Before we began. A quick warning. This episode contains descriptions of intimate partner violence. I met Eric Schneiderman in twenty sixteen at the Democratic National Convention. I did not know who he was. He introduced himself to me, and at that time, at the beginning, it felt too good to be true. It felt like a fairy tale. I'm Tally Farhadian Weinstein, and this is hearing Back. In twenty eighteen, Tanya Selveratnam was one of four women to come forward with allegations of abuse and assault against Eric Schneiderman, who was at the time the Attorney General of New York State. The allegations were made public in an explosive feature story in The New Yorker by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer. Three hours after it was published, Schneiderman resigned. Tanya's story, alongside those of the other women who accused Schneiderman of abuse, was a pivotal moment in the early days of the Me too movement. It showcased the power of storytelling and investigative journalism to hold abusers to account, even those who wield tremendous political power and influence. But it also raised complex questions about how these cases should be investigated and prosecuted, and whether or not justice can be achieved in the court of public opinion. Tanya addresses all of these questions head on in her new memoir Assume Nothing, which was just published last month. This week, she joins us on Hearing to tell her story and to talk about the ways the criminal justice system should be improved so that more survivors can feel comfortable trusting law enforcement as a resource in moments of crisis. As time went on, the darkness started to see ben the criticism, my brown skin, my wavy hair, telling me to get my boobs and hands. I mean, it was just and I and none of that was stuff I was going to do. But the emotional abuse and then the physical violence that happened in the sexual context. And I had never been in an abusive relationship before. I had witnessed a lot of domestic violence as a child between my mother and my father. I never thought that I would get into an abusive relationship, but there I was. Whenever I speak about domestic violence, without fail, no matter how small the group, somebody comes forward and says, this happened to me, This happened to my mother. This happened to somebody who really matters to me in my life, and there's always sort of a cast of shame. And I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about what happened to your mom, as you describe in the book, and how your own experience maybe deep into changed your understanding of her experience with domestic violence. These are some of my most vivid memories, but they're also my most painful memories. It was difficult for me to include them and share them, but they are an essential part of the story, Like how did I, who as a child witnessed terrific domestic violence that my father inflicted on my mother, bloody teeth, a black eye, how did I then wind up in an abusive relationship? Now, the domestic violence I witness as a child on surface look different than what I experienced as an adult in my own abusive relationship with my father. It was the beatings that happened in different rooms of the house, the living room, the kitchen, but not in the bedroom. And in my situation, it was the gaslighting, criticism, the isolation, the feeling of entrapment, the verbal abuse, the emotional abuse, psychological abuse. The physical abuse happened only in the bedroom, and it doesn't feel great for me to share these details of my experience, But I also believe that by sharing our stories, we destigmatize domestic violence and we can begin to chip away at the conditioning that allows it to continue. There are so many elements of the story that you've written that are distressing, but one part of it that I found particularly heartbreaking as somebody who obviously believes that we can build a better criminal justice system, and this is the story you tell of you sitting in a taxicab and trying to decide whether to come forward, and I wonder if you might share that story. I remember that moment so vividly. I was in a taxicab and it was like a public service announcement that if you or someone you know is in a violent relationship, to report it because you might help someone else. And at the time, I was working on the Glamor Women of the Year Awards, and I was very ensconced in my work and my friends and just moving on, and I did not have an intention of coming forward at that time. But I had also around that time heard through mutual friends about a previous girlfriend of Eric Schneiderman, the former New York State Attorney General that had an early similar story to mine, Because until that point I thought that it was specific to me. I thought that I had done something to spark the abuse, as is often the case in abusive relationship. However, because I had found out about the previous women and realize that if there's me and her, there must be others out there, then it did become this real roller coaster of figuring out how to come forward. So let's break that down, because I just wonder if you could even imagine a law enforcement system that would have made you more comfortable in that moment to not need the buttressing of other people's stories, but to be able to say, this is what happened to me, What can we do about it. I was in a relationship with the top law enforcement official in New York State, which is what made my situation especially fraught in terms of going to the police. And also, as I mentioned in the book, I have friends who had had negative experiences when trying to bring their cases to the attention of law enforcement. There is a whole system that is designed to protect powerful and wealthy people, and powerful and wealthy people can manipulate the system to their advantage, so I, being a nobody, didn't feel that it was