Déconstruire les croyances qui nous desservent - Dialogue avec Louise Aubery

When you're successful, you spend energy, but you earn even more. Because what you do gives you a lot of energy. I don't believe in the phrase « Choose a job and you'll never feel like you're working a day in your life ». No, I work a lot. It's just that, it's true, I chose to do a job where I earn more energy than I spend. And so, I can have a great ability to work. But that doesn't mean I don't rest, etc. The danger is to monitor your energy level. And if your energy level is positive, then keep going. If it's negative, it means you have to change something. In general, when we think of influencers, we think of all those who sell diets, aesthetic surgery, to match a certain image. What's great about Louise Obery is that she works, on the contrary, to deconstruct this whole set of instructions, of rules, of injunctions. How to make peace, how to free yourself from injunctions, how to be yourself, to flourish, how to know how to listen. This is what I propose to explore with Louise Obery in this episode of Dialogue. Hello Louise, I am really very happy to welcome you to Dialogue. Would you like to introduce yourself very quickly? With great pleasure. My name is Louise Obery, I am 26 years old, I am a content creator, entrepreneur and author. And I am, in particular, the author of Mirror Mirror, Tell Me What I Really Want, an essay in which I wanted to return to the origins of inequalities and explain the injunctions that weigh today on the shoulders of women. So, what fascinated me, why I wanted to invite you, is that people who are, in quotation marks, what we call influencers, we know a lot of them. But what strikes me about you is that you are, you feel that you are inhabited by something, to try to enlighten, something for others, to really have a commitment. And deep down, your book is the result of this commitment. And your commitment here is to try to deconstruct what is locking us up. Exactly. I can just say, deconstruct is a very important word, it is a word that comes from philosophy and that really tries to say that we are prisoners of structures that we do not realize. Something that makes structure, that's why we talk about deconstructing. And you spot, with a lot of honesty, sincerity, so it's not at all an abstract book, but it talks about your experience, how we are stuck and how we must deconstruct. Yes, in fact, I could see that sexism was still omnipresent for all the women around me, and yet there was a bit of this discourse according to which we had made the feminist revolution, we had the rights that we had to have, that the equality of rights, and it's true, is reached in theory in France. And I couldn't, well, I rather wanted to be able to identify what made us still subject to certain injunctions, to certain mechanisms, and which, as I said very well, locked us up and therefore prevented us from really being ourselves. I could see, you see, if we take a very concrete example, which may seem superficial, but that when I did not introduce myself to the world, wearing makeup, getting ready, as many men can do, without having negative consequences on their lives, I was not treated in the same way, I was not considered, and so I forced myself to perform what was expected of me, so to perform femininity, to be able to be integrated, to be able to conform. And in fact, I realized, it's a bit like a ball where you unwind the thread, that when you start from that, for example, and you say to yourself, but why? Why am I not considered in the same way when I am not ready? And you answer, and by thinking, you say, well, because it's the role of the woman. But why is it the role of the woman? Well, because historically, the woman has been... And when you unwind, unwind, unwind, unwind, you come to the origin, finally, and I realized that I was not aware of that, I was not aware of the origin, and that being aware of it allows me to free myself. Because basically, what is important to say is that your commitment is not to do something theoretical on the issue of women, it is to leave what prevents us from being ourselves. That's the title of your book. Why your book... It's called Mirror Mirror, tell me what I really want? Because it's a bit like a wink at Snow White, which I'm sure is one of your favorite movies, where the witch asks the mirror, Mirror Mirror, tell me who is the most beautiful, and which, for a whole generation, sent back the idea that the value of a woman lies in her beauty. In other words, all that matters to the witch is to be beautiful. And I really asked myself the question, knowing that I, too, as a teenager, considered that my greatest value had to rest in that, and that I had to try at all costs to be beautiful. Knowing that I realized that it was an illusion, I asked myself, OK, but now, where does my value rest? Because I think you can't just tell someone, no, but you don't care about beauty, focus on who you are inside. If you don't understand where it's coming from, and so you're a victim of this system, it's very hard for you to get rid of it. And once you've understood it, I think you have to put your value elsewhere to be able to have that energy to re-allocate somewhere, otherwise you'll be left out. So that's why I called it that. I'm going to pause the episode for a few seconds to say thank you. If you're on my channel and you're so numerous to listen to Dialogue, it's because you're interested in taking care of yourself, to care for the world, to want to develop more affection, tenderness, warmth in this world that really needs it. And if you want to be aware of everything I offer, Dialogue, courses, meetings, it's very simple. Sign up for my newsletter by clicking on the link below and you'll even receive a little gift. Now, I'm coming back to