American Women Suck

By Liz Mineo | Harvard Staff Writer | Harvard Gazette ‘Future of Jobs’ report highlights value of emotional intelligence A recent report on “The Future of Jobs” by the World Economic Forum found that while analytical thinking is still the most coveted skill among employers, several emotional intelligence skills (i.e., motivation, self-awareness, empathy, and active listening) rank among the top 10 in a list of 26 core competencies. In this edited conversation with Ron Siegel, assistant professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School, he explains why emotional intelligence skills are crucial in the workplace, especially in the age of AI. What’s emotional intelligence? Is it a different way of being smart? It is a kind of being smart, but it’s not what we usually think of as being smart. In recent decades, psychologists who study intelligence have become aware that there are many different kinds of intelligence. You could think of somebody who has natural athletic ability as having a kind of body or coordination intelligence or somebody who has a natural math ability as having a good deal of mathematical intelligence, and so on. When we look over human experience in the developed world, where many people have basic food, clothing, and shelter, there’s nonetheless a great deal of conflict and unhappiness. Most of this strife involves the challenges of working with our emotions as humans, and particularly the complexity of our reactions in relationships. Emotional intelligence is a particular skill of recognizing one’s own feelings, working with those feelings, and not just reacting in ways that are going to be problematic. It also involves recognizing the feelings that are arising in others, and then being able to work with others, to work out conflicts, or get along well with one another. Why do employers consider emotional intelligence one of the top core skills needed to thrive in the workplace? The importance of emotional competence comes from the observation in the business world, in academia, the military, and every human enterprise, that there are people who are highly competent in technical and analytical skills, but when they interact with others, projects stall. So many resources are wasted in emotional misunderstandings or in people’s difficulty with emotional regulation. We humans are grossly inefficient in trying to get things done because most of our energy is spent on trying to make sure we look good, or on making sure that people think of us in a certain way, or on getting triggered by one another. I suspect that business leaders have realized that it’s relatively easy to get technical expertise in almost anything, but to get people who can understand and get along with one another, that is a challenge. In many projects, there is a growing awareness that this skill is going to be the one that carries the day. Can you talk about the evolution of the concept of emotional intelligence since publication of the 1995 book “Emotional Intelligence” by Daniel Goleman, Ph.D. ’74? Humans have known about this for a long time. Western industrialized cultures have very much favored other forms of intelligence, like logical analytical ability, mathematical ability, and entrepreneurial skills over relational skills and the ability to connect with feelings and connect with one another. Over the years, psychologists have become more aware of a strong cultural bias toward certain kinds of intelligence and against other kinds of intelligence, and they have tried to rectify that by looking at emotional intelligence. And when Daniel Goleman wrote his landmark book, people started realizing that there are many people who may have high SAT and GRE scores but are not thriving in life or even succeeding in their work. And when we look at why that is, it turns out that they don’t know how to manage their own emotions or how to read other people’s emotions, and they don’t know how to get along effectively with other people, while other people with far lower GRE and SAT scores have skills to understand and read people and can get a team together and lead them to accomplish things and have great success. There’s a growing realization that emotional intelligence matters, even for external material, goal-oriented activities. Are emotional intelligence skills relevant in the age of AI? As people increasingly are interacting with chatbots rather than real human beings to get their work done, I suspect that authentic, connected human interactions are going to become more important. Humans are hardwired to be a social species­ — we long for connection to others. We hate the experience of being ostracized and pushed out of the group. That’s in our basic primate nature, and I suspect that as more of people’s lives are engaged in interactions with AI, even though it does a nice job of imitating human responses, that people will long for simple, natural responses. That’s my hope, anyway, that people will value genuine connection rather than preferring to spend time with chatbots because “My chatbot is so much more complimentary toward me than my spouse or is so much more willing to change its mind to accommodate my needs.” I’m hoping we don’t just go for the chatbots because they’re better at boosting our egos. As people increasingly are interacting with chatbots rather than real human beings to get their work done, I suspect that authentic, connected human interactions are going to become more important. What are the components of emotional intelligence? How can we become emotionally competent? The first component is self-awareness, which means being conscious of our own thoughts, feelings, and what’s happening inside of us. It is the capacity to notice that every simple interaction stimulates myriad different emotions and associations to all the other moments in our life. The second big area is self-regulation, which is the ability to manage our emotions in a healthy way. It means that we’re able to feel the full range of our emotions and yet not be overwhelmed by them. The