"Women need to think about their lives from the back".

m&k: Bascha Mika, you were an editor-in-chief for decades—first at the Taz in Berlin, then six years at the Frankfurter Rundschau. So you had to step down from your position a year ago—why?

Bascha Mika: Well, I've slipped into retirement age. (laughs)

 

What will you miss?

I love working with the editorial team. I enjoy driving things forward, developing visions, and bringing them to life. I’m also a true team player—I love working with people. I’m not interested in hierarchies or silo battles.

 

What will this new phase of life be like?

My partner and I don't have to commute anymore. Frankfurt to Berlin—that's quite a distance. And I'm a writer again. I'm still working for the *Rundschau*. I write editorials, conduct interviews, and pick the topics that interest me.

 

What are your favorite topics?

I'm a generalist, which means I write about all kinds of topics. That's what I've always done. Of course, I've always focused somewhat on so-called "women's issues." But basically, I write about everything—from politics to social issues, and, of course, for the arts and culture section.

 

Speaking of women's issues: Let's go back to 1997. Back then, you were at the Taz. Before you were promoted to executive management, you took a year off to write the book about Alice Schwarzer. How did this book come about?

I met Alice Schwarzer in 1995 because I had won the «Emma» Journalism Award. I found this woman so interesting, lively, and exuberant that by the end of the day I had already decided to write a profile about her, even though we had completely disagreed politically on that first day.

«Women need a career to be economically independent.»

 

Argued—about what, exactly?

Alice Schwarzer was apparently used to the fact that, no matter what political views she expressed, she was rarely—if ever—contradicted. And she was completely surprised when that wasn’t the case with me, because I disagreed with her entirely. Then she got really loud, and so did I. Still, I felt that we got along well. But she wouldn’t give me an interview, which I would, of course, have needed as the basis for my profile. So I started doing research among her circle of acquaintances. That’s when some terrible things came to light.

 

What kind of things?

Alice Schwarzer literally mistreated women—both those on the editorial staff and freelance writers. Many women were afraid to talk to me about Alice because they said her influence extended far and wide. If they spoke out here now, Alice would go to the editor-in-chief and put pressure on them. I just couldn’t believe it. So I wrote this profile, capturing all the ambivalence I felt toward this woman and what I’d uncovered through my research into her circle. We published it in the Taz published.

 

So what happened next?

The portrait sparked a firestorm. I had simply been doing my job as a journalist. For that, I was accused of betraying my own cause. How dare I tarnish the reputation of such a heroine of the women’s movement? All the commotion surrounding this portrait eventually led Rowohlt Verlag to ask me if I’d like to write a book about Alice Schwarzer.

 

What was the response to the book?

That was a real scandal. That someone dared to write an unauthorized biography about the icon of the women’s movement—as a woman and as a feminist. Because we mustn’t forget—back then, Alice Schwarzer had long been the media’s darling. She was a regular on game shows; on talk shows, she went along with every bit of nonsense. And that’s why, of course, the outrage was immense.

«Only when we stop playing along will anything change.»

 

Did you see each other again?

We've seen each other from time to time at official events. She consistently avoids me.

 

You left the editorial board in 2009. Why?

It was about time. After I left, I wrote two more books. I also stepped up my work at the university as the program director and an adjunct professor.

Let's talk about your second book, *The Cowardice of Women*. That one also sparked a storm of criticism. They accuse the women of not fighting hard enough for their own life's dream.

My thesis is that a great many women stray from their life plans because they are afraid. That’s why I chose this title: *The Cowardice of Women*. Out of fear of losing their partner. Out of fear of losing the love of those around them.

 

What did the critics say?

Many of those who took part in the backlash didn’t read the post carefully. Because I believe that in many ways, women are much braver than men. Just not when it comes to their own life plans and to making them a reality—in the face of opposition and the fear of losing love. I was accused of not paying enough attention to the structures that hold women back.

 

So, have you been paying too little attention to them?