the rest of this Dialogue. Do you want to tell us a little bit about what you share with the reader? The suffering you experienced as a teenager while being a prisoner of this image, so that people can understand how concrete it is. And this vision that you had to be beautiful, does it imply torture, in the end? Yes, of course, as a sacrifice, as unfortunately too many teenagers still today. I was really obnobulated by appearance. I had a twin sister, well, I still have a twin sister, so we were compared a lot. And this somewhat omnipresent comparison could be unhealthy because we always have someone next to us to evaluate. But hey, it can be the case with our brothers and sisters, it can be the case with our friends, it can be the case with our entourage. And so, I compared myself all the time to her, all the time to the girls in the magazines. And I thought to myself, but why does she have this body and not me? If my twin sister has a flat stomach, why can't I have it? So it was due to a great restriction, especially in terms of food and sports, to try to have a physique that I considered perfect. And by being totally a girl, and that's what, with hindsight, I think, hurts me the most towards myself at that time, it's that I didn't consider my body for what it was, but really just like a simple envelope that had to look like something. So rather than listening to my body, which should still be the basis, namely to feed it when I was hungry, I totally disregarded it. It was like a tool that I had to tame, and so I had to go beyond the signs of hunger, I always had to be in healthy eating, not to make distances, so here too, not even listening to my pleasures or my desires, whereas for me, today, it's my own life. And so it went through a form of... What term could we use? It went through a form of disregard for my body, and a sentence, a quote that I have in the book, it's, your body is an instrument, not a frame, and I saw it, as unfortunately too many teenagers, just as what it looked like and not what it really was. So I lost a lot of time, I lost a lot of money trying different techniques, methods to lose weight. I really sacrificed a part of my mental health in this search for perfection, which I have, spoiler, never achieved. So now, when we're going to eat together, at least you have fun, you're really alive. And deep down, I'm telling this anecdote because what I find really striking, which is important to show throughout your book, is how to find joy. There's an element that you say, which I think is very important, it's that this pressure to have a certain body makes you spend your time looking for the energy you lose to want to lose weight, to correspond to something, and it doesn't work at all. And you tell very well how much it poisoned you. Yes, it did. In fact, it becomes, I think, almost a mission of life. And that's where I say it's important to reallocate this energy elsewhere afterwards. It's because I think we all have this energy in us, this desire to be better, to progress. And the problem is that in the performance of femininity as we consider it today, this energy is almost entirely directed in appearance, or in weight. Appearance, with the violence you need to respond to this appearance, with the fact of not listening to our real needs to enter this appearance. So there's a whole game of violence. And here we can see that this weight that you describe is not just abstract, but manifests itself. And how, for example, how did you get over it? Because it's not about stopping taking care of your body and paying attention to what you eat. But how did you get over this model, violent, that attacked you, to the relationship you have today? Because it's not that you don't have any... It's not that you just stopped being beautiful, taking care of your body, etc. On the contrary, but in a way that is freer, more listening to yourself, and that takes up the title of your book. What do I really want from myself? Could you describe this great movement? Of course, it's a long process because it's a process, first of all, at least for my part, of reflection. Because that's why, even if it's fashionable today to make very practical drawings and to say, here, to be happy, this is what you have to do. I would never pretend to do it because we can't apply a method to everyone. So for me, it's important to combine theory and practice because I think that when you know why you are a victim of an injunction, it's much easier to get rid of it. And so, in fact, for me, it was really realized that it was the consequence of patriarchy and that it was almost a form, on my part, of rebellion, not to bend in it because bending in it would be a form of perpetuation of this system that I denounce. It's important. People, a lot of young people, but still old people, want to lose weight to look like an image thinking that's what they want without realizing that that's not what they want. They are manipulated. It's based on a very old structure that identifies the woman with something, that deprives her of her own power and her own rights. And so that's what you're trying to deconstruct and show. Obviously, it's quite shocking since most people say, but if I want to lose weight, I want to be like that. Well, in reality, you don't realize all this structure that is insidious. So there are several things that I want to say in relation to that. It's that, you see, it's certain that we have to bring nuance. First, it would be a lie to say that it's not easier today to exist in our society by corresponding to beauty standards. It's easier. And so I would never criticize people who choose to perform femininity or masculinity because society rewards them for it. But I want it to be their choice. When I was 17, 18, 19 years old, it wasn't my choice. It was, for me, the only possible