third big component is social awareness or empathy, and that’s noticing what’s going on in others. This means being free enough of self-preoccupation so that we can see that other people have needs, desires, fears, and hurts, and so we can respond to them in appropriate ways. And the fourth big component is social skills, which is the ability to work well in teams, to be able to solve conflicts and help the team to cooperate. Emotional competence is key in our personal lives too. I’m a clinical psychologist by training and I know that most people are not struggling because they can’t figure out the answer to a technical question. They are struggling because they can’t figure out how to get along with their kids, their parents, their spouses, their siblings, their neighbors, or their friends. How do we stop hurting each other’s feelings and find a way to feel safely connected and love one another? That’s our big challenge. — This story is reprinted with permission from The Harvard Gazette. *** Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here. — Photo credit: unsplash The post Why Employers Want Workers With High EQs appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The animated movie ‘Elio’ Is out now on Digital Pixar has made some wonderful films over the years. Each one has told some amazing stories and have taken viewers of all ages on some mind blowing journeys. When I first heard about Elio it looked like it could be a fun animated film. I was able to get a digital copy of this movie and here is what I thought of it. (c) Walt Disney Studios You can read the plot for this film here: Elio, a space fanatic with an active imagination, finds himself on a cosmic misadventure where he must form new bonds with eccentric alien lifeforms, navigate a crisis of intergalactic proportions and somehow discover who he is truly meant to be. (c) Walt Disney Studios Overall this was an alright movie. The visuals were amazing and really helped bring the environments and the characters to life. The story was fine but not as great as it could have been and parts of it felt kind of weak. There are a few emotional moments that could tug at your heart strings a bit though. Kids are sure to enjoy this one, but it won’t be for everyone. ‘Inside the Communiverse: The World and Characters of Elio’ showed how this story came together and the process of bringing many of the characters to life. ‘Extraterrestrial Easter Eggs and Fun Facts’ was a lot of fun to watch and revealed some pretty cool easter eggs that I totally missed. There was also a funny Gag Reel and a few interesting deleted scenes. (c) Walt Disney Studios Elio is available now on 4K Ultra HD, Blu-Ray, DVD and Digital. You can follow this film on Facebook and Instagram. The post The Family Fun Space Adventure ‘Elio’ Is Out Now on Digital appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

⏱️ Every five seconds, someone’s identity is stolen. Don’t let it be yours. I trust NordProtect for real protection and real alerts. No gimmicks, just results. Get 65% off now while you still can. I switched from LifeLock and saved a ton of money! The post Every five seconds, someone’s identity is stolen appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

By Noreen Want to know how to save money when buying a house? We’ve got some ideas for you! From consolidating your shopping trips to sharing closing costs, these tips will help you keep more money in your pocket when you buy your home. Some of these may seem counterintuitive (wait, like, I should spend money on an inspector?), but I promise they’ll benefit you in the long run. Without further ado, here are 14 ways to save money when shopping for a new home. 1. Decide What You Want Make your choices. List your needs and wants, negotiables and non-negotiables, when it comes to buying a house. Then, don’t waste a minute looking at anything else. And don’t budge! This list of wants and needs might include “less than a 25-minute drive to work” or “3 bedrooms or more.” You know what you and your family need the most. Does this mean you can’t change your mind? No, you can always adjust the scales. But by sticking to your guns, you’ll avoid the things you don’t need and focus on everything you do. 2. Shop Neighborhoods From Your Couch An online map lets you learn a lot about a home or neighborhood. Have the little Google man walk around for you so that you don’t waste time and fuel driving around towns. This way, you’ll know ahead of time if there’s something like a busy intersection around the corner, a power plant two doors away, or even something good like a bakery two doors down. 3. Scour Listing Photos You can learn a great deal about a home by stealthily inspecting its listing photos. Look for things like dated electric outlets, heating sources, mold, potential repairs; the list goes on. When buying our foreclosure home, we knew before we saw it in person that it would need work. Sometimes, you can even tell if a photo has been doctored, stretched, or enhanced. If you decide it’s not your house, pitch it and move on! 4. Consolidate Your Home Shopping Days Particularly if you live far away from your new home’s destination, you can save money by shopping for houses in clusters. We lived in Queens while shopping for a house in Jersey. Whether we drove or took the train, tolls and train fares cost a small fortune for two adults to commute. Take a full day or weekend to view neighborhoods and homes in bulk. 5. Drive Around a Prospective Neighborhood Once you are ready to consolidate your shopping days, schedule a “drive-by” day without a realtor. Make a list of houses you want to see, then drive by all of them. You can probably cut your list down very quickly. You may not have initially noticed something geographically undesirable, like a train station next door or a sewage plant across the street. Or maybe the pictures looked amazing but conveniently didn’t show that the house isn’t standing up straight (yes, this exists!). Regardless of the turn-off, trust me on this: I promise you’ll know the second you look at a house if it’s not for you. Trust your gut, and don’t buy that house. 