comments that are related to bad news, but if there's good news out there, sometimes if you can make a reference to something that's timely and relevant in a cheerful sense, that can help create a safe space. That can help break the ice, that can help make people at least find a way to smile when they are talking about topics that are rather difficult and fraught with trauma. I usually try to stay as hip to whatever's going on as I can, as I am increasingly less hip day by day, so that there's a connection between me and my audience, both good and bad.

PUGH: Thanks Aaron and Greta. You bring up really important points about how we cannot overlook the amount of preparation it takes and it should take as we go into somebody's community or somebody's auditorium and start talking about intimate partner violence. And no matter how much we prepare, we've been doing this for a couple of decades, we're always surprised by something. We talk about derailing, Aaron. And when we've been in rooms together, you've been in rooms and talking about intimate partner violence or another complicated topic, and there's something that happens in the program, during the program. What are some ways how you prepare yourself or to handle those circumstances when they're happening?

MCKEIG: Well, I would love to say that I am as good at preparation as Greta and Aaron are, but I will say that my personality drives how I facilitate or how I train or how I educate. It's a little bit different, although I will say that I have learned to be more prepared because of things that have happened. One is I think that being careful about the language that you're using in the group, that's really important. Also, I find demeanor and I also find even what I'm wearing. For example, if I'm going to go and train on the reservation and I show up in what might be considered, it's not my courtroom attire, but what might be considered traditional courtroom attire, I'm already creating a barrier between myself and the group that I'm going to train just because I would be seen as an outsider and whatever I have to say is not going to be heard very well. And it would lead perhaps to more of some of those events that take place in the course of the training, which can really derail a training.

I always try to be, if it is something that is extremely controversial or just plain wrong, for example, I know that somebody has made a statement that's completely wrong, I have over the years changed how I've handled that. From remaining silent when I was less sure and confident of myself as a trainer, educator, facilitator. As my role has changed from attorney to judge to justice, I have felt a greater responsibility to ensure that the information that is being shared in the group is A, it's accurate and also that people are free to share different positions or opinions. But that people don't leave there with something that's just completely incorrect because I've seen that happen far too often where the facilitator has felt uncomfortable because it's an uncomfortable and awkward moment and has left perhaps misinformation out there. Or if it is something that is really atrocious, not addressing that, and then the rest of the group feels completely alienated. You'd love to say that there's an ABC of how to do that, but I don't know that there is, other than growing in your level of comfort to be able to address those issues because it is so, I think fact and scenario driven. But having a general philosophy about how you're going to approach a problem like that.

PUGH: Thank you. You mentioned a couple of points that I want to go deeper on. One of them is that there's a hierarchy when we are coming into a training, when we're talking about judges, when we're talking about any audience, but really when we're talking about judges, the facilitators or the co-presenters, there may be a hierarchy and there's also a hierarchy in the room. That can also take place in court staff and if you're looking in a situation where there's a mix between judges and court staff, we have to manage those dynamics as well.

How do you strategize? We have two attorneys and a justice and a non-attorney on this podcast right now. We all go into a room together and we're about to facilitate on intimate partner violence. Is there a strategy to this approach on who's saying what, who's taking this and who's going to talk about the high points or what is it? Anyone care to take that on right now? Greta.

GARDNER: Sure. Yeah, I was nodding because absolutely the messenger is really important and depending on where you are, who you're talking to, even if you're in a multidisciplinary audience, it depends on who's the best messenger. That could be the justice in this instance, or maybe her style isn't what is best in this scenario. Her presence and her authoritarian position might be the best, or perhaps somebody who is a little bit more familiar, their style is just different and may be okay. For example, if we're in South Carolina, maybe Aaron is the best person to do that because he knows the culture, he knows how people like to relate to each other. I think, yeah, it absolutely depends on doing the work to find out who's the best messenger in that particular situation and it could be a mix. It could be co-facilitating or making sure that you have this piece, I'll do this piece, or I'll be the information person. Figuring out your roles is really, really important. But strategy is absolutely important, especially anticipating if something should get hard.