I made it very clear at the beginning of the book: Of course, these structures are a plague. Of course, these structures hold us women back in many ways. We don’t lack awareness here; what we lack is action. But what’s also missing is actively addressing women’s participation in this issue. Another accusation I found completely absurd: that I want to force all women into careers. I never wrote that. I’ve always said that women need a career to be economically independent. Because economic dependence is one of the factors that traps them. It’s also about the fact that, in addition to economic independence, a career offers many additional benefits for women. Because they’re out in the world, because they have social connections, and because, if they do their job well, they also boost their self-confidence. All of this is something a woman simply doesn’t have if she works only at home, no matter how much work she puts into the house and the children. That is my argument in favor of a career—not because women have to pursue a career.

 

What else were you accused of?

The most absurd accusation leveled against me was that I’m not a mother and therefore have no right to write about mothers. And I certainly wasn’t allowed to pass judgment on mothers. Because in the book, I coined the term «latte macchiato moms.» And I really made fun of women—in a mean and ironic way—who had big plans for their lives and suddenly found themselves reduced to just a home and a child. But then, when their partner leaves, they say they had no other choice—yet along the way, they lose their professional qualifications, their autonomy, and their independence. And whether they’re with a partner or not, when they do eventually return to their careers, they often end up with only a part-time job. Even if they want to advance professionally, they’re often not given the opportunity.

«Many women feel invisible once they're over 40, but that's when things really get going.»

 

This is also reflected in retirement planning.

Exactly, that has implications for countless areas. Jutta Allmendinger, the sociologist I interviewed in connection with the book, said this beautiful line: «Women must learn to think about their lives in reverse.» And that’s exactly the key point. It’s not about planning your entire life from start to finish. But it is about standing up for what you expect from life.

Then came *Mutprobe*, your third book. Its subtitle is «The Hellish Game of Growing Older.» Is there a lot of Bascha Mika in it?

I myself have actually never had any trouble getting older. As a rule—unless I was going through a crisis in my life—I’ve always felt most comfortable in whatever situation I happened to be in at the time. And at whatever age I happened to be. But I’m a journalist, so I ask around and hear about other women’s experiences. When it comes to the issue of aging—or «doing aging,» which is, so to speak, the equivalent of «doing gender»—the following point particularly intrigued me: “Doing aging” has been a major topic in academia since the 1990s. Yet in public discourse, nobody talks about it.

 

What exactly does «Doing Aging» mean?

The fact that women are made to look older than their biological age—that’s simply not a topic of discussion. And I had hoped that with this book, I could bring this scientific debate into an everyday context and make it part of our everyday understanding. I don’t feel like I’ve succeeded in doing that.

 

How do you determine that?

From the reactions. I still don’t come across the term «Doing Aging» in the general debate. Not even in feminist discourse. Perhaps it’s also because many feminist debates—which have certainly been reignited over the past fifteen years—are driven largely by young women, who naturally don’t necessarily have a sense of what «Doing Aging» entails. But I can’t say for sure if that’s actually the reason. It’s certainly also because, much like with “The Cowardice of Women,” it’s not easy for women to grapple with this issue either. Because of the societal discrimination against women as they grow older—I’m not talking about old women here; gerontology is an entirely different matter. But my focus is on the process of aging, and as we all know, for women that begins by age 30 at the latest. Well, not really, of course, but we’re led to believe by external pressures that we urgently need to do something about ourselves so we still have a chance on the market.

 

Are experience and wisdom recognized in society?

Not for women. For men, of course. Men are still elected to supervisory boards even in their 70s. For women, the career ladder is virtually over once they turn 50. At age 60, I joined the editorial board of the Frankfurter Rundschau ...have been appointed. That is an absolute exception. Aging, for both genders, deserves more respect and dignity.

---

Bascha Mika She was born in 1954 in a Silesian village in Poland and moved to West Germany as a child. After completing a banking apprenticeship, she studied German language and literature, philosophy, and ethnology. She served as editor-in-chief of the *taz* and the *Frankfurter Rundschau*. She lives in Potsdam with her partner and works as a freelance journalist.