Our monthly(ish) community prompt // Last month, Stanford neuroscientist-turned-chart-topping-podcaster Andrew Huberman made appearances on two shows proffering one particular piece of advice that made me spit out my coffee, passed down from music producer and fellow podcaster Rick Rubin: “The key to being really great at something is to just be you." But this misses one crucial caveat . . . Our monthly(ish) community prompt, courtesy of Andrew Huberman and Rick Rubin
I also find it repulsive that Andrew Huberman talks about just “being himself” when he’s the kind of person who cheats on his girlfriend (who is going through IVF) with five other women. It’s so disturbing we look up to problematic figures!
On the business side, it doesn’t hold up either. Of course you want to be yourself and be in your zone of strength and be doing something that you are passionate about. But you have to get all the other market fit pieces in place, be able to sell and market effectively, generally visibility and opportunities and so many other things.
I’m disappointed also to learn what Aileen wrote above about Rick Rubin. I’ve always thought he was a really cool cat, which he is creatively, but please, to have such a poor representation of women that he obviously has access to in the creative circles he runs with is pretty disappointing.
I remain optimistic that one can make money from creative endeavors. They just have to be really connected to what the market actually wants to have all the gears running in that direction.
I know I miss your podcasts, but I totally understand why you needed to stop doing them!
Seriously!! What I find enraging is that even when we know about their very bad behavior, these types of (usually men) often still rise to the top (see: presidents of companies and countries). "Just be you" works for a verrrrry specific type of person that our society rewards. And it seems every now and then, an outlier will "make it" who doesn't fit that dominant archetype/mold, but those are rare.
Thank you for weighing in re: what you've seen working with so many small business owners, and for your words about the podcasts!! I do hope to bring them back someday, maybe in a totally different re-imagining (or frequency, or format — who knows :)
Pam, you are one of the women I look to! And Jenny! And people like Michele Woodward and Desiree Adaway, and I could go on and on. There are so many, so very smart women in business out there. I don't need to listen to bros like Huberman for advice on anything (for instance, try Dr. Jen Gunter for medical things).
As far as Rick Rubin, my time in looking towards him as a man of great creativity, well, let's just say it's better informed now -- imagine how much more creative he could be if he included women's voices! He is stunting himself; his loss. I will watch, for instance, Brandi Carlile and what she's doing now as a producer and behind the scenes -- giving voice and audience to women of color and LGBTQIA+ women in places where they have previously been shut out. That's where the future is. Not with older white men like Rubin. He had his time, but I truly believe it's passing b/c people are seeing him with clear eyes, as he continues to show us (so many reviews on Apple Podcasts mirror my own review -- "where are the women?")
So well said Aileen!! I have noticed that with so many male podcasters; even if their subject matter is writing or creativity, their guests are 80-90% male. As if men are the only ones who are worth interviewing in those categories?! Such a ridiculous blind spot.
Reminds me of the Jann Wenner debacle (what an idiot). Quoting from a Classic Rock website, "The media magnate’s new tome, released on Tuesday, compiles interviews he conducted with seven “masters” of rock ’n’ roll: Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Mick Jagger, Jerry Garcia, Pete Townshend, Bono and Bruce Springsteen. In an interview with The New York Times to promote the book, Wenner defended his decision to feature exclusively white men by arguing that female artists and artists of color “just didn’t articulate” at the same “intellectual level” as their peers." https://ultimateclassicrock.com/jann-wenner-the-masters-flops/
I'm so glad they removed him from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame after that! Atrocious.
YES! And how he doubled-down on his position when asked about it. So ridiculous. And unfortunately, likely so many more out there with his thinking. Sometimes it feels like an uphill battle esp when men like that are the gate-keepers to so much promotion, upward mobility, visibility, air-time, etc.. Frustrating.
I have to say, I don't take any advice from Andrew Huberman, esp in light of his recent controversy. He's always seemed like a "bro" guy to me, and that investigation solidified something I've always sensed.