a process I could trust. And rather than going to the police, I had the counsel of a domestic violence expert. I had my lawyer, and so with them I was able to strategize more effectively for how to come forward. And Tanya, you also thought about using other kinds of legal process, like a civil complaint or an ethics complaint, and you concluded that those didn't feel right either. Why is that well? With a civil complaint, as was explained to me, there would likely be a settlement, But for me, it wasn't about getting a settlement for getting money. I know that there are many people who are filing civil claims and that is important to them. It wasn't important to me. I am fortunate to be able to work. And also that wasn't the message that I wanted to send. With regard to the ethics complaint, which is supposed to be confidential, I was warned that actually he might be tipped off right away that an ethics complaint had been filed against him, So that felt like an unsafe process. Part of why I was worried about my personal safety is because as the top law enforcement officer in New York State, Eric Schneidaman had great power and there were a couple of occasions when he said that if we broke up, he might have to kill me. So the civil complaint felt kind of for me philosophically the wrong way to go, and the ethics complaint felt dangerous from a personal safety point of view. And thank goodness for investigative reporters and the power of journalism. Yes, and so you know, it's I'm going to use the word heartbreaking and also exhausting to describe. You're having to really think through with excellent counsel, how disappointing the criminal justice process, the civil process, the ethics complaint system that we have set up would all be to you. And you wind up with journalism. And you know, I wanted to ask you about that because you are also a journalist, and you surely knew that a lot of the exposure that you would have experienced if had you taken any of these other paths would come there as well. Why did this feel safer? Nonetheless, it was around the time that the courageous me to reporting was having tangible outcomes and I was very heartened to see how many perpetrators, and in some cases they are enablers, were being you know, deep throned. So I was hopeful that through the power of investigative reporting, and I truly did have to submit myself to the journalistic process, meaning that I was going to be scrutinized, I was going to have to provide corroborating stories and all my notes and emails. It was nerve wracking, but I also put my faith in it. I liken it too when I was diagnosed with cancer back in twenty twelve, and I really had to submit myself to the medical process and trust in that system. Tell us about that first conversation that you had with the editor of The New Yorker, David Remick, that you describe in the book, and what he told you the process would be, what you would be submitting to Well, at that time, he didn't know what The New Yorker would do. It was very informal for him to hear in my own words what I experienced. And also at that point I knew of the previous girlfriend almost a decade before me, who had also been abused, and he just was listening and asking questions and asking tough questions, like if I had photographic evidence of any bruises, and I asked myself, do I need to have bruises to be believed? And this is why the criminal justice process also, the bar is so high to provide evidence in order for it to be considered a crime in an abusive relationship. In any relationship, there are at least two sides to a story, so you get into a situation where it's he said, she said. But when there are multiple people with eerily similar stories interviewed independently of each other, objectivity emerges. Yes, you know, as I listened to this, of course I can help, but think that the investor gate of process in journalism sounds a lot like what we do right. We're looking for corroboration, we're looking for patterns, we're looking for other witnesses, we're looking for documentary and other evidence. And I think that when we're at our best, it makes sense that these processes are happening similarly or maybe even in parallel, because these are searches for truth. And I've had this conversation on this podcast with Jayan Fan, for example, in talking about how we really get to the truth with particularly vulnerable either subjects of an interview or victims in the criminal justice process. And I wonder if there was something about your experience and how this was handled at The New Yorker that gives you some insight in how the criminal justice process could do better. But I have great respect for the criminal justice process for those who participate it, and the more good, conscientious, courageous people that participated, the better the system will work. As I said before, the bar is high for victims to be able to provide enough evidence that they have been abused, and I would like to see the criminal justice process move in a more victim centered direction. Indeed, And you know, I'm listening intently because just to say, I think things are really messed up. And you know, I started asking you about the decision to report because for me, Tanya, that's that's a starting point. That only half of sexual assaults and only half of incidents of domestic violence across the country are even reported, And so there we're doing something wrong, and probably many things wrong. You use the word being victim focused. I think that there is a widespread problem in the way these cases are approached, where the instinct is to investigate the victim in a way that you would not investigate the victim of let's say, a gunpoint robbery in the street. I mean, ultimately you have to arrive at the credibility of the victim as well. But it matters how you start. What would you like to see law enforcement, police