6. Organize Your Money Get your financial ducks in a row. A better credit score means a better mortgage rate. A higher down payment means a smaller mortgage. Furthermore, with an airtight financial presentation, you’ll get preapproved for a loan faster – and time is money when bidding on a house! 7. Make the Ask Check if the seller will contribute to closing costs. Hey, you never know until you try! 8. Explore All Possible Costs Look at fees besides the monthly mortgage payment. When shopping for a house, particularly for the first time, it’s easy to look at principal + interest costs as provided by a listing website. If the principal, interest, taxes, and insurance (PITI) look like they will be less than your monthly rent, buying a home is tempting! But have you considered property taxes, HOAs, and utilities? What about the costs of trash and recycling pickup, if applicable? Or consider everyone’s favorite duo – maintenance and repairs? By foreseeing potential “extras,” you could save yourself a lot of money in the future. 9. Understand PMI PMI is private mortgage insurance. No, it doesn’t insure you – it insures the bank in case you don’t pay. If you make a down payment of less than 20%, you’ll have the cost of PMI on top of your mortgage, interest, and taxes. It’s not cute! Avoid it if you can! 10. Educate Yourself Don’t pay for investing courses, classes, seminars, or coaches… YET. There is an OCEAN of information out there on buying houses. Start with your local library and read up on investing strategies that will work for you. Read all the blogs! Follow the investors you admire on social media. Use your best judgment to decide what philosophies you want to adapt and which you want to ditch. I would be shocked if you exhaust all the free avenues of information necessary before you get your first house. 11. Use an Experienced Agent Now is not the time for an agent’s first real estate deal. An experienced agent should guide you through the home-buying process more efficiently. Get recommendations from family, friends, and coworkers. Are you hoping to support your cousin’s bestie’s sister, who just got their real estate license? Well, maybe they can work with an experienced agent as an assistant. But don’t sacrifice your home purchase in the name of being nice. This is a big deal with a lot of money on the line. 12. Pay For Quality, Once Skipping things like a title search or home inspection might seem like they’re saving you money upfront. But if you miss a huge problem, you’ll pay exponentially more for it down the road, so don’t skimp on them. For example, let’s say you skip the inspection and don’t know that there’s a little mold in one duct. It spreads, and instead of paying $500 for an inspector and $5 for a bottle of Lysol, you’re paying $4,000 for mold abatement professionals to fix the whole basement. 13. Remember a Contingency If you’re buying a home that needs work, carefully estimate your repair costs and create a home renovation budget. Then – and here’s the important part – add 10-15%! There’s nothing wrong with a foreclosure or fixer-upper – in fact, we tackled a two-for-one in that regard. It was financially a great decision, but know that we were very intentional when bidding and renovating. A contingency fund is imperative, even more so with an older home or foreclosure. 14. Cash Is King Have cash at the ready in a high-yield savings account. Cash always helps. Cash, cash, cash. The Benjamins. The coins. As my immigrant Irish grandma would say, “‘Tis better to be looking at it than for it.” So, save up! There you go – 14 ways to save when you’re buying a home. From consolidating your shopping trips and organizing your money to planning a contingency fund and keeping cash, you will be a savvy house shopper in no time! This article originally appeared on Wealth of Geeks. — Previously Published on The Invested Wallet. — Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * Subscribe If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here. — Photo credit: iStock.com The post 14 Smart Ways to Save Money When Buying a House appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

A black man kills a white woman in an American city, and the mainstream media gives it zero coverage. Imagine if the races were reversed. The US mainstream media tends to operate by encouraging a certain prefabricated outrage. Sensationalized narratives are cultivated along predictable tracks. But no less egregious is what the media chooses to ignore. Few events of late have better exposed the ideological underpinnings of the media – and of the elite whose narratives it plugs – than the recent brutal and shocking murder of a young Ukrainian woman on a train in Charlotte, North Carolina. On August 22, a career criminal, Decarlos Brown Jr., casually walked up behind 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska, who was seated on a train minding her own business, and stabbed her three times in the neck in cold blood, killing her. He sauntered away, still clutching the knife dripping blood. The mindless and savage attack was captured on surveillance footage, but Charlotte’s Democratic Mayor Vi Lyles pushed for it not to be released, ostensibly out of respect for the victim’s family. But the footage did eventually surface, and the story spread like wildfire. But this was a wildfire that couldn’t reach the impervious redoubt of the mainstream media – even after Elon Musk gave it the push into viral territory by chiming in on an End Wokeness thread pointing out the stunning media silence. In fact, not a single major legacy outlet – the New York Times, Washington Post, NPR, Reuters, CNN, Wall Street Journal, and others – picked it up. One would think that, by sheer chance, one of these esteemed outlets would have bucked the trend. But that didn’t happen because, as Matt Taibbi once brilliantly pointed out, “Reporting is done in herds, no one wildebeest can break formation without screwing things