way. And I felt like it was even my duty. I felt like, as a woman, it was almost disrespectful to present myself to the world without makeup, well, naturally. You see, for me, the natural was... And when I think about it, it's really terrible because, as a result, I was really putting my value in something that doesn't depend on me, or very little on me, despite all the control I was trying to bring. And then, to talk about the fact that, in fact, we often have the impression that we want to be beautiful or we want to be thin for ourselves and that, in the end, it's for others. In fact, I realized it very quickly by asking myself the question, if I were all alone in a forest, would I eat what I want or would I impose myself the same food rigor as if I knew very well that I would have to appear to the world? And it's still a good way to know why we do things. And even if it's for others, in fact, I don't want it to become, for the people watching us and who may be in this diagram, that it's at the expense of your mental health. Because we talk a lot about physical health and yes, eating healthy is good for your health, but eating healthy can become dangerous for your mental health. But the way people want... I'm taking my editor's cap who has worked a lot on these subjects, the way we help people lose weight and control their diet doesn't work. It goes against their health, it attacks them. And we know that no diet works. And it's scientifically proven, etc. That the bodies are different. So there, and even losing weight can only be done by respecting your body and getting out of the will to control it. That the will to control doesn't work, it's violent. So that's also it, it's that there's a model that we present, but behind it, there's a whole extremely violent framework. I'm going to lose weight, I'm going to control myself. Anyone who wants to control themselves cracks up. So we're caught in a vicious circle of guilt. I cracked up, I'm bad, I'm angry. But no, I'm going to be even stronger next time. Instead of finding an inner balance that comes from a form of listening to oneself. And above all, what I question in the book, and what really puzzled me, is when and why we started from the principle that getting into a size 34 or 36 was worth more than listening to yourself and enjoying yourself. You see, me, because there are some people who don't know me and they'll say, well, easy to say, she's thin. I've gained a little over, almost 15 kilos in the last eight years. So yes, I was very thin, precisely because I fell into that excess. But today, I really have this philosophy of life where you see, you said, we don't say you shouldn't pay attention to what you eat. I don't like the term pay attention. That is, food is not going to jump on us. Food is not an enemy. Of course, we are aware of what is good or bad for our health. But in fact, it's all a matter of balance. So, and in fact, I say it because when we're a little caught up in this spiral of anorexia or orthorexia or bulimia, we sometimes tend to label foods and say, OK, that's good, that's bad. And suddenly forbid certain foods, while we don't say enough that everything without excess, in fact, is not harmful. I mean, I have to say, I ate viennoiserie, I ate sweets, in a world where there are books on why you should stop eating sugar, etc. I am much happier and in good health now that I allow myself to do that, than at the time when I only ate vegetables and where I had a so-called perfect diet, which was not necessarily a diet in the sense that you see, I ate a lot and all, but I was just looking for perfection that didn't get me anywhere except misfortune. Yes, it's really essential to see this reversal, but it's something you take care of a lot because on your networks, even with your job, one of your jobs, you promote the possibility, you give images, there is a real commitment. You publish on your social networks a lot of images of women who are well in their skin and who come out of that standard. Yes, because as you said very well, there are morphologies and a lot of people tend to make a shortcut between weight and health. And there is a correlation, but that doesn't mean that there is necessarily a general truth and a causality to establish between the two. There are people, for many different reasons, who have a weight higher than the average IMC and who are still in good health and above all, you have to stop judging, criticizing or prohibiting yourself from enjoying yourself. Because in fact, I really went through a state of mind where my goal is not to please others, but to please myself. And in fact, I like to eat croissants, you know. It's the best way to please others, because you can feel it in your skin. And again, we must insist, the epidemics that there are today of overweight do not come from people listening to each other, they come from all this stuff. I control myself, I crack, I am manipulated. They come from psychological problems linked to the injunctions of society, by the way. Yes, I don't know what I want anymore. But how did you... Was it easy? How did you come to what you do a lot in your networks, to show yourself... Natural, you can say. Natural, yes, with lingerie, etc. How did you... Was it therapeutic for you? How did you do it? Using the introduction that I feel in you, which touches me a lot, the will to help people. We can see that you do this so that people can have other images. But how did it work for you? Listen, you're right, it was therapeutic, the networks for that. Because when I started sharing photos a little before, after, inverted, so it was at least five, six years ago now, where, you know, we saw a lot of weight loss photos and we congratulate weight loss, as if it were a form of accomplishment and that what it means that weight loss was a failure. And again, I