and prosecutors do differently, Maybe borrow from some of the other actors who you felt were better in your own experience and in the experience of others. Right, because you've known many people who have experienced this kind of violence and reported on it. What can we do better in our part of the world. I think that there should be gender based violence training for every law enforcement officer. You know, in some states the number one reason for calls to nine one one is a domestic violence incident. Yeah, in New York City they get close to a quarter million calls a year for domestic violence. That's before the pandemic. It's heartbreaking, and I think that incorporating more holistic processes with law enforcement is very important because often those who are closest to the situation are best equipped to address it. So looking at community organizations for storative justice programs, the trauma that survivors of violence experience. It sinks in on a cellular level, which is something that scientists understand but not most people do. And that is an important part of gender based violence training for law enforcement to understand the physiological impact of violence and trauma and how it affects people's futures. I mean, they are people whose lives are stopped. Their lives are forever altered, whether that of use happens for a few minutes, a few days, a few years, or a lifetime. I've heard a lot from survivors in the last few years and the people who advocate from them, who say, we just don't ever want to see you law enforcement alone. You're a part of it, and we want to feel safe reporting to you, and we have to work out the shame and coming forward to you, but you're never going to be able to give us everything that we need to get through this experience. And I take that very much to heart and understanding, well, I have to do my part, and I have to do it well, but I have to do it alongside other people who are supporting this community of women. You know. For my part, a centerpiece of really what I want to do is to create a Bureau of Gender Based Violence in the DA's office, and I think every DA across the country should have that. That really sets this aside as a different kind of crime that is gendered. And I've really Rachel Lois Schneider helped me to find the words for this. You know it obviously, you can be a man or a woman perpetrating it or experiencing it in any combination. But the truth of the matter is that it is almost always men inflicting this kind of abuse on women, and I think that that needs to be said, and I think that we need to go into those situations much more sensitive and sophisticated and committed and courageous than we have been. And all of this also leads me to want to ask you what does accountability look like for you? Because we're talking about the bar beinghind the criminal justice process, as it must be, because accountability is often the loss of a person's liberty. But you've also suggested that there are other ways in which you wanted Schneiderman to be held accountable or what might look like justice for you, not that you have to have that vision fully played out either, And I think we often expect a lot of the survivors of this kind of violence. It's not really fair. But if you do have a sort of a vision of what you think accountability would look like for him, and whether you think we got there, I would love to know. Well, there's kind of the micro and the macro answer. So on the micro level, in my individual story, Justice looked like his resignation. Within three hours of the New Yorker story coming out, Justice looked like New York State having its first female and black Attorney General, Latitia Things going further, though, I think there has to be more accountability of the enablers that facilitate the abuse, because behind every perpetrator there is usually an enabler, and sadly that enabler or enablers are often women. And I feel like we are in a civil war between feminists and patriarchs, and those on the side of feminists are not only women, and those on the side of patriarchs are not only men. And we have a lot of work to do to unravel the damage not just for the last few years, but of the last many centuries. Amen to all of that, and I do think we are in a civil and a cultural war, and part of what I appreciated so much about your book is you talk about your own experiences, but you also are a scholar and a reporter of these crises happening, you know, across the board, and you offer these really troubling statistics right about the lifetime economic costs that are associated with intimate partner violence three point six trillion dollars according to one study, lost in productivity and criminal justice expenses and psychological costs that we can't even begin to calculate and put a number on. And I want to ask you, what do you think makes our society so tolerant of this kind of violence and abuse. Because we are tolerant of it, we are conditioned to accept it from the time that we are that we are born, and this is like an unbrainwashing that needs to happen. Part of what normalizes violence and abuse is popular culture. You know, we're trained to believe that when a guy teases us in the playground that he likes us. We see it in the movies that we watch, the television shows, in the music we listen to, where violence is glorified. We're criticizing people is glorified, and that needs to change. Like joy, love and peace, is not boring, So we just have to make them more prevalent and dominant. And it's going to take a lot of work. It's going to take a lot of chipping away at that. And part of it is dismantling the patriarchy, because patriarchy is inherent way about the subjugation of women. The evidence is all around us. And part of it is in sort of allowing the culture to develop really in the minds of our kids. I think you're right about