up for the others. So, they’ll all hold the line, until they all stop holding the line.” As of this writing, it seems the media herd is starting to reluctantly skate to where the puck is going. And that means that some version of the story, however sanitized, will soon appear everywhere. So what exactly has given this story its irresistible momentum? Let's start with the blatant double standard about reporting interracial crime. A white victim and a black perpetrator, as was the case in this instance, is usually a circumstance that tips the scales in favor of silence. When an instance of black-on-white crime cannot be avoided, the respective races of the individuals involved are not mentioned, and the tone is more along the lines of “aww shucks, what a tragedy.” When the racial roles are reversed, the media coverage is extensive and sensational, and the race angle is established immediately and runs throughout the ensuing coverage like an electric wire. Given such highly distorted media coverage of interracial crime, one would be forgiven for assuming that it is blacks who are perpetually in mortal danger of racist attack by whites in the US. This view was a large part of the impetus behind the Black Lives Matter movement. However, the actual statistics on interracial crime, which are not easy to find, show otherwise. Buried inside this Department of Justice (DOJ) report from 2020 is a rather remarkable admission: “[In 2019], there were 5.3 times as many violent incidents committed by black offenders against white victims (472,570) as were committed by white offenders against black victims (89,980).” Such stark wording was not repeated in subsequent reports under the Biden DOJ, but there is no reason to believe anything has changed in the streets. Zarutska’s murder certainly comes at a time of record-low American trust in the mainstream media. Instances of misreporting and factual disasters have become such a recurrent theme as to not require individual examples. The media’s efforts at narrative formation have also become so heavy-handed that identifying the establishment cause being promoted in almost any piece of reporting is now a parlor game. But – and I venture into very risky terrain here – the uproar over this senseless killing also points to a deeply ensconced taboo slowly starting to unravel: Many white Americans are tired of being denied the right to display even the slightest and most tentative hint of the type of racial solidarity that other groups are extended so liberally. It is a story being played out on a different stage with different actors in Great Britain. There’s another angle here, and it is one that has already been remarked upon in numerous places. The victim was a citizen of a country that the US has spent enormous treasure and effort ostensibly defending since 2022. The roughly $130 billion in aid that Washington has coughed up for Kiev comes out to some $3,500 per Ukrainian citizen. Certainly enough for a bodyguard on train rides. And yet the silence from the pro-Ukraine crowd has mirrored that of the media at large. This certainly confirms what has been abundantly clear throughout the war and remains so today: Ukrainian deaths that don’t advance a Western elite media narrative are dismissed and ignored. But this lack of reaction also casts in sharp relief the reality that pro-Ukraine sentiment in the US is largely a cause bundled in with the rest of the progressive agenda, underpinned by the uniform mouthpiece of a jaded media. The Ukrainian flags one sees out and about rarely reflect a principled stance but rather deference to elite cues. It will be said that all sides have merely assumed their positions on the barricades to score political points on this deeply human tragedy. We will all be accused of coming to praise Caesar rather than to bury him. This young woman’s death is indeed a human tragedy and a particularly painful one. But to see it as only a tragedy is to dismiss its larger context and to refuse to draw any conclusions. That is willful ignorance. When a tragedy unveils such a confluence of two deep ideological biases, what it does is reveal the contours of the magnet moving underneath the pattern of American life. View the full article

A black man kills a white woman in an American city, and the mainstream media gives it zero coverage. Imagine if the races were reversed. The US mainstream media tends to operate by encouraging a certain prefabricated outrage. Sensationalized narratives are cultivated along predictable tracks. But no less egregious is what the media chooses to ignore. Few events of late have better exposed the ideological underpinnings of the media – and of the elite whose narratives it plugs – than the recent brutal and shocking murder of a young Ukrainian woman on a train in Charlotte, North Carolina. On August 22, a career criminal, Decarlos Brown Jr., casually walked up behind 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska, who was seated on a train minding her own business, and stabbed her three times in the neck in cold blood, killing her. He sauntered away, still clutching the knife dripping blood. The mindless and savage attack was captured on surveillance footage, but Charlotte’s Democratic Mayor Vi Lyles pushed for it not to be released, ostensibly out of respect for the victim’s family. But the footage did eventually surface, and the story spread like wildfire. But this was a wildfire that couldn’t reach the impervious redoubt of the mainstream media – even after Elon Musk gave it the push into viral territory by chiming in on an End Wokeness thread pointing out the stunning media silence. In fact, not a single major legacy outlet – the New York Times, Washington Post, NPR, Reuters, CNN, Wall Street Journal, and others – picked it up. One would think that, by sheer chance, one of these esteemed outlets would have bucked the trend. But that didn’t happen because, as Matt Taibbi once brilliantly pointed out, “Reporting is done in herds, no one wildebeest can break formation without screwing things up for the