don't agree with that at all. And I think I'm the proof. Well, to receive so many messages from people who thanked me, to show that we could gain weight and be happy, that we could gain weight and be in good health, that weight loss was not an end in itself or a victory in itself. It galvanized me a lot to continue to share this message and to show all these women that they were not alone. And that's why you said that I created the underwear brand to address all bodies and represent all bodies. Because I think it's still distressing that we don't represent them. Because, as a result, we establish a hierarchy between bodies that contributes to perpetuate beauty standards that contribute to our complexes. And so my goal is really... Yeah, actually, I think my real goal is for women to be more complex. And for men watching us, it's not that I want you to be complex. It's just that, as a woman, the reality I know is this one. It's that of the injunction to femininity. And so you received Ben Ever, who speaks very well of virility. So there you go. It's not an opposition between the two. And by the way, Olivia Gazelle wrote a great book, The Myth of Virility, which shows that it is virility that is also born, the injunction to femininity. But I focus on that because that's what I've known, that's what I've been a victim of. And that's, I think, what I've come out of today. How do you do it? It's one of the great acts of your work, to free yourself from the gaze of others. Because deep down, your commitment is precisely to stop feeling guilty, to feel remorse, to be ashamed. And that, unlike what we know from books, you show very well in your book, look at how you are imprisoned. For me, a fundamental question is why. In fact, if we start to... If we take the reflex to ask ourselves the question why, why do we do things, we manage to be aligned and therefore to free ourselves from the gaze of others. And it's a daily job. So why did I dress like this today? Well, you see, I know why. I wanted to wear green because now I'm red and I think it goes well together. Why do I put on makeup and not my skin? Because I like to put on makeup, but I don't like to put on makeup because I have skin problems. I don't want it to get in the way of my skin problems. In fact, I now know why I do it. And I think it's a question that we don't ask ourselves enough and that would allow us to identify if we really want to perform femininity or not. Because my goal is not to say... And again, it's really a speech that people will simplify, I don't know, to denounce my point, but my goal is not to say, go out in your pajamas, in your bed. In fact, it's do it if you're comfortable with doing it. But if you ever want to wear lipstick because it makes you feel super powerful, if you ever want to wear high heels because you like your safety with them, or on the contrary, sneakers because you're fed up with inflicting heels on your feet, well, actually, do it. What I mean is that there are no rules except those that we have decided that you should respect. And I'm pretty radical about that, and we may not agree, but for me, all the rules of society are social constructions that can be deconstructed. So I'm really for a self-affirmation that is full, as long as it does not harm others. But you see, there is a discourse that we can oppose, that is, Louise, to live in society, you need social conventions. Well, yes, if you decide that you need them, but in fact, if you decide that you want to live in your truth and that it does not hurt anyone else, and if it hurts them just because they are closed-minded, well, I was going to tell you, it's not up to you to prevent yourself from being who you want to be. Or we could say that social constructions are social constructions. We could say that too. What you do in your book is to say, recognize that social constructions are only social constructions and do not take them for a truth that we are not allowed to question, to discuss. Because deep down, you are not against social constructions. You just oppose the fact that they are taken as an indisputable, logical, transcendent, normative truth. Deep down, no. A construction, the way a woman should be today, is not a truth. It depends on the cultures, it depends on the worlds. And to transcend, to be free, is not to erase them all, but it is to have a slightly freer relationship and to be able to do as you say, to do as you want with it, instead of being submissive to it. Are there other social conventions that you find particularly oppressive in the fact of being able to be a little more yourself when you are a woman? Are there other social conventions? In fact, what bothers me the most today is what we call the male gaze, that is to say, the objectification of the woman. And in fact, it is felt in a very insidious way in the cinematographic culture, in the literary culture, in porn. And in fact, as long as... You see, I don't know when this video will come out, but a few days ago, there was this Spanish journalist who got her butt touched in public. She was live, and there was a guy who came and touched her butt. And you see, the world was outraged. There were guys who commented, no, but it's the exception, it never happens, etc. But in fact, yes, it happens way too often, because this man is imbued with this male gaze where he assumes that the woman's body belongs to him because that's what we show him in movies, in porn, etc. And suddenly, we are victims of this on a daily basis, whether in professional life, in love life, in social life. And that's what explains the conjugal violence, in large part. It's that, culturally, many men still assume that their woman's body belongs to them and therefore they can do whatever they want with it. So I would say that's what bothers me a lot. It's this consideration of the