that. Rachel Lois Snyder talks about how we really should be just teaching teenagers about intimate partner violence in their first relationships, and we're not, and we could. That's really the way to get at some of the root of this. But you know, my job is to come in later in the process. And I'll just offer you one incredibly troubling statistic is that at the nypdm you were talking about police reform in such limited ways. Right now, I think the NYPD still spends just about one percent of its budget on the investigators who are responsible for all of sexual assault and child abuse. The first time I heard that, I thought it can't possibly be true. Right, Well, this goes back to that kind of the devaluation in general of our bodies. Tanya, let me ask you just a different question because and this is just to take you in a somewhat different direction. You know, let's talk about what happens to the people who are accused, because in your book you criticize certain publications for giving a platform who accused of users to defend themselves. But it raises kind of a tricky question about where they are supposed to respond to allegations. So tell me how you work out some of that tension. Well, I cite specific examples where they were giving platforms to perpetrators who deny that they were perpetrators. And I believe in redemption. I believe in reconciliation. I believe in second chances, but the perpetrator has to have admitted the harm and or done the time. But look, I know that you know that there's an underlying serious question though about to process. You yourself say, look, it's vital to fairness. We have to fact check allegations. So I submitted myself to multiple investigations, and I wonder, you know, if these cases are being played out in the court of public opinion, and you know, rather than in court. How do we sort of make sure that we are sort of being fair to people who are accused. I think it's important to have the either journalistic or legal process unfold do its work. I think it's important to avoid the witch hunt. I think it's important not to jump to conclusions for the credibility of the allegations. Allegations can be made that are false and can result in terrible decisions being made. And the way I frame it is, there are those who use their platforms to elevate movements, and there are those who use movements to give themselves a platform. The vast majority of people who come forward are doing so at great risk themselves, but there are those who take advantage of the movement. Oh gosh, that's so well said. I just appreciate your openness around that, and tell me a little bit about the cost to you. And I think it is important to focus on that. I mean, this is your second memoir and you say at the end of it, the previous book in my experience with infertility was a part of my life, but this book, this experience will be the rest of my life. What are the long lasting implications of this for you? My first book, the big Lie, which was about fertility awareness and motherhood, was a certain chapter of my life. I am turning fifty next month, and I'm not going to be able to have a child, although I'm not ruling out ever becoming a mother. But this memoir of intimate violence is an issue that affects people at all stages of the life cycle. And because of what I witnessed with my mother, because of what I experienced myself, because of what so many friends have shared with me and so many strangers have shared with me, and because of the devastating statistics that twenty to thirty percent of people will experience some form of violence. These are devastating statistics, and we can do better. I couldn't agree with you more. I mean I sometimes times, you know, I asked myself, you know, what is the lasting impact of crime? What is really at stake? And I think it's freedom, I really do. I know that's a word that has been co opted very strangely by the right, but I think it makes people feel less free. That is what inhibition is. You sort of close in on yourself. You know we're doing this in audio, but my shoulders are are rapping even as I say it, and I think that if we don't understand that, that we can't really get to accountability. Yes, you said it, I said it, You said it. I close the book with the oft sided words of Muriel Rockeiser. What would happen if one woman told the truth about her life? The world would split open? Tanya, I, this was such really a pleasure, while really difficult to rain. And I really want to thank you for taking the time. I wish you great success with your book and all the things not related to this as well. And I hope lots of people read this and all of the other things that you put out into the world. Thank you. Hearing is produced in partnership with Pushkin Industries. Our producers are Sam Dingman and Camille Baptista. Our engineer is Evan Viola, and special thanks to Malcolm Gladwell and Jacob Weisberg. This podcast is paid for by New Yorkers for Tali and Tanya Selverattenham's appearance on the show does not constitute a political endorsement. We'll put a link in the show notes to Tanya's memoir Assume Nothing, A story of intimate violence. I am running to be District Attorney of Manhattan and to set a national example in delivering safety, fairness, and justice for all, especially are most vulnerable. If you like what you've heard, go to Tali fda dot com to learn more about my campaign and be sure to join us for the next installment of our Women's History Month interview series next week. I'll be joined by Robbie Kaplan, who is one of the co founders of the Times Up Legal Defence Fund, argued the Supreme Court case that struck down the Defensive Marriage Act and coincidentally represented Tanya in her legal battle against Eric Schneiderman. I hope you'll join us. I'm tally for Hadien Weinstein. Thank you for listening, and I'll see you next time on Hearing