PUGH: Thank you. Aaron, you want to add to that in terms of strategizing?

POLKEY: Yeah. I think that the strategy, again, as I said before, has to continuously realign itself with the goal. The strategy adjusts to the goal, the goal doesn't necessarily adjust to the strategy. I think that's an important distinction to make. In some cases, there might be a reason to make slight adjustments to the goal based on what you learn. But for the most part, as you work with a partner or a team to effectuate a training, it can be very tempting sometimes to make assumptions based on what's being said in the room and therefore assume that your goal is misaligned because the people who are talking are indicating to you a different level of awareness. Or it might be advanced or it might not be advanced. When you do that in a way that's not as deliberate and thoughtful, you may not always account for the people in the room who aren't speaking up.

In working with my partner to plan and prepare, that's the part that I most lean into when an adjustment is to be made. Are we making this adjustment because we think we aren't connecting? And why do we think we aren't connecting? If the reason why we aren't connecting is because the room feels like people aren't speaking up and things to that effect, that's a dangerous space to be in. There's a lot of reasons why people don't speak up. The room might be too hot, the room might be too cold, it's the time of day that you met it, whatever it is.

In my preparation and strategizing, I always try to circle back with my partner. What are we doing here to reach this goal? Does our goal continue to be relevant? Usually it does. Then after we get to that point, then we can get to the parts that Greta just ably articulated, which is, well then if we are still moving toward this goal, then my expertise suggests maybe I should focus on this. Your expertise suggests that maybe you should focus on that. I felt a little bit burned when I said something before, so maybe you should say that next time. Ultimately, what are we willing to give and take with each other to achieve that goal? Because as facilitators, it's not about us, it's about the people who are in the room.

GARDNER: Just thinking that even where you just say who's the first face or the first voice that that group should hear from is important too. Because that can be an easy entree, just as the justice was saying, depending on where she's going, what she's wearing. She doesn't even have to open her mouth and before she's even said anything, her appearance has made a statement for her. I think that there's something to be said too around the non-verbals and just who's the best person even to open.

PUGH: Aaron, you did say it's not about us, and that is something that we've always tried to prep and talk about when we go in and remember when we're going into the room. We're trying to get an audience to think a little bit more deeply and do something a little bit more different when it comes to responding to intimate partner violence. But as Anne mentioned earlier, sometimes we get stuck or people say atrocious things. There's some misinformation out there, and sometimes there might be an unsafe environment for us as the facilitators. You mentioned that as you elevated in your position, you feel more responsibility, but how do you take into consideration and command composure of yourself when you're feeling something as completely atrocious as you mentioned, or just harmful or hurtful?

MCKEIG: Yeah, I think that sometimes just takes time as a facilitator. First of all, you've got to be mature enough I guess, and you got to have some thick skin. But in the moment, you don't want to allow an atrocious or a disturbing or a hurtful comment to derail what it is that you are there to accomplish. Certainly that has for sure happened with me over time where people have made very personal comments about me as a person. I just bypass that and say, "Okay, well we can talk about that after if you'd like to have further conversation. But let's bring it back to what it is," and then moving forward because it can be extremely challenging.

I watched one of our local politicians not too long ago, there was a swearing in of a dean of a law school and unbeknownst to the audience and to the presenters, there were protestors there. The protestors started popping up one by one while he was giving his remarks in support of this dean's investiture. I watched him and I thought he did an incredible job of addressing the protestors, but not allowing them to derail the joy in the moment that it was for this investiture by saying, "You have valid concerns, but you're here to talk to me and we're really interfering with someone else's moment here. So I will come outside and talk to you afterwards." That's maybe perhaps a different example, but I just thought the way that he diplomatically went about that, even though the attacks were very personal towards him and he refocused that you really don't want to ruin the rest of these people's evening because you're really here just to talk to me. We'll go talk about that afterwards. I complimented him afterwards just on how well he handled that.