others. So, they’ll all hold the line, until they all stop holding the line.” As of this writing, it seems the media herd is starting to reluctantly skate to where the puck is going. And that means that some version of the story, however sanitized, will soon appear everywhere. Read more ‘Western liberal dictatorships’ spreading hate – Moscow So what exactly has given this story its irresistible momentum? Let's start with the blatant double standard about reporting interracial crime. A white victim and a black perpetrator, as was the case in this instance, is usually a circumstance that tips the scales in favor of silence. When an instance of black-on-white crime cannot be avoided, the respective races of the individuals involved are not mentioned, and the tone is more along the lines of “aww shucks, what a tragedy.” When the racial roles are reversed, the media coverage is extensive and sensational, and the race angle is established immediately and runs throughout the ensuing coverage like an electric wire. Given such highly distorted media coverage of interracial crime, one would be forgiven for assuming that it is blacks who are perpetually in mortal danger of racist attack by whites in the US. This view was a large part of the impetus behind the Black Lives Matter movement. However, the actual statistics on interracial crime, which are not easy to find, show otherwise. Buried inside this Department of Justice (DOJ) report from 2020 is a rather remarkable admission: “[In 2019], there were 5.3 times as many violent incidents committed by black offenders against white victims (472,570) as were committed by white offenders against black victims (89,980).” Such stark wording was not repeated in subsequent reports under the Biden DOJ, but there is no reason to believe anything has changed in the streets. Zarutska’s murder certainly comes at a time of record-low American trust in the mainstream media. Instances of misreporting and factual disasters have become such a recurrent theme as to not require individual examples. The media’s efforts at narrative formation have also become so heavy-handed that identifying the establishment cause being promoted in almost any piece of reporting is now a parlor game. But – and I venture into very risky terrain here – the uproar over this senseless killing also points to a deeply ensconced taboo slowly starting to unravel: Many white Americans are tired of being denied the right to display even the slightest and most tentative hint of the type of racial solidarity that other groups are extended so liberally. It is a story being played out on a different stage with different actors in Great Britain. Read more US scientists axe ‘woke’ to keep cash flowing – WSJ There’s another angle here, and it is one that has already been remarked upon in numerous places. The victim was a citizen of a country that the US has spent enormous treasure and effort ostensibly defending since 2022. The roughly $130 billion in aid that Washington has coughed up for Kiev comes out to some $3,500 per Ukrainian citizen. Certainly enough for a bodyguard on train rides. And yet the silence from the pro-Ukraine crowd has mirrored that of the media at large. This certainly confirms what has been abundantly clear throughout the war and remains so today: Ukrainian deaths that don’t advance a Western elite media narrative are dismissed and ignored. But this lack of reaction also casts in sharp relief the reality that pro-Ukraine sentiment in the US is largely a cause bundled in with the rest of the progressive agenda, underpinned by the uniform mouthpiece of a jaded media. The Ukrainian flags one sees out and about rarely reflect a principled stance but rather deference to elite cues. It will be said that all sides have merely assumed their positions on the barricades to score political points on this deeply human tragedy. We will all be accused of coming to praise Caesar rather than to bury him. This young woman’s death is indeed a human tragedy and a particularly painful one. But to see it as only a tragedy is to dismiss its larger context and to refuse to draw any conclusions. That is willful ignorance. When a tragedy unveils such a confluence of two deep ideological biases, what it does is reveal the contours of the magnet moving underneath the pattern of American life. View the full article

By Greg Toppo, The 74 This story first appeared at The 74, a nonprofit news site covering education. Sign up for free newsletters from The 74 to get more like this in your inbox. Jean M. Twenge holds an unusual place among Ph.D. psychologists. For the past two decades, she has toggled between the obscurity of the academy and the glare of academic fame. The author of two college textbooks and five books for non-academic readers, she is equally at home researching and writing about adolescent mental health, sleep disorders, digital technology, homework and narcissism. She was one of the first experts to warn nearly a decade ago that smartphones could hold negative consequences for our mental health. A decade after the advent of the iPhone, Twenge went viral in 2017 with an Atlantic piece that asked, provocatively, “Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?” A professor at San Diego State University, she has collaborated for years with the researcher and author Jonathan Haidt, whose 2024 book The Anxious Generation was a mega-bestseller that has helped build momentum for school cellphone bans in a growing number of states — 35 as of this fall. And she is one of the few experts in the education and mental health world to have appeared on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher. Twenge’s 2017 book, iGen, looked at how modern teens are somehow both more connected than previous generations and less prepared for adulthood. In it, she theorized that depression rates among teens are rising because they spend more time online, less time with friends in person, and less time sleeping — a problematic combination. The dilemmas Twenge identified in 2017 are only getting worse: By 2023, the