Before we began. A quick warning. This episode contains descriptions of intimate partner violence. I met Eric Schneiderman in twenty sixteen at the Democratic National Convention. I did not know who he was. He introduced himself to me, and at that time, at the beginning, it felt too good to be true. It felt like a fairy tale. I'm Tally Farhadian Weinstein, and this is hearing Back. In twenty eighteen, Tanya Selveratnam was one of four women to come forward with allegations of abuse and assault against Eric Schneiderman, who was at the time the Attorney General of New York State. The allegations were made public in an explosive feature story in The New Yorker by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer. Three hours after it was published, Schneiderman resigned. Tanya's story, alongside those of the other women who accused Schneiderman of abuse, was a pivotal moment in the early days of the Me too movement. It showcased the power of storytelling and investigative journalism to hold abusers to account, even those who wield tremendous political power and influence. But it also raised complex questions about how these cases should be investigated and prosecuted, and whether or not justice can be achieved in the court of public opinion. Tanya addresses all of these questions head on in her new memoir Assume Nothing, which was just published last month. This week, she joins us on Hearing to tell her story and to talk about the ways the criminal justice system should be improved so that more survivors can feel comfortable trusting law enforcement as a resource in moments of crisis. As time went on, the darkness started to see ben the criticism, my brown skin, my wavy hair, telling me to get my boobs and hands. I mean, it was just and I and none of that was stuff I was going to do. But the emotional abuse and then the physical violence that happened in the sexual context. And I had never been in an abusive relationship before. I had witnessed a lot of domestic violence as a child between my mother and my father. I never thought that I would get into an abusive relationship, but there I was. Whenever I speak about domestic violence, without fail, no matter how small the group, somebody comes forward and says, this happened to me, This happened to my mother. This happened to somebody who really matters to me in my life, and there's always sort of a cast of shame. And I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about what happened to your mom, as you describe in the book, and how your own experience maybe deep into changed your understanding of her experience with domestic violence. These are some of my most vivid memories, but they're also my most painful memories. It was difficult for me to include them and share them, but they are an essential part of the story, Like how did I, who as a child witnessed terrific domestic violence that my father inflicted on my mother, bloody teeth, a black eye, how did I then wind up in an abusive relationship? Now, the domestic violence I witness as a child on surface look different than what I experienced as an adult in my own abusive relationship with my father. It was the beatings that happened in different rooms of the house, the living room, the kitchen, but not in the bedroom. And in my situation, it was the gaslighting, criticism, the isolation, the feeling of entrapment, the verbal abuse, the emotional abuse, psychological abuse. The physical abuse happened only in the bedroom, and it doesn't feel great for me to share these details of my experience, But I also believe that by sharing our stories, we destigmatize domestic violence and we can begin to chip away at the conditioning that allows it to continue. There are so many elements of the story that you've written that are distressing, but one part of it that I found particularly heartbreaking as somebody who obviously believes that we can build a better criminal justice system, and this is the story you tell of you sitting in a taxicab and trying to decide whether to come forward, and I wonder if you might share that story. I remember that moment so vividly. I was in a taxicab and it was like a public service announcement that if you or someone you know is in a violent relationship, to report it because you might help someone else. And at the time, I was working on the Glamor Women of the Year Awards, and I was very ensconced in my work and my friends and just moving on, and I did not have an intention of coming forward at that time. But I had also around that time heard through mutual friends about a previous girlfriend of Eric Schneiderman, the former New York State Attorney General that had an early similar story to mine, Because until that point I thought that it was specific to me. I thought that I had done something to spark the abuse, as is often the case in abusive relationship. However, because I had found out about the previous women and realize that if there's me and her, there must be others out there, then it did become this real roller coaster of figuring out how to come forward. So let's break that down, because I just wonder if you could even imagine a law enforcement system that would have made you more comfortable in that moment to not need the buttressing of other people's stories, but to be able to say, this is what happened to me, What can we do about it. I was in a relationship with the top law enforcement official in New York State, which is what made my situation especially fraught in terms of going to the police. And also, as I mentioned in the book, I have friends who had had negative experiences when trying to bring their cases to the attention of law enforcement. There is a whole system that is designed to protect powerful and wealthy people, and powerful and wealthy people can manipulate the system to their advantage, so I, being a nobody, didn't feel that it was