It reminds me of that's how I want to make sure that that whole training isn't hijacked by one perhaps negative interaction or comment, because that would really be a waste of other people who have really put a lot of time and focus and they're dedicated and want to be there. I think it's something that for one thing, you learn over time with your experience as a facilitator. But also think ahead as to, okay, what am I going to do? Do I have at least of a outline of a game plan? And talking to your co-presenters about that because I think Greta mentioned about who the messenger is, is really important. Sometimes when I say that I've changed my role, I know that I am less vulnerable than perhaps some of my other colleagues and I can take the hit as it were. Whereas they are in a very different position, so just strategizing about that ahead of time certainly helps.

PUGH: Thank you. If you're lucky and when we talk about really preparing for this, preparing for educational moments, we really want to do it in teams and not be alone because we want to lean on each other as co-facilitators, especially on the topic of intimate partner violence. Because we hear unfortunately, very problematic statements and we're used to them, but sometimes we are taken off guard. It's just the nature of this work that we're in. Sometimes we know that we can't always be in our best ready self, so we need a partner to pass the baton and lean on a little bit. Greta, in your experiences, how do you manage these situations and what are some kernels of advice that you could share with our audience?

GARDNER: Like the justice said, it's experience. It's trial and error, some things you're going to do very well, and then on a bad day you might not do so well. I will say in my younger years when I first started out in the technical assistance provider world, there were some tears and that's okay. I mean, the tears could be cathartic. I think as I have matured, as the justice said, as I have developed more relationships and deeper collegial friendships and I know who has my back, even if I'm not co-facilitating with someone, there's someone in the room that I can look at and say, "Do you hear what I'm hearing?" Or I know somebody even in that moment if I'm not feeling crazy like, "This is what I think I heard," that's super helpful. Just knowing that you have support.

But I will tell you, I'm not very good at self care, so I probably need to do better than that. I have my people. But yeah, I think as my time as a domestic violence prosecutor, I had to learn to not take it home with me or else it was going to just eat me up. I think in a lot of ways I do that, I have very thick skin, I'll just try to compartmentalize it, which I know is not healthy. But we're actually working on this at Ujima because we do so many trainings, we want to make sure that our team, who's a relatively young team, that they're okay. So we're looking into wellness practices, we're looking into when they don't do more than two in a day or if they're doing a lot of bias trainings, really checking in with each other or somebody else because it gets heavy. It gets really, really heavy and then it can get personal.

PUGH: Speaking of personal, Aaron, we've been in many rooms together and we both know that feeling of being attacked or having our beloved co-host, co-facilitator attacked. How do you not take things personally?

POLKEY: Well, the first thing I do is I give myself permission to take things personally. Now, whether or not the people in the room know that I have taken something personally is the part that I have to control and think through. But as Greta said, there's a sacrifice that occurs when you're in front of a room. I spoke early about me seeing my role as facilitator as being a servant to the room. As a result of that, there are circumstances where I have to put aside for a brief moment the fact that something has hurt my feelings to see if there's an opportunity there to convert that moment into a moment of growth for everybody that's involved.

Now, that's not going to work every single time, there is a line. I think one of the things that is key to team facilitating to the meetings that you asked about earlier with respect to your partner, is making sure that the person who's there with you knows what your lines are to the extent in which you are able to express them or predict them from previous encounters. So that if they're aware of that, then hopefully if they see that someone stepped on that line, then maybe they can be the one that can seize the moment and take the opportunity out of it as you collect yourself.

I would say that when something happens and it's an ouch moment for me, the first thing I say to myself is, "What's the opportunity here to achieve my goal?" The opportunity could be if I'm able to continue and my partner hasn't stepped up, the opportunity can be in the form of soliciting from other people in the room. Well hey, are there some other thoughts on that point? And frequently someone else in the room will articulate the disagreement that you wish that you could have said. Then therefore that opportunity hasn't been lost, the moment's there.

Sometimes, depending on the statement, if you feel safe and comfortable and it's not that far out there, you can also ask that person, "Well, let's talk about what you just said, because some people could receive that as however you received it. And is that really what you mean?" Frequently in that encounter, the person who says that actually may have not meant the impact. They may repackage what they said to be more clearly in line of what they think and the moment's been saved.