woman as an object and that, said like that, may seem a little pulled by the hair. So I really detail where it comes from in the book. But the more I move forward in life, the more I realize that it explains a lot of the behavior of men and that it ultimately harms both men and women. And that we have to reinvent a feminine imagination, which we are doing with the emergence of powerful women who exist for something other than their physique. But it's true that as long as we haven't, I think, made this revolution, we will always be confined to this objectification. It's very difficult, what you're talking about, because deep down you show that the way a woman should be, aesthetically, corresponding to standards, implies that she becomes an object that men can, a little, instrumentalize, abuse, take. And there you show a whole structure that is important to identify to get out of it. So we can see, it's not about saying that a woman should no longer wear lipstick, but not to become an object in the power of men, because it doesn't allow a real relationship, neither for men nor for women. That's what I like about it. Yes, absolutely. In fact, it's true that it's a bit the theme of my podcast or my networks, it's a bit about taking back the power of one's life. And it goes through writing one's own story, affirming one's own narrative, what we have been deprived of for years, even centuries. So it's true that we can't necessarily find it overnight. But it's true that today, for me, it's really crucial to change this narrative. And you see, there are videos that show it very well. I don't know if you've seen this video where we asked entrepreneurs the same questions we ask women entrepreneurs, well, entrepreneurs, the questions we ask women entrepreneurs. And in fact, they were completely lost. They didn't understand. And in fact, in the end, we explained to them the why and the how. And you see, it's this kind of exercise that can open your eyes. And in fact, what is complicated in our society... I didn't quite understand, sorry. So, for example, if we had an interview together, you're a big entrepreneur, and I tell you, so today, it's okay, the alarm clock is not too difficult, the kids, you dropped them off at school. You see, the guy in front of you comes like, yeah, no, it's okay, and everything. Very good. Your shirt will delight with your skin. It's really beautiful. It's true, right away. We can see right away. Only comments that a lot of women have the right to in an interview, whatever the job they do. It's clear. Which starts with a good intention, but it's just less the difference in treatment that I'm denouncing. Yes, the story you're telling shows very well how much we don't realize it. And the fact that we are a man or a woman conditions something fundamental of what we are. Yes, and in fact, what is complicated in our society today is that the principle of privileges is that we don't realize that we have them as long as we haven't lost them. And so, we are a bit in a society, but for any discrimination, which is a bit deaf, because as long as we haven't experienced the form of discrimination that we denounce, people who haven't experienced it will not understand what we're talking about. And so, for example, I, having never experienced racial discrimination, it's going to be difficult for me to realize the discriminations of which racialized people are victims. And for men who have never experienced sexism, it's true that there is a discourse, again, sometimes, where we go through reluctant people, hysterical people, radical people, because they themselves have absolutely no awareness, since they have never been afraid of going home at night when they pass in a small alley, or that they have never been whistled at in the street, or touched against their will. So, it's a bit of the pedagogy that needs to be done. And then... It's clear, we don't understand. I must admit that in my work as an editor, I work with... It's a job that has become quite feminine. Speaking with many of my colleagues in recent months, having read your book and other books, we had lunch, I asked them questions, they revealed to me how so many male authors are heavy, entrepreneurs, abuse, play on the sensitive string, play with their power. And I must say, it was for me, I had tears in my eyes to feel this violence that we don't talk about, that must be prevented. They have the impression that they just have a work lunch, and then it goes further, you don't know what to do, you feel sucked in, because you have already accepted the meal, because you think you've done the work, and it takes you further. And I think it's very important to be able to spot what appears little. That's precisely why I added a chapter in the new edition of the book, a manual of responses to sexist remarks. Because we got there. I receive a lot of messages from my community, from people who tell me, I received this or that remark, whether it's when you're a woman or a man, you know, I'm single, I get messages, why would a woman like you be single? Why not, actually? In short, on... I don't want you to be told that you're giving birth again, because it's... What's the big deal? You're 30 and you don't have children. But be careful, the biological clock is ticking. Men also undergo injunctions. Well, I'll let you talk about it, because you know better than me. But anyway, I list all the sentences, or at least a lot of sentences that we can have. For example, why are you dressed like that? You're looking for it. You say, so you're against gallantry? Yeah. That's very well seen. Yeah, but actually, lots of sentences that are easy to replicate and sometimes to which we can feel... in front of which we can feel diminished because we don't necessarily know what to answer. Because, once again, it's not... These are attacks