a process I could trust. And rather than going to the police, I had the counsel of a domestic violence expert. I had my lawyer, and so with them I was able to strategize more effectively for how to come forward. And Tanya, you also thought about using other kinds of legal process, like a civil complaint or an ethics complaint, and you concluded that those didn't feel right either. Why is that well? With a civil complaint, as was explained to me, there would likely be a settlement, But for me, it wasn't about getting a settlement for getting money. I know that there are many people who are filing civil claims and that is important to them. It wasn't important to me. I am fortunate to be able to work. And also that wasn't the message that I wanted to send. With regard to the ethics complaint, which is supposed to be confidential, I was warned that actually he might be tipped off right away that an ethics complaint had been filed against him, So that felt like an unsafe process. Part of why I was worried about my personal safety is because as the top law enforcement officer in New York State, Eric Schneidaman had great power and there were a couple of occasions when he said that if we broke up, he might have to kill me. So the civil complaint felt kind of for me philosophically the wrong way to go, and the ethics complaint felt dangerous from a personal safety point of view. And thank goodness for investigative reporters and the power of journalism. Yes, and so you know, it's I'm going to use the word heartbreaking and also exhausting to describe. You're having to really think through with excellent counsel, how disappointing the criminal justice process, the civil process, the ethics complaint system that we have set up would all be to you. And you wind up with journalism. And you know, I wanted to ask you about that because you are also a journalist, and you surely knew that a lot of the exposure that you would have experienced if had you taken any of these other paths would come there as well. Why did this feel safer? Nonetheless, it was around the time that the courageous me to reporting was having tangible outcomes and I was very heartened to see how many perpetrators, and in some cases they are enablers, were being you know, deep throned. So I was hopeful that through the power of investigative reporting, and I truly did have to submit myself to the journalistic process, meaning that I was going to be scrutinized, I was going to have to provide corroborating stories and all my notes and emails. It was nerve wracking, but I also put my faith in it. I liken it too when I was diagnosed with cancer back in twenty twelve, and I really had to submit myself to the medical process and trust in that system. Tell us about that first conversation that you had with the editor of The New Yorker, David Remick, that you describe in the book, and what he told you the process would be, what you would be submitting to Well, at that time, he didn't know what The New Yorker would do. It was very informal for him to hear in my own words what I experienced. And also at that point I knew of the previous girlfriend almost a decade before me, who had also been abused, and he just was listening and asking questions and asking tough questions, like if I had photographic evidence of any bruises, and I asked myself, do I need to have bruises to be believed? And this is why the criminal justice process also, the bar is so high to provide evidence in order for it to be considered a crime in an abusive relationship. In any relationship, there are at least two sides to a story, so you get into a situation where it's he said, she said. But when there are multiple people with eerily similar stories interviewed independently of each other, objectivity emerges. Yes, you know, as I listened to this, of course I can help, but think that the investor gate of process in journalism sounds a lot like what we do right. We're looking for corroboration, we're looking for patterns, we're looking for other witnesses, we're looking for documentary and other evidence. And I think that when we're at our best, it makes sense that these processes are happening similarly or maybe even in parallel, because these are searches for truth. And I've had this conversation on this podcast with Jayan Fan, for example, in talking about how we really get to the truth with particularly vulnerable either subjects of an interview or victims in the criminal justice process. And I wonder if there was something about your experience and how this was handled at The New Yorker that gives you some insight in how the criminal justice process could do better. But I have great respect for the criminal justice process for those who participate it, and the more good, conscientious, courageous people that participated, the better the system will work. As I said before, the bar is high for victims to be able to provide enough evidence that they have been abused, and I would like to see the criminal justice process move in a more victim centered direction. Indeed, And you know, I'm listening intently because just to say, I think things are really messed up. And you know, I started asking you about the decision to report because for me, Tanya, that's that's a starting point. That only half of sexual assaults and only half of incidents of domestic violence across the country are even reported, And so there we're doing something wrong, and probably many things wrong. You use the word being victim focused. I think that there is a widespread problem in the way these cases are approached, where the instinct is to investigate the victim in a way that you would not investigate the victim of let's say, a gunpoint robbery in the street. I mean, ultimately you have to arrive at the credibility of the victim as well. But it matters how you start. What would you like to see law enforcement, police