This is Molly Hemingway, encouraging you to listen to my favorite podcast, issues, etc.

Every day you get in-depth interviews with host Todd Wilkin asking expert guests, substantive, thought-provoking questions on all of the important news and issues of our day.

The expert guests are in culture, law, ethics, philosophy, theology,

and apologetics. Expert guests? Expansive topics. Always extolling Christ. Issues, etc.

You have heard the argument from feminism that women can have it all.

That usually means delaying marriage and family in favor of a career.

The all usually means something like devoting yourself and prioritizing your career over other things until maybe it's too late. Well, there's kind of a flip side to that argument. Don't settle. And it was heard most recently from Megan Kelly. Welcome back to Issues, Et cetera. I'm Todd Wilkin, joining us to talk about the don't settle argument of feminism, Suzanne Venker, a married mother of two children in St. Louis,

host of the Suzanne Venker Show. She's author of several books, including the flip side of feminism

and her latest, How to Build a Better Life, a New Roadmap for Women, Who Want to Prioritize

Love and Family. She's also written a

recent column for the Federalist titled, No, Choosing Family Over Career isn't settling for less.

Suzanne, welcome back. Hi, thanks for having me. What advice did media personality, Megan Kelly,

recently give her female ex-followers that caught your attention? So she basically spoke specifically to the women, said, ladies, it's possible to make your own

money, have your own career, pay for your own swanky New York City apartment, whatever that's

supposed to mean, and find a man who loves you, wants to have and raise kids with you, and wants to be with you and only you.

The only thing stopping you, your decision to settle for less.

That's it. That's all she put. There was no explanation or anything that was a statement.

So how would you describe what we're calling here the don't settle argument of feminism?

Yeah, so it's packaged a little differently here, but the underlying message is the same as it really has been for decades, which is you can have it all, don't settle, and that anything short of having

all of that that she described in there is settling.

I don't think there's any way to parse that out other than that's just what it is.

And, of course, I think she's referencing herself there in her life and saying, well,

...