Finally, however, if all else fails, you can't move on, you can't pass to your partner, the person who said the comment has doubled down and no one in the room is going to disagree with them. In fact, people in the room are agreeing with them and you're now stuck. I think that the one thing that one must avoid doing is getting into an argument with that person in front of everybody. Because now at that point the goal is completely lost. It is now about you and them. So retreat, parachute, get out of that conversation, take your break, change the topic, do everything. But to the extent in which you've taken it personally, your feelings are hurt, everything's terrible, if you get to the point where you're now telling that person how it is, I don't think that's effective for anybody that's involved.

But as a final note, if it gets to that, also you have a right to feel the way that you feel. If your feelings are hurt and people have really crossed that line with you and you've done everything that you can, I'm not going to be upset at someone that has to draw their own line in the sand with respect to an encounter. But that should be after you've tried all the other steps that I've suggested.

GARDNER: And you can always say, "Thank you so much for this," bolstering them a bit in a safe way. "Thank you so much for engaging in this conversation with us as a whole. We're going to have to agree to disagree and we are going to have to move on. But I want to say thank you because you added so much to this discussion." I mean, in some ways you don't want to want it to seem like you're colluding or like the justice was saying, or Aaron, that you're giving up your position or what you know is right. But there is a way to respectfully let the group know, I disagree with this person, but I respect their opinion.

I think that that's really important and that lends to your credibility as a facilitator when as Aaron said, you don't really necessarily dig into because then it becomes personal on your credibility can be diminished. Particularly, we haven't talked about this and maybe that's another podcast, but as a female facilitator, in some circumstances all you have is your credibility and you can't diminish that in any way, shape or form if you want the audience to hear you.

PUGH: Oh Greta, we want to talk about that during this podcast because I want to say as a Black Asian woman and being in a room sometimes as the only woman of color, I've come to some strength where sometimes I feel like I don't need to engage with you in that mode. That's not where I'm going to use that energy. I'm going to do what you suggested, Greta, or I'm going to say, "This has been a fruitful, engaging conversation and we're going to move on." Because I know for a fact that I'm being targeted and that's not the purpose of what we're here for. We're not going to let you target me, we're going to try to get to the next phase. But we have had those situations and I want to as a diverse group here on this podcast, talk about a little bit more of our identities and how that has impacted our facilitation styles or our approach to this work. Greta, do you want to add more to that as your identity as a Black woman, your experiences in that role?

GARDNER: It's been really diverse and changing. I use my identities as a training tool sometimes as we talk about stereotypes or biases or things like that. So it's really, really helpful. I will say that I've changed over the years. I mean, I was probably considered reckless as a young single person in my facilitation style. It has become more measured, I hope, more thoughtful as I've matured, had a little bit more life experience as a mother, as someone who has been through family court twice and what does that look like? I think all of those things come into play. We are the sum of our experiences. I think in some ways it has made me more gentle and a better listener. And in some ways it has added another coat of armor when people say things or do things because I know there's something else behind that.

When you're facilitating it's very different than technical assistance because in technical assistance you always want to ask, "Well what does that mean to you? What are you asking?" What they're asking for may not be really what they want or need. Whereas in facilitation, you have to draw that back and let the organic conversation flow with your guidance. But it's been hard. I think in some ways I gain credibility because I am a lawyer. In certain spaces that commands some respect. Believe it or not, because I'm tall, it commands some respect and I always wear heels, so it makes me taller. The fact that I speak the Queen's English and to some degree people think I have a acculturated, so I'm a safe person of color lends me some privilege as well. Yeah, I'll have to think more. I'll let my colleagues speak more on it, but it has its pluses and minuses depending on where I am and current events and what I'm talking about or what I'm engaging others in conversation about.

PUGH: Thank you, Greta. Anne, did you want to share some insight around about how you identify and how that's impacted your facilitation and how you receive information and how you take it out and impart it?