and prosecutors do differently, Maybe borrow from some of the other actors who you felt were better in your own experience and in the experience of others. Right, because you've known many people who have experienced this kind of violence and reported on it. What can we do better in our part of the world. I think that there should be gender based violence training for every law enforcement officer. You know, in some states the number one reason for calls to nine one one is a domestic violence incident. Yeah, in New York City they get close to a quarter million calls a year for domestic violence. That's before the pandemic. It's heartbreaking, and I think that incorporating more holistic processes with law enforcement is very important because often those who are closest to the situation are best equipped to address it. So looking at community organizations for storative justice programs, the trauma that survivors of violence experience. It sinks in on a cellular level, which is something that scientists understand but not most people do. And that is an important part of gender based violence training for law enforcement to understand the physiological impact of violence and trauma and how it affects people's futures. I mean, they are people whose lives are stopped. Their lives are forever altered, whether that of use happens for a few minutes, a few days, a few years, or a lifetime. I've heard a lot from survivors in the last few years and the people who advocate from them, who say, we just don't ever want to see you law enforcement alone. You're a part of it, and we want to feel safe reporting to you, and we have to work out the shame and coming forward to you, but you're never going to be able to give us everything that we need to get through this experience. And I take that very much to heart and understanding, well, I have to do my part, and I have to do it well, but I have to do it alongside other people who are supporting this community of women. You know. For my part, a centerpiece of really what I want to do is to create a Bureau of Gender Based Violence in the DA's office, and I think every DA across the country should have that. That really sets this aside as a different kind of crime that is gendered. And I've really Rachel Lois Schneider helped me to find the words for this. You know it obviously, you can be a man or a woman perpetrating it or experiencing it in any combination. But the truth of the matter is that it is almost always men inflicting this kind of abuse on women, and I think that that needs to be said, and I think that we need to go into those situations much more sensitive and sophisticated and committed and courageous than we have been. And all of this also leads me to want to ask you what does accountability look like for you? Because we're talking about the bar beinghind the criminal justice process, as it must be, because accountability is often the loss of a person's liberty. But you've also suggested that there are other ways in which you wanted Schneiderman to be held accountable or what might look like justice for you, not that you have to have that vision fully played out either, And I think we often expect a lot of the survivors of this kind of violence. It's not really fair. But if you do have a sort of a vision of what you think accountability would look like for him, and whether you think we got there, I would love to know. Well, there's kind of the micro and the macro answer. So on the micro level, in my individual story, Justice looked like his resignation. Within three hours of the New Yorker story coming out, Justice looked like New York State having its first female and black Attorney General, Latitia Things going further, though, I think there has to be more accountability of the enablers that facilitate the abuse, because behind every perpetrator there is usually an enabler, and sadly that enabler or enablers are often women. And I feel like we are in a civil war between feminists and patriarchs, and those on the side of feminists are not only women, and those on the side of patriarchs are not only men. And we have a lot of work to do to unravel the damage not just for the last few years, but of the last many centuries. Amen to all of that, and I do think we are in a civil and a cultural war, and part of what I appreciated so much about your book is you talk about your own experiences, but you also are a scholar and a reporter of these crises happening, you know, across the board, and you offer these really troubling statistics right about the lifetime economic costs that are associated with intimate partner violence three point six trillion dollars according to one study, lost in productivity and criminal justice expenses and psychological costs that we can't even begin to calculate and put a number on. And I want to ask you, what do you think makes our society so tolerant of this kind of violence and abuse. Because we are tolerant of it, we are conditioned to accept it from the time that we are that we are born, and this is like an unbrainwashing that needs to happen. Part of what normalizes violence and abuse is popular culture. You know, we're trained to believe that when a guy teases us in the playground that he likes us. We see it in the movies that we watch, the television shows, in the music we listen to, where violence is glorified. We're criticizing people is glorified, and that needs to change. Like joy, love and peace, is not boring, So we just have to make them more prevalent and dominant. And it's going to take a lot of work. It's going to take a lot of chipping away at that. And part of it is dismantling the patriarchy, because patriarchy is inherent way about the subjugation of women. The evidence is all around us. And part of it is in sort of allowing the culture to develop really in the minds of our kids. I think you're right about