typical American teen was spending nearly five hours a day using social media, recent research finds, with severe depression rates rising. In one key study, girls who were heavy users of social media were three times as likely to be depressed as non-users. Her sixth book, out Tuesday, offers practical guidelines for parents raising kids in the age of ubiquitous connectivity and sophisticated — some would say addictive — social media. Twenge doesn’t shy away from challenging harried parents to do better. Among her suggestions: No one — parents included — should have electronic devices in the bedroom overnight. Likewise, she says, the first handheld device a kid should receive is a “basic phone” that allows calls, texts and not much else. “It’s a really big myth out there that if kids are going to communicate, it has to be on social media,” she said. “That’s just not true.” Ahead of its publication, Twenge spoke with The 74’s Greg Toppo about her rules, her work with Haidt and her belief that we need stiffer laws that keep young people off social media until they’re old enough to drive. Their conversation has been edited for length and clarity. I wanted to start with a quote from your book. It’s a parent’s description of his 10-year-old after she got her first smartphone: “She suddenly wasn’t playing with her younger siblings as much. Novels were promptly cast aside. She wasn’t around to help with dinner anymore. She danced less, laughed less. She was quieter. Our home was quieter.” That’s so heartbreaking, but I’m guessing it’s not unusual. I don’t think it is. Many, many parents describe how their kids are different after they give them a smartphone. And it’s especially heartbreaking when that’s a 10-year-old, but even when it’s a 16-year-old who might otherwise be ready. It’s very noticeable how they change after they get that phone in their pocket. Were there any particular data points about smartphones and social media that persuaded you they were causing a mental health crisis? It was a slow process for me, and it wasn’t an immediate conclusion when I first started to see these trends in adolescent mental health. It was first a process of ruling out obvious causes, like the economy, which wasn’t aligned at all, and any other big events that might happen. I would trace it, really, to the big survey data sets that I work with on teens, where there was just this combination all at once of not just rising depression, but teens spending less time with each other in person and less time sleeping. And then realizing, “Well, wait: What might explain all of those things happening at the same time?” And it seemed clear that a good amount of that answer is probably smartphones and social media, particularly after I found a Pew Research Center poll about the ownership of smartphones, that [it] reached 50% in the U.S. at the end of 2012. And that’s right around the same time all these changes were happening. I want to dig into a few of your rules. No. 3: “No social media until age 16 or later.” That seems a lot tougher than what most families practice. Why 16? And what do you say to parents who worry about their kids’ social isolation and FOMO or Fear Of Missing Out? I have not found that with my kids — that they’ve been socially isolated for not having social media. Most other parents I talked to who have put off social media have also not found that with their kids. Social media is just one mechanism for communicating. There’s so many others. Kids can call each other, they can text each other — they do a lot of texting. They can FaceTime each other, they can get together in person. Usually that ends up tilting toward texting, but it does not have to be social media. It’s a really big myth out there that if kids are going to communicate, it has to be on social media. That’s just not true. And that leads to rule No. 4, where you advocate “basic phones” — your phrase — before smartphones. In a world where even school assignments need Internet access, is that practical for most families? Yeah, because kids have laptops. And if the family can’t afford to buy them a laptop, almost all schools provide a laptop. So they have Internet access on their laptop even if they don’t have it on their phone. And laptops have come so far down in price too, that if you haven’t bought a laptop recently, or if you use Mac laptops like I do and my kids do now, you might not realize you can get a Chromebook for $150. So that’s another big thing: Maybe 10 years ago, if a kid doesn’t have Internet access on their phone, then they don’t have Internet access at all. That’s just not true in the current landscape. Although you do have problems with school laptops. Oh, yes. I mean, this is a thing! They get Internet access on the laptop, whether it’s a school laptop or a personal one, and then that opens a whole other can of worms. Absolutely true. Laptops are the bane of my existence as a parent, particularly the school laptop, although they’ve gotten a little bit better, at least in my district. Actually, that was going to be my next question, this parental controls thing. It sounds like your district is being responsive. Well, on that issue, they still don’t have a coherent phone policy during the school day. In the high school, it’s especially bad. That’s something I’m hoping will change. It is changing in a lot of schools around the country, thankfully. A lot more schools are doing “no phones during the school day, bell to bell,” which is what needs to happen. A big message of the book is phone-free schools. And I know you’ve worked with Jonathan Haidt, who has pushed for schools to get rid of phones. A few critics have said that this is a simple solution to a complex problem, and that it’s not entirely clear that phones are actually causing the mental health issues that Haidt has become a best-seller writing about. How do you respond to that criticism? There are a couple of things to unpack there. For one thing, even if you take mental health out of the equation, kids should still not have their phones at school