With respect to Rick Rubin, I have always held him in high regard, admired his work for decades, loved his creativity and way of looking at things and the music he produced. And then he started his podcast. And week after week after week, it was male guest after male guest after male guest. The purpose of his podcast, as he stated, was to follow his inspiration. And it hit me, he's not for me. Because women are not for him. He may work with them, take money from them, etc.., but he doesn't admire them or like them or chose to platform them. Things may have changed at his podcast, idk. I emailed him, I left a review pointing this out (the glaring imbalance between genders etc), but nothing changed, so I stopped following. After 47 episodes (last time I did a full analysis), he had 44 male guests and 3 female guests -- a whole .06% of his guests. In today's age, tell me he can't find more women he admires or whom inspire him? That's a problem.
(And before I hit "post" here, I scanned Rubin's podcast again -- nothing has changed -- very occasionally a female guest, but the others are mostly "bros.")
As I've gotten older, I am definitely more discerning in whom I take advice from and for the most part, if it's a man espousing his advice, I will look elsewhere. He doesn't understand my situation, doesn't know my world, and I know, in this day and age, I can find a woman who is smarter and who does. I will find her.
I replied on our thread above, but just to say that this gender imbalance of podcast guests ENRAGES me too; especially for shows I *want* to like!! Check out the ratio on How I Write 🙄 https://pod.link/1700171470
Love the discussion so far. I'm thinking about attachment theory too. If a person grew up with caregivers who encouraged authenticity and "being yourself," then it's a much easier path to continue that in adulthood. But if we grew up suppressing ourselves to be fed, to be protected, to feel love, then it's quite the ask to "just be yourself."
That is such a great point. If you grew up having the "take the temperature" of the room and adjust yourself to whomever you needed to be in order to be safe, then you're absolutely right -- it's hard to know who "yourself" really is (it becomes whoever you need to be in the moment and that can change on a hourly/daily/weekly basis).
If you're a bro' with a beard, or a billionaire with a rocket ship, you can surely be yourself. What are the true risks?
I'm all for authenticity, but if you're a member of marginalized group (whether that be your gender, race, class, neurodivergence or other differences, it might be wise to take a good hard look around the room (or the potential podcasting audience) and assess your psychological safety first.
We weigh the risks:
Will sharing this information/story hurt my career possibilities, or possibly show my leadership on an issue I care about?
Do I care if these folks have a good or poor opinion about me? Will they be able to understand the nuances of the courageous stand I plan to take?
Who are my allies in the room or the space? Is someone handing me the mike to highlight my expertise, or to prove they know more than me? Do I have a sponsor or mentor who would discuss or test this idea with me before I bring it to a larger group?
Is this [issue] a non-negotiable for me, or is it a request/disclosure that might make me appear like I can't handle the workload (job interview related)?
Over the years, as a White-presenting Mexican American woman born in Wisconsin, I've had the privilege of showing up in the ways that felt mostly authentic, but also strategic. But it hasn't always been an easy balance. When your job is [perceived as] secure, you have a lot more leverage to speak your mind. On the other hand, when your boss has already shown signs of racism or misogyny, sometimes you need to pick your battles.
I would never advocate to pretend to be someone else or fake your agreement with a group or team. However, we must often position ourselves to foster trust with folks 1:1 to build alliances before presenting something too radical for the setting. It requires a lot of emotional labor, but you also make a lot of friends and allies along the way. ❣️
Also, for the record, 80% of my podcast listening is from women. There are a few public radio podcasts mixed in with male voices (for balance, ha!). Innovation happens at the margins, and that’s one place I’ve found my soul tribe too. ;-)
Thank you so much for this beautiful comment, Christy — an essay in itself! I'm so grateful for you sharing your thoughts and perspective, you've really added so much to the conversation here (as you always do!) 🙏 I especially love this last line, " Innovation happens at the margins, and that’s one place I’ve found my soul tribe too. ;-)" ❤️ ❤️ ❤️
I agree it's fairly useless advice but everybody says it not just podcaster bros. I just googled "be yourself" next to Marie Forleo, Elizabeth Gilbert, Shonda Rhimes, Brenee Brown, Michelle Obama and Oprah. They've all said it in the context of career success.
Julia, fascinating that you searched (and found!) it as advice from all these female top-of-their-game peeps as well . . . the advice just seems so incomplete. While it's MUCH easier to be yourself than to fake being someone else (again, even easier if "yourself" aligns with market needs/wants/tastes) but it really falls short on recognizing that there are so many other ingredients required to really make it at these levels.