that are a bit insidious. And so I wanted to have a practical side at the end, by saying, well, here are the answers that you can have for all the sexist remarks that you can take in the face on a daily basis and to be able to put people back in their place. Because, in fact, it's not you who's the problem. And if you ever want to dress like that, you have the right to. And no, you didn't look for it. When should we justify an aggression by the attire of a person and not by the fact that the aggressor is an aggressor who should be in prison? So there's that. And then, to go back to what you were saying, in fact, I think even now, you see, since I've been able to think about it since the release of the book, in fact, I really think the main difference today, for me, between men and women, lies in self-confidence. And in fact, why do the men you were talking about, for the authors and the authors that you represent, feel... Men feel that they have this confidence to impose themselves on a woman who, a priori, doesn't want them to do it. It's that we educate them to have this confidence in themselves, this confidence. You see, I was watching a podcast about a guy who passed the school contest four times and he said, in fact, I knew I was going to see her. In the first year, he had one in the contest. But he said to himself, I'm going to see her. And in fact, more and more, it makes me think how, on the contrary, women are not at all educated, but it's not by their parents, it's by society in general, to have this confidence. And as it is not well perceived. I mean, I, who still have confidence in myself, I've often heard my grandmother say, be careful Louise, you're going to scare men. Well, but everyone, you know. And in fact, I think that's terrible because, as a result, not only are they not educated to have confidence in themselves and it has an impact on their professional life and on their social life. It's that, as a result, men impose themselves more easily on us. There is also a dynamic of power that imposes itself like that. But on top of that, even if we have it, well, we're going to suffer from it. Socially, in particular, and in our romantic relationships, because it's not the pattern that's valued. It's important to clarify that because most of the speech on self-confidence is only psychological. What you're showing, no, no, no. Self-confidence is also built. It depends on a social construction. And if you find them confident in you, it's important that you do this work to be able to find out how they were taken away from you by these structures. Exactly. And to allow yourself to detach from it. If it doesn't seem fair to you. If it doesn't seem fair to you and if you ever want to... Well, in fact, it's similar to what we were saying at the beginning, that is, to please yourself before trying to please others. That is, if, for my part, having the level of confidence that I have displeases, well, too bad. I am happy with that. It serves me on a daily basis, in my life, in my work. And I chose to prioritize being good in my skin. And I think that sometimes it takes courage. Courage to prioritize, let's say, what society or others might think of us. There is another axis that you also raise, it is the relationship to children and maternity. As well, there too, all the injunctions that prevent a woman from knowing what she wants, what she would like, what is right for her, at what time. Do you want to try to break down this domain as well? In fact, yes, there are five domains that I mainly study in the book, beyond the theory on originationality. It's beauty, weight, maternity, old age, and the couple. And regarding maternity, it's true that it's a question that I think I've always asked myself, not being very close to my parents. And above all, I saw that many parents of my generation, of the generation of my parents, had children a little by principle. That is to say, as it is, yes, the order of things, I will not say the opposite, many do not ask themselves the question of why they want children, if they really want them, etc. Which sometimes does not serve the so-called children who did not ask to be there and who, suddenly, sometimes find themselves a little propelled in life with not necessarily the luggage necessary to face it. And I wondered a lot about the figure of the witch, which Mona Jolet has very brilliantly studied too, but which is really an archetype. So you see, in the Disney movies, it's always the bad girl. And when you study who is this bad girl who is ugly as a hen, well, it's a woman who has power, who has influence around her, who is not married, who has no man in her life, who has no children, who has chosen to be 100% free, and these three characteristics are always represented by a woman who is repulsive. So as if it was really the thing not to do when you are a woman. And that really puzzled me. I said to myself, why? Why a woman who has power, who has no man and who has no children, would necessarily be repulsive, despicable? And I just wanted to ask why we have children, why some women are happy without children, why it is not necessarily the purpose of a life. It can be. But I found that it was an extremely strong pressure, already for those who do not want it, but also and especially for those who cannot have it. And reinvent a little, as we said, in this desire to rewrite femininity, to invent another femininity. I want to participate in reinventing a femininity that not only does not reduce women to their physique, but which does not reduce women to their uterus either. And therefore say that you can be a woman without being a mother. It is a choice that is possible. You also do a lot of work, almost having fun, but also with a little gravity, to identify all the ways in which women have been deprived of their own power in