for academic and focus reasons, for the reason of developing social skills by talking to their friends at lunch, for the reason that a bell-to-bell ban is actually easier to enforce than a classroom-by-classroom ban. There are so many reasons for it that don’t even include mental health. The second question is [about] the research on phones and social media and mental health: We’ve known for quite a while that teens who spend more time on social media are more likely to be depressed or unhappy. Almost every single study finds that. Where you sometimes get more debate is, “O.K., that’s correlation. What about causation?” But in the last 10 years, we’ve gotten a lot more studies, and the studies that ask people to cut back or give up social media for at least three weeks a month or so, almost all of those studies show an improvement in well-being. And I don’t want to get too in the weeds here, but that’s actually a little bit shocking, because by definition in those experiments, you’re taking people who are at average use and having them cut back to low. That’s actually not where we see the biggest effects in the correlational studies. The heaviest users are much more likely to be depressed than the average or light users. So, you know, you can’t ethically do an experiment that would really answer the exact question: You can’t take 12-year-olds, randomly assign them to spend eight hours a day on social media, and then see what happens. At least I hope not. In the book, you talk about the 10 rules “creating a firewall for kids against anxiety, attention issues and constant insecurity.” I think most parents would get behind that. But let’s be honest, they’re users of these tools themselves. How do we craft rules around web dependence and social media without being hypocrites? Parents have to be role models. Parents are also allowed a small amount of what I call “digital hypocrisy.” Because they’re adults, they have jobs, they may be responsible for elderly parents, etc. But that said, parents should think about their technology use as well. They should get their phones and electronic devices out of their bedroom at night. They should also consider doing things like not having social media on their phone. If they want to use Facebook or Instagram or Twitter, do it on your laptop. That’s what I do. I mean, I don’t have much social media to begin with. I have X, but I don’t have it on my phone, and that’s very much a purposeful decision. During family dinners, unless there’s a really specific reason for me to have my phone with me, it’s upstairs. That seems to be an easy one: Phones away at dinner. Well, you’d think so, but you’ve got to get the whole family on board, and sometimes husbands are not really into that. I want to skip to Rule No. 8: “Give your kids real-world freedom,” which will probably be met with some resistance. I have a 4-year-old grandson, and when I read your recommendation to let 4-to-7-year-olds go find items a few aisles away in the grocery store, I shouted, “Hell no!” Why? Why is there, do you think, a resistance to that idea? I have nightmares about this child being snatched from me at Safeway. I guess I want you to just pull me back from the edge, if you would. I mean, that is not just unlikely to happen — the chances of that are so infinitesimal it probably shouldn’t even factor into our decision making. There’s one stat in there, and I forget the exact number, but someone calculated that if you wanted your kid to get kidnapped, how many hours — it turned out to be years — would they have to be in your front yard for that to happen? It’s something like 100,000 years. O.K., well that helps. And a four-year-old loves that stuff! They love being grown up. I mean, look, even if you don’t do the grocery store thing, make sure they learn how to tie their own shoes, that they know how to get dressed. I remember when my girls were that age, and it occasionally amazed me when I would be with other moms in various situations and their kids couldn’t dress themselves at that age, and that’s where it starts. At pretty much every age, the great thing is that giving kids independence makes it easier for parents. It is easier as a parent if your 4-year-old can dress themselves. It is easier if your teenager makes dinner once a week. It’s good for everybody. A lot of people might see this freedom rule as somehow contradictory to some of the other rules, in which you talk about adults being “in control.” Can you parse that? For sure. Jon has said this as well — and I completely agree: We have overprotected kids in the real world and underprotected them online, and these principles are just trying to get those two to balance. When you’re talking about the real-world freedom thing, it’s not a matter of letting kids completely run wild and do whatever they want. We’re talking about giving kids some of the freedoms that parents themselves had when they were kids, and to build independence in a way that is really good for kids and good for them as they grow up. I can’t even remember who said this to me when I had young kids: “You’re not raising children, you’re raising adults.” And that’s just so true. That is your job as a parent. Giving kids some freedom and independence is a really, really key part of raising an adult. I wrote a whole book about learning games, and one of the powerful ideas that I took from that reporting is that many adults don’t realize how social video games have become. You acknowledge that, saying gaming is the primary way that some kids spend time with friends. But I gather that you see the risks as well. And I wonder if you could talk about that. It really comes back to the principle of “Everything in moderation.” Many games are not as obviously toxic as social media. Games tend to be more in real time, more interactive. But is it a good idea for kids to be spending five or six hours a day gaming? Probably not. There have to be some limits. You quote Sean Parker, the Facebook founder, admitting they’re “exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology” to