Yeah it's an axiom. Certainly not sufficient and in my case not even necessary. None of my accounting clients need to know that I think taxation is theft 😆 even though that's my "true self"
Omg, I love this take on the popular advice: just be yourself as long as that self is palatable for public consumption: i.e. mainstream, cis, white, male, American, etc. I do think that authenticity is an important quality for life in general but career success is a whole different beast. Aside from podcasting, which is a whole different realm, in most types of careers the companies mostly don’t care about your truest, deepest self but the value you are adding and creating. While it’s considered cute and desirable to have some (palatable) authenticity and charisma, it is very far from the truth that that’s the key ingredient for success. If anything, learning the hidden rules and how to be strategic will take you much further in career realm than pure authenticity, even though it makes it for a really powerful self-help message. I also think that such message moves us away from thinking about why is economy messed up, how are our institutions failing us and instead try to “be more of our true selves” hoping that that pursuit will eventually result in career growth. And also blaming our lack of success on not being authentic enough, which is another (powerful) fallacy
So well said Milena!! Thank you for weighing in! I love the distinction you make with this part, "While it’s considered cute and desirable to have some (palatable) authenticity and charisma, it is very far from the truth that that’s the key ingredient for success. If anything, learning the hidden rules and how to be strategic will take you much further in career realm than pure authenticity, even though it makes it for a really powerful self-help message."
And sooo true that the "be yourself" message takes us back to an individualist view of success or failure, while completely ignoring the structural problems that make that difficult. I love how you shed light on the tendency to "blam[e] our lack of success on not being authentic enough, which is another (powerful) fallacy." Thank you for adding so much to this conversation!!
"Be yourself" feels to me advice that is akin to any diet plan..."just stick to the plan" (even if that plan is impossible to follow long term and requires an enormous amount of willpower that no human can sustain for long). It's not the diet's fault! If only YOU had the commitment to stick to it, you'd be skinny!!
Same platitudes apply here...are you REALLY being YOURSELF? Maybe you missed something, still trying too hard, caring too much about success, not ignoring the rest of the world enough to JUST BE YOU!! We just need to find our selfier-self!! THEN the world will notice and reward us.
I agree with your analysis, Jenny.
I also find it repulsive that Andrew Huberman talks about just “being himself” when he’s the kind of person who cheats on his girlfriend (who is going through IVF) with five other women. It’s so disturbing we look up to problematic figures!
On the business side, it doesn’t hold up either. Of course you want to be yourself and be in your zone of strength and be doing something that you are passionate about. But you have to get all the other market fit pieces in place, be able to sell and market effectively, generally visibility and opportunities and so many other things.
I’m disappointed also to learn what Aileen wrote above about Rick Rubin. I’ve always thought he was a really cool cat, which he is creatively, but please, to have such a poor representation of women that he obviously has access to in the creative circles he runs with is pretty disappointing.
I remain optimistic that one can make money from creative endeavors. They just have to be really connected to what the market actually wants to have all the gears running in that direction.
I know I miss your podcasts, but I totally understand why you needed to stop doing them!
Seriously!! What I find enraging is that even when we know about their very bad behavior, these types of (usually men) often still rise to the top (see: presidents of companies and countries). "Just be you" works for a verrrrry specific type of person that our society rewards. And it seems every now and then, an outlier will "make it" who doesn't fit that dominant archetype/mold, but those are rare.
Thank you for weighing in re: what you've seen working with so many small business owners, and for your words about the podcasts!! I do hope to bring them back someday, maybe in a totally different re-imagining (or frequency, or format — who knows :)
Pam, you are one of the women I look to! And Jenny! And people like Michele Woodward and Desiree Adaway, and I could go on and on. There are so many, so very smart women in business out there. I don't need to listen to bros like Huberman for advice on anything (for instance, try Dr. Jen Gunter for medical things).
As far as Rick Rubin, my time in looking towards him as a man of great creativity, well, let's just say it's better informed now -- imagine how much more creative he could be if he included women's voices! He is stunting himself; his loss. I will watch, for instance, Brandi Carlile and what she's doing now as a producer and behind the scenes -- giving voice and audience to women of color and LGBTQIA+ women in places where they have previously been shut out. That's where the future is. Not with older white men like Rubin. He had his time, but I truly believe it's passing b/c people are seeing him with clear eyes, as he continues to show us (so many reviews on Apple Podcasts mirror my own review -- "where are the women?")
