Why are women using AI at lower rates than men—and is that actually a problem?

In our first episode, we dig into the data: Logan scraped 1,000+ comments from a viral TikTok about women resisting AI and ran sentiment analysis to find the patterns. The top reasons? Pride in independent thinking. Skepticism about accuracy. Gendered critique of tech bros. Fear of cognitive decline. And a deep, earned distrust: "You fooled me once with social media."

We get into all of it—the valid reasons to be wary, the real risks of opting out, and why ambivalence might be the healthiest response to this moment.

Also in this episode:

• Anthropic's Claude Cowork launch (they built it in a week and a half using Claude itself)
• The $100-200/month cognitive inequality gap—who gets to experiment at the frontier?
• Mara's savings circle analogy: what women's financial inclusion groups taught her about building AI on-ramps
• The "fooled me once" theory: why women who lived through social media's promises aren't buying the AI hype
• Carol Gilligan's "In a Different Voice" and why women's way of asking questions gets pathologized
• The protégé effect: why teaching someone else is the best way to learn

We end with voice notes from women around the world on what "Womansplaining AI" means to them—from a nonprofit founder explaining RAG systems to a PhD economist in Ottawa to a friend in Australia talking about reproductive justice and accessibility.

This is not a show that tells you AI is good or bad. It's a space to hold both—to be excited and freaked out at the same time—and to figure out what that means for your life, your work, and the people you care about.

Resources mentioned:
• Didoriot's TikTok on women and AI resistance
• Ethan Mollick's "Co-Intelligence"
• Carol Gilligan's "In a Different Voice"
• Nicholas Michelson's "The Death of a Knowledge System" (Substack)
• Mara's Stanford Social Innovation Review piece on ambivalence

Got a reaction? Leave us a voice message. We want to hear from you.