MCKEIG: Yeah, for me it can go one of two ways, particularly if I am speaking to my community, the native community. Some will say that I am too white to be native, and then of course, if I'm speaking to perhaps a non-native community, then it's like, "Well, then she's too native to be white." It's just this constant adapting as to who I'm talking to and being prepared for that. Because I'll never forget the moment where a participant accused me of the fact that because my husband was Mexican, they knew this, that I had switched my allegiances and I was no longer a native person. I was becoming Latinized, as they said. It was like, "What?" I was never expecting that one because that one hurts. I was used to the one or the other, but that one threw me for a loop.

I have to say, I didn't really know what to do about it in the moment and I think I handled it okay. But I did go up to the person afterwards and talked to them just because I'm probably a pretty confrontational person. But I didn't do it in a mean way. But I did say, "You have kids?" And, "Yeah," and it's like, "Well, how would you feel if somebody did that to your kid?" They're like, "Oh yeah, well I wouldn't like that." At least try to have some connection with that person and not letting it go. But I've also learned that the way that I handle it impacts everybody else. In my old style, I bet Greta and I were somewhat similar because I would say I was certainly reckless and I was ready for the fight at all times.

Now learning when not to do that. Then I actually look like the reasonable one and the person who has been the poor actor as you will, looks like the unreasonable one and I have gained the rest of the room by not getting into that fight at the moment. It is a weighing and balancing, but it is also I think, really necessary for particularly people of color to have these conversations with each other because it is a different experience in my opinion, than people who are not of color. I think it's important to have a place where we can go and have those conversations and strategize and just get some of our feelings out about that because it is additional layers that are put upon us that perhaps some of our colleagues don't have and that's just real.

GARDNER: May I say something wonderful about Aaron before he speaks?

PUGH: Sure.

GARDNER: There is a very special skill for male facilitators in this work to co-facilitate with female facilitators. There are only a few that I will work with because they know me so well and vice versa. And the respect and the grace and the deference that Aaron gives as a co-facilitator, to give you the space and to recognize you as an expert as well, and to give up some of his privilege in the room is really quite fascinating. I want to say thank you, if I have this opportunity to say thank you because it's not often that we get the chance to speak on these things. We just keep moving. So I wanted to give that as an example of how male co-facilitators share space with female facilitators.

POLKEY: Thank you, Greta. I really appreciate that and it does matter. The gender dynamics do matter when you have these conversations. I really appreciate that because it makes me think of the time that I really lost my cool in the room, was very much intertwined with my identity and my family's identity. Because the person who made the comment that insulted me, that I wasn't able to not take personally in front of everyone, said something disgraceful about African American women.

What you said made me think of that Greta, because the first person that I thought of when that comment was made was my own mother. It was as a Black man, not to make light of the moment, but the person was effectively talking about my mama. You know what I mean? When you get into that level of closeness to one's heart and one's being, and one's just manner of existence, it really denied me in that moment, the capacity, as you described, Greta, to give up privilege and give up space. What I ended up doing was, despite all of the training and personal growth that I do to try not to be defensive and not to be defensive in the gender dynamic, unfortunately that participant brought me into that space.

What I learned from that was that me becoming angry was actually an affirmation to a certain extent of the historic gender roles in that context. Because of that, I now will be better in the future if something like that occurs. That's the takeaway that I'm really trying to lead towards in telling that story. Which is, if you get it wrong once or twice, don't lose the possibility that you could learn something about yourself, your limits, your triggers, and then not allow that to happen again. That moment, actually as terrible as it was, not only made me a better facilitator, but it also further broke me out of the mold of thinking that I had some duty that society tells me to stand up for the women in this context. Stand up for my mama, you know what I mean? It was a real ugly moment for us all.

PUGH: Thank you for sharing that, Aaron, Greta and Anne. I think it's important for us to talk about how this work has impacted us and how we've learned from it. And how there's a lot of pain and healing and opportunity to move forward. Maybe there's a lot more we can talk about in terms of healing and moving forward, really about self care because the work is hard. I mean, we're talking about stuff that we keep talking about, we haven't figured it out yet. Especially with audiences that sometimes that power control gets us in a way, where no matter how prepared and we've seen it all, we still take it home. We need to decompress and we need to process it.