that. Rachel Lois Snyder talks about how we really should be just teaching teenagers about intimate partner violence in their first relationships, and we're not, and we could. That's really the way to get at some of the root of this. But you know, my job is to come in later in the process. And I'll just offer you one incredibly troubling statistic is that at the nypdm you were talking about police reform in such limited ways. Right now, I think the NYPD still spends just about one percent of its budget on the investigators who are responsible for all of sexual assault and child abuse. The first time I heard that, I thought it can't possibly be true. Right, Well, this goes back to that kind of the devaluation in general of our bodies. Tanya, let me ask you just a different question because and this is just to take you in a somewhat different direction. You know, let's talk about what happens to the people who are accused, because in your book you criticize certain publications for giving a platform who accused of users to defend themselves. But it raises kind of a tricky question about where they are supposed to respond to allegations. So tell me how you work out some of that tension. Well, I cite specific examples where they were giving platforms to perpetrators who deny that they were perpetrators. And I believe in redemption. I believe in reconciliation. I believe in second chances, but the perpetrator has to have admitted the harm and or done the time. But look, I know that you know that there's an underlying serious question though about to process. You yourself say, look, it's vital to fairness. We have to fact check allegations. So I submitted myself to multiple investigations, and I wonder, you know, if these cases are being played out in the court of public opinion, and you know, rather than in court. How do we sort of make sure that we are sort of being fair to people who are accused. I think it's important to have the either journalistic or legal process unfold do its work. I think it's important to avoid the witch hunt. I think it's important not to jump to conclusions for the credibility of the allegations. Allegations can be made that are false and can result in terrible decisions being made. And the way I frame it is, there are those who use their platforms to elevate movements, and there are those who use movements to give themselves a platform. The vast majority of people who come forward are doing so at great risk themselves, but there are those who take advantage of the movement. Oh gosh, that's so well said. I just appreciate your openness around that, and tell me a little bit about the cost to you. And I think it is important to focus on that. I mean, this is your second memoir and you say at the end of it, the previous book in my experience with infertility was a part of my life, but this book, this experience will be the rest of my life. What are the long lasting implications of this for you? My first book, the big Lie, which was about fertility awareness and motherhood, was a certain chapter of my life. I am turning fifty next month, and I'm not going to be able to have a child, although I'm not ruling out ever becoming a mother. But this memoir of intimate violence is an issue that affects people at all stages of the life cycle. And because of what I witnessed with my mother, because of what I experienced myself, because of what so many friends have shared with me and so many strangers have shared with me, and because of the devastating statistics that twenty to thirty percent of people will experience some form of violence. These are devastating statistics, and we can do better. I couldn't agree with you more. I mean I sometimes times, you know, I asked myself, you know, what is the lasting impact of crime? What is really at stake? And I think it's freedom, I really do. I know that's a word that has been co opted very strangely by the right, but I think it makes people feel less free. That is what inhibition is. You sort of close in on yourself. You know we're doing this in audio, but my shoulders are are rapping even as I say it, and I think that if we don't understand that, that we can't really get to accountability. Yes, you said it, I said it, You said it. I close the book with the oft sided words of Muriel Rockeiser. What would happen if one woman told the truth about her life? The world would split open? Tanya, I, this was such really a pleasure, while really difficult to rain. And I really want to thank you for taking the time. I wish you great success with your book and all the things not related to this as well. And I hope lots of people read this and all of the other things that you put out into the world. Thank you. Hearing is produced in partnership with Pushkin Industries. Our producers are Sam Dingman and Camille Baptista. Our engineer is Evan Viola, and special thanks to Malcolm Gladwell and Jacob Weisberg. This podcast is paid for by New Yorkers for Tali and Tanya Selverattenham's appearance on the show does not constitute a political endorsement. We'll put a link in the show notes to Tanya's memoir Assume Nothing, A story of intimate violence. I am running to be District Attorney of Manhattan and to set a national example in delivering safety, fairness, and justice for all, especially are most vulnerable. If you like what you've heard, go to Tali fda dot com to learn more about my campaign and be sure to join us for the next installment of our Women's History Month interview series next week. I'll be joined by Robbie Kaplan, who is one of the co founders of the Times Up Legal Defence Fund, argued the Supreme Court case that struck down the Defensive Marriage Act and coincidentally represented Tanya in her legal battle against Eric Schneiderman. I hope you'll join us. I'm tally for Hadien Weinstein. Thank you for listening, and I'll see you next time on Hearing