history. I say with a little joy, because by showing that we do not learn that at school, we go to moments where women have had the right to vote and all that. And you try to identify the different moments of closure. And reading it in the book, we are still struck. Do you want to tell a few of your discoveries? Yeah, no, but it's sure that I was struck too. There are so many places where we say to ourselves, but why don't we know that? There are two main ones that struck me when I discovered them. It's one on physical strength, since it's still the main excuse to justify the domination of men over women. Yes, but it's because men are stronger. So in fact, historically, they had the upper hand, so they dominated women a bit. Well, again, no, it's not a question of nature, it's a question of choice, since many scientific studies have shown that if men went hunting, it's because women, being able to give birth, had to be confined to their interiors, which was an interpretation of the belly. And so, to hunt, they needed proteins to go kill animals. So they were given the proteins that were killed, while women and children had the buoys. And so, over centuries, even millennia, a difference in physical constitution was built between men and women, notably due to this fundamental food difference that greatly developed the musculature of men. So that's already a first effect that I think deserves to be known more. And the second, frankly, being made up of history, is the Salic law, which in 1574 changed the course of history. That is, we are taught that royalty was transmitted from father to son, and we are never taught why it was not transmitted from father to daughter, and why women were ultimately excluded from the throne. Because it was indeed a choice, and we realize, and I detail it in the book, that it really came from the falsification of a document where we changed the word land by crown, or from the inheritance of the land from father to son, we built the inheritance of the crown from father to son, by totally excluding women from the throne of France. And it was quite late, because before, women could be queens. Yes, exactly. And there were queens in France. There were a few queens in France, and some who reigned for quite a long time. And it was when we felt that it was a woman who was going to take the throne while we wanted, in the games of power, that it be a man, that we simply decided that, by divine right, we would find a text that justified that the crown was transmitted only to men. And it's really a quarrel between the Capetians and the Valois, and absolutely, at the beginning, has nothing to do with the questions of women, but it was a question of power, and it was just a way of... It was a strategy, but admit that it's still crazy that we learn about this at school. And it's crazy that people don't know how much women had a lot of freedom in the Middle Ages. Yes. And that it's a little after that things closed, as we also forget that we didn't burn the witches in the Middle Ages, but in the Renaissance, and that it was a genocide. It was really a persecution. And it's interesting to see that it also brings up a lot of things, and that we also burned the witches. It's because men wanted to have power with the creation of universities, etc. And that it was women who had influence of power who became threats because they did not conform to the established order. Do you remember how we said doctor in the Middle Ages for women? No. Miresse. And so, you see, it makes me laugh today, the debates there are on inclusive writing or on the terms that we are going to absolutely feminize. Because in fact, these are terms that existed in the Middle Ages. And it's just that at the creation of the French Academy, an institution that historically excluded women and was particularly sexist, we decided to eradicate all the terms, all the names of female professions. The other great example you speak of is the civil code. Yes, dear Napoleon. What is the most striking? Pick your fighter, I want to say. But what particularly caught my attention was that in the civil code, Napoleon submits the woman to her husband and that he claims that this submission is chosen because by signing the marriage contract, in fact, the woman chooses to finally become the object that we were talking about just before, but to really become the object of her husband. It was basically... The somewhat fallacious argument behind it is if you don't want to be submissive to your husband, you can't get married. Yes, but in fact, if you're not married, you can't exist because you have no legal legitimacy if you don't have a husband to meet your needs. So in fact, you were really forced to get married and therefore forced to be submissive and claim that it was a chosen submission. It's at best hypocritical and at worst dangerous. The movement of your book, which I hope we were able to clarify, is to make choices that correspond to us. And you tell yourself, so in the book there is a lot of sincerity, the different steps. You also tell, I find it quite strong in the book, how, thinking about being at your service, you will follow a program in Berkeley, go to the United States, a training to become an entrepreneur. I think it's a good example of how pressure can take us and how to do all the work you're trying to do, to free yourself from a pressure that makes us believe that we want something when we don't want it. It is indeed one of the most important points. In fact, it comes back to the question that I mentioned earlier, which is to really ask yourself why. I think I didn't ask myself at the time, I didn't ask myself why I was doing things. And I don't think you should ask yourself once, you have to ask yourself ten times. That is to say, you have to ask yourself why, why, why, why, why. And in fact, if I