We're running out of time and there's much more we could be talking about, we need to talk about when we talk about this audience and our facilitation and this work that we do. We talked about some advice to give in terms of facilitation, preparing for a difficult conversation, courageous conversation. Any advice that you would have? One or two kernels that we haven't talked about. Whether it's about preparing with your co-presenter, or decompressing, or if you're not a lawyer, if you're not a justice, any advice in terms of people who are listening that want to do this work or struggle in this work? Anne.

MCKEIG: I think that I just want to hit on the point of the self care, because that's usually what we talk about last and it is really important. If you are going to do this work, you've heard today and on the other podcast that it's very challenging. It also can be extremely rewarding, but you have to of know yourself well enough to know how this is going to impact you and take the time to think about that and then how you're going to address it. Because I think left unaddressed, it impacts you in ways that sometimes we don't even think about. It can be physical, it can be emotional. I think about even just sitting as a judge and people that I have seen come through the court process, particularly where there is violence within the home, and talking to couples and saying that I've seen that physical transformation by not addressing the stresses and stressors.

I think just what I would say is know who you are, know what you stand for, make sure that you do have confidence, but also make sure that you have some way of taking care of yourself after these trainings. Also, knowing that if it's not working, don't force it. There's lots of other things that you can be doing to still do work in the area and not actually have to be a facilitator. Because I don't think it ever works when it's forced and it's having that negative impact on you. But it is really important work and just know that there's also a very rewarding side to it.

PUGH: Thank you. Aaron, did you want to share some kernels of advice?

POLKEY: Sure, yeah. My advice would be that many of us won't receive immediately to our satisfaction, the feedback that we had a great training or a great facilitation experience. Everybody may just walk out of the room and everyone looks like they had a horrible time. Or you may see blank and with apparently dejected faces. Or you look at your evaluations and 20 of them are neutral or good, but there's a couple of them that say really biting things about you or the experience that they had. Don't get lost in those circumstances and don't dwell on it.

My advice is just to what we say, just leave it on the field. The reason why we know that that's something that works and the reason why I'm confident in giving that advice is because we all who have done trainings frequently have had those experiences where you had a difficult person in the room or the room just looked like they had a horrible time, or you may have seen some evaluations. But then at some point you're in a hallway, or you get an email, or you encounter the person who was being difficult and they'll say to you, and it happens much more frequently than I ever expected, they'll say to you, "That was a good training," or, "I really appreciated this point that you made when you said blah, blah, blah." Or, "You gave me something to think about."

Your feedback isn't always going to be instant or gratifying, but if you gave it your all, if you stayed true to your goals, more likely than not, you did reach somebody. And reaching somebody is the best that we can ask for in our line of work.

PUGH: Thank you. And last, but not least, Greta, did you want to share some advice?

GARDNER: Sure. I know we've talked a lot about being prepared, but don't be over prepared. You have to pivot and be flexible and go with the flow so that you can move the conversation where it needs to go. Be prepared, but just be nimble. The second thing is, and I hope my colleagues agree with me, that even though you're having very heavy conversations, courageous conversations about challenging topics, never underestimate the power of well placed levity and humor to bring an audience back so that they can disarm themselves in a way. I have different pieces where I facilitate different conversations where I know if it's getting too heavy, I'm going to say this or I'm going to bring this into the room because everyone's gone way too far and it's way too dark. That's where people start lashing out. It's okay. I mean, obviously you want to be respectful and you have to be well timed and make sure you don't go too far. But there are places for that. One of the best evaluations I've ever received is that I really appreciated the moments of levity. I really appreciated being able to talk about some of the topics in a lighthearted way.

PUGH: I appreciate you, I appreciate all of you. Thank you so much for joining us in the podcast two, preparing for challenging and courageous conversations. Luckily, we have one more podcast in this series and it's going to dig even deeper in these facilitating challenges in intimate partner violence, education and programming. Greta will be back with us and Judge Jeff Cramers will be back with us. We'll have a new guest, Loretta Frederick, who has been doing this work for many, many years. Justice Anne McKeig, we're going to miss you so much. But thank you for sharing all of your truth and wisdom with us here today. Thank you.