So well said Aileen!! I have noticed that with so many male podcasters; even if their subject matter is writing or creativity, their guests are 80-90% male. As if men are the only ones who are worth interviewing in those categories?! Such a ridiculous blind spot.
Reminds me of the Jann Wenner debacle (what an idiot). Quoting from a Classic Rock website, "The media magnate’s new tome, released on Tuesday, compiles interviews he conducted with seven “masters” of rock ’n’ roll: Bob Dylan, John Lennon, Mick Jagger, Jerry Garcia, Pete Townshend, Bono and Bruce Springsteen. In an interview with The New York Times to promote the book, Wenner defended his decision to feature exclusively white men by arguing that female artists and artists of color “just didn’t articulate” at the same “intellectual level” as their peers." https://ultimateclassicrock.com/jann-wenner-the-masters-flops/
I'm so glad they removed him from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame after that! Atrocious.
YES! And how he doubled-down on his position when asked about it. So ridiculous. And unfortunately, likely so many more out there with his thinking. Sometimes it feels like an uphill battle esp when men like that are the gate-keepers to so much promotion, upward mobility, visibility, air-time, etc.. Frustrating.
I have to say, I don't take any advice from Andrew Huberman, esp in light of his recent controversy. He's always seemed like a "bro" guy to me, and that investigation solidified something I've always sensed.
With respect to Rick Rubin, I have always held him in high regard, admired his work for decades, loved his creativity and way of looking at things and the music he produced. And then he started his podcast. And week after week after week, it was male guest after male guest after male guest. The purpose of his podcast, as he stated, was to follow his inspiration. And it hit me, he's not for me. Because women are not for him. He may work with them, take money from them, etc.., but he doesn't admire them or like them or chose to platform them. Things may have changed at his podcast, idk. I emailed him, I left a review pointing this out (the glaring imbalance between genders etc), but nothing changed, so I stopped following. After 47 episodes (last time I did a full analysis), he had 44 male guests and 3 female guests -- a whole .06% of his guests. In today's age, tell me he can't find more women he admires or whom inspire him? That's a problem.
(And before I hit "post" here, I scanned Rubin's podcast again -- nothing has changed -- very occasionally a female guest, but the others are mostly "bros.")
As I've gotten older, I am definitely more discerning in whom I take advice from and for the most part, if it's a man espousing his advice, I will look elsewhere. He doesn't understand my situation, doesn't know my world, and I know, in this day and age, I can find a woman who is smarter and who does. I will find her.
I replied on our thread above, but just to say that this gender imbalance of podcast guests ENRAGES me too; especially for shows I *want* to like!! Check out the ratio on How I Write 🙄 https://pod.link/1700171470
Exactly! So very frustrating.
Love the discussion so far. I'm thinking about attachment theory too. If a person grew up with caregivers who encouraged authenticity and "being yourself," then it's a much easier path to continue that in adulthood. But if we grew up suppressing ourselves to be fed, to be protected, to feel love, then it's quite the ask to "just be yourself."
Ooh, great point Caitlin!! That's so, so true . . .
That is such a great point. If you grew up having the "take the temperature" of the room and adjust yourself to whomever you needed to be in order to be safe, then you're absolutely right -- it's hard to know who "yourself" really is (it becomes whoever you need to be in the moment and that can change on a hourly/daily/weekly basis).
If you're a bro' with a beard, or a billionaire with a rocket ship, you can surely be yourself. What are the true risks?
I'm all for authenticity, but if you're a member of marginalized group (whether that be your gender, race, class, neurodivergence or other differences, it might be wise to take a good hard look around the room (or the potential podcasting audience) and assess your psychological safety first.
We weigh the risks:
Will sharing this information/story hurt my career possibilities, or possibly show my leadership on an issue I care about?
Do I care if these folks have a good or poor opinion about me? Will they be able to understand the nuances of the courageous stand I plan to take?