did this third year abroad in Berkeley, why? Because I wanted to be an entrepreneur. Why did I want to be an entrepreneur? Because I found it stylish to be an entrepreneur. And I stopped there. Whereas if we really detail why it is stylish to be an entrepreneur, because it is well seen by others. Why do you want to be well seen by others? Well, because I think I had a lack of recognition and I want to have it. And why is it by this means that you want to have it? In fact, doing this work really, I would say, said why, allows you to get to the reason why you do things. And suddenly, to realize if the means we identified is really the most just way to get there. And deep down, I think that what I really wanted was to have an impact. And yes, entrepreneurship is a way to get there, but in the absolute. After, I don't regret this experience because, well, I was 21 years old. Sometimes we don't have all the answers and you have to know how to deal with life, whether it works or not, to realize that we are on the right track or not. But in any case, what it taught me is that I now know that the best way to have an impact for me is not to try to build the biggest company possible, to raise millions of euros and then to try to conquer the world. It's a very capitalist American vision that doesn't suit me. And maybe if I had really asked myself that question, I would have realized that I didn't need to prove that to myself to have an impact and to try to get things moving. Well, the fact is that I went there. I didn't like it. It's beautiful because you achieve your dream, well, you believe it to be your dream. I'm at Berkeley, I'm in a good university. You're there and you say, and I think it takes a lot of courage, you say, but deep down, that's not what makes me really happy. That's not what I really want to do. And now I'm talking about it with hindsight, like, wisdom, it taught me things. But at the time, I had a depression. At the time, it's very hard, I find, to accept that you've made a mistake in your dream or that your dream isn't one. Well, you know, it's... But you were lucky enough to have this kind of depression because it allowed you to become yourself. Yes, yes, on the one hand, yes. After all, I have a hard time today, you know, I'm not at all for what doesn't kill us stronger. No, of course. I mean that because, you know, in personal development, there can be a gap. Yes, after all, you can learn lessons from it. In the absolute, I would have preferred not to suffer. What matters to me, what I was underlining, is not that. What I was underlining is how strong you were, by this suffering and all that, that allowed you to realize that it wasn't going to work. Because so many people in our world don't give themselves permission, even if they're going wrong, they keep pushing. But that's what I want to do. That was my vocation. And so many people find themselves ten years later and say, but shit, that's not the life I wanted at all. For me, what I find striking in your example, which is a bit at the heart of the whole book, is how we do, at some point, to be in agreement with what is deepest in us, even if it doesn't look like the norm. Realizing that the aesthetic canon that I am imposed on is not me, the fact of being locked up in this status of woman is not me, and even having the success of being in one of the great American schools, in the end, it's not me. That's what I think is the great lesson of your book. There's a concept I'm developing in the book that can help you identify what you were saying. Are we in the right place or not? For me, a very strong signal that I felt from there, even though I'm not someone who feels, you know, like you, I'm not super sensitive, so for me, it's sometimes difficult to listen to myself. But there, I really felt that I was spending more energy than I was making. And it's a bit like the theory for me of batteries, that is to say that when we are fulfilled, we spend energy, but we earn even more, because what we do gives us a lot of energy. So, for example, after a podcast, yes, I was able to spend two hours talking, you know, thinking, I go out, I can honestly do a marathon, you see, I'm galvanized. And there, in Berkeley, I would come home every night, but completely empty. I had done things that I didn't want to do. I just wanted to set up a company so much that I actually accepted things that didn't stand out at all. I was talking about tech all day, even though it's not really a center of interest that I have. And so, in fact, I was just emptying my batteries as I went along. And I filled it up sometimes, but it wasn't enough. And so, for me, that's what leads, if we take the extreme case, to burnout. It's, you see, I don't think so much of the phrase choose a job and you'll never feel like you're working one day in your life. No, I work a lot. It's just that, it's true, I chose to do a job where I earn more energy than I spend. And so, I don't want to have a lot of work capacity, but that doesn't mean I don't rest, etc. But for me, the danger is to monitor your energy level. And if your energy level is positive, then keep going. If it's negative, it means you have to change something. Thank you very much. I think that's a very nice conclusion. It was a great pleasure to share this moment with you. Me too, Fabrice. I feel that you are always so profoundly bright. And I hope that it inspires a lot of people to find their own light too and to understand that it is often hidden by all these structures that prevent us from being ourselves. Thank you very much. Thank you, Fabrice. Thank you for following this episode of Dialogue. I can't wait to read your comments. And if you don't want to miss the extraordinary surprises that I'm preparing for you, well, subscribe to my channel. I send you all my love. And I'll see you soon.