Who are my allies in the room or the space? Is someone handing me the mike to highlight my expertise, or to prove they know more than me? Do I have a sponsor or mentor who would discuss or test this idea with me before I bring it to a larger group?
Is this [issue] a non-negotiable for me, or is it a request/disclosure that might make me appear like I can't handle the workload (job interview related)?
Over the years, as a White-presenting Mexican American woman born in Wisconsin, I've had the privilege of showing up in the ways that felt mostly authentic, but also strategic. But it hasn't always been an easy balance. When your job is [perceived as] secure, you have a lot more leverage to speak your mind. On the other hand, when your boss has already shown signs of racism or misogyny, sometimes you need to pick your battles.
I would never advocate to pretend to be someone else or fake your agreement with a group or team. However, we must often position ourselves to foster trust with folks 1:1 to build alliances before presenting something too radical for the setting. It requires a lot of emotional labor, but you also make a lot of friends and allies along the way. ❣️
Also, for the record, 80% of my podcast listening is from women. There are a few public radio podcasts mixed in with male voices (for balance, ha!). Innovation happens at the margins, and that’s one place I’ve found my soul tribe too. ;-)
Thank you so much for this beautiful comment, Christy — an essay in itself! I'm so grateful for you sharing your thoughts and perspective, you've really added so much to the conversation here (as you always do!) 🙏 I especially love this last line, " Innovation happens at the margins, and that’s one place I’ve found my soul tribe too. ;-)" ❤️ ❤️ ❤️
I agree it's fairly useless advice but everybody says it not just podcaster bros. I just googled "be yourself" next to Marie Forleo, Elizabeth Gilbert, Shonda Rhimes, Brenee Brown, Michelle Obama and Oprah. They've all said it in the context of career success.
Julia, fascinating that you searched (and found!) it as advice from all these female top-of-their-game peeps as well . . . the advice just seems so incomplete. While it's MUCH easier to be yourself than to fake being someone else (again, even easier if "yourself" aligns with market needs/wants/tastes) but it really falls short on recognizing that there are so many other ingredients required to really make it at these levels.
Yeah it's an axiom. Certainly not sufficient and in my case not even necessary. None of my accounting clients need to know that I think taxation is theft 😆 even though that's my "true self"
Omg, I love this take on the popular advice: just be yourself as long as that self is palatable for public consumption: i.e. mainstream, cis, white, male, American, etc. I do think that authenticity is an important quality for life in general but career success is a whole different beast. Aside from podcasting, which is a whole different realm, in most types of careers the companies mostly don’t care about your truest, deepest self but the value you are adding and creating. While it’s considered cute and desirable to have some (palatable) authenticity and charisma, it is very far from the truth that that’s the key ingredient for success. If anything, learning the hidden rules and how to be strategic will take you much further in career realm than pure authenticity, even though it makes it for a really powerful self-help message. I also think that such message moves us away from thinking about why is economy messed up, how are our institutions failing us and instead try to “be more of our true selves” hoping that that pursuit will eventually result in career growth. And also blaming our lack of success on not being authentic enough, which is another (powerful) fallacy
So well said Milena!! Thank you for weighing in! I love the distinction you make with this part, "While it’s considered cute and desirable to have some (palatable) authenticity and charisma, it is very far from the truth that that’s the key ingredient for success. If anything, learning the hidden rules and how to be strategic will take you much further in career realm than pure authenticity, even though it makes it for a really powerful self-help message."
And sooo true that the "be yourself" message takes us back to an individualist view of success or failure, while completely ignoring the structural problems that make that difficult. I love how you shed light on the tendency to "blam[e] our lack of success on not being authentic enough, which is another (powerful) fallacy." Thank you for adding so much to this conversation!!
"Be yourself" feels to me advice that is akin to any diet plan..."just stick to the plan" (even if that plan is impossible to follow long term and requires an enormous amount of willpower that no human can sustain for long). It's not the diet's fault! If only YOU had the commitment to stick to it, you'd be skinny!!
Same platitudes apply here...are you REALLY being YOURSELF? Maybe you missed something, still trying too hard, caring too much about success, not ignoring the rest of the world enough to JUST BE YOU!! We just need to find our selfier-self!! THEN the world will notice and reward us.
[eye roll]...