keep users on the app. Given social media’s sophistication, are mere parental rules sufficient? I mean, don’t we need a bigger hammer, like legislation and policies? Absolutely! Yes! Yes! It would be absolutely amazing for parents and for kids if we had laws that verified age for social media. I mean, ideally, that would be age verification to make sure they’re 16 or older, to raise the minimum age to 16. But even if we just enforced existing law with the minimum of 13, that would be progress, given the enormous numbers of 10-, 11- and 12-year-olds who are on social media, often without their parents’ permission — often explicitly against their parents’ permission — and actually against the COPPA law [Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule] that was passed in 1998. What is the biggest obstacle to getting better regulation, or, to your point, to enforcing the existing regulations? It’s interesting. The barrier is not the inability to verify age or the inability to verify age without a government ID. There are so many companies that will verify age now that they have their own trade association. It can be done in many different ways. The biggest barrier is tech companies themselves. Any time a state passes a law about verifying age on social media or even pornography sites, the companies will sue — every single time. They have sued to keep those laws from going into effect. Are any emerging technologies that parents should be concerned about? Do your rules need updating for AI or virtual reality or whatever comes next? AI chatbots are what a lot of parents are rightly worried about. And yes, you could certainly modify or add to the rules and say, “No AI chat bots until 16 or 18 — probably 18.” And of course, it depends on what we’re talking about. It is common for kids to use ChatGPT when they need to look up something for homework or even have it write their essays — that’s a whole other horrible discussion. But what I’m specifically referring to is the many chatbots out there right now that are supposed to be AI friends, or worse, AI boyfriends or girlfriends. There’s already been a tragic case of a child who committed suicide, apparently due to one of these AI girlfriends. It’s just really scary to think of kids having their first romantic relationship with an AI chatbot. It’s terrifying. The good news is, if you follow that rule about your kids having basic phones, if you give them one of the phones that’s designed for kids, those phones do not allow AI relationship chatbots. It’s on their banned apps, just like social media and pornography and violence apps. Parents have such a tough job, and it’s nice that there are at least a few tools out there that can make their lives easier and keep their kids off of things like AI girlfriend and boyfriend chatbots. In keeping with the theme of overwhelmed parents, I wonder: If I were to come to you as a parent and say, “Oh my God, Jean, 10 rules is a lot. If I could only do two or three, where would I start?” Is that even a smart thing to do? And if so, where would you start? I would say, “No electronic devices in the bedroom overnight.” Start there, because the research is so solid on it, and it’s such a straightforward rule, and it works for everybody, of all ages. Your teenager can’t say, “Well, you do it differently,” or, “You get to be on social media.” No, actually, my phone is outside my bedroom when I sleep at night too. So that’s a great place to start. And then, just because they have so much utility, I would probably say the second rule, about basic phones, because even with all of the mess of the laptops, I’m just so happy and grateful that my kids did not have the Internet or social media in their pocket until they were older. As a parent and a grandparent, I really appreciate you using your real life to inform a lot of these rules. In a way, it hardens them a bit, makes them more durable. Anything I haven’t asked you about that you feel needs to be in the mix? Two things I’ll throw out there just in terms of pushbacks: With “No phones during the school day,” the pushback is often “What about school shootings?” And it’s actually less safe for students to have access to their phones during an active shooter situation. And I go through the reasons for that in that chapter. And then the real-world freedom piece: When you look at the things that I’m suggesting in terms of how to give your kids freedom, obviously letting them go off on their own in the real world is important, and you should do that too. But there are lots of things in that list of suggestions you can do without even leaving the house: teens making their own doctor and hairstylist appointments, for example, or middle-school kids, or even elementary school kids, cooking dinner for the family. Those are great experiences for kids to have without too much parental interference. You do have to — and I know this by experience — step back, especially with the cooking piece, and let them do it by themselves and learn how to make mistakes. It’s tempting to just be there when they’re doing that, but you learn quickly that if you leave them alone, they’ll figure it out. And then you can go do something else. Go and read that book you’ve been meaning to read for a while. Go for a walk. Watch TV. Have some relaxation time that you wouldn’t otherwise get. I wrote a piece a couple weeks ago on unschooling, this idea of pulling kids out of school and letting them find their own level and their own interests. This almost strikes me as unparenting. It is — and I’m not a huge fan of unschooling, because it’s a rare kid it would actually work for — but it is. It’s the general idea that not being up in your kids’ business all the time is better for both parents and kids. It’s something we really have to consider more. — This story was produced by The 74, a non-profit, independent news organization focused on education in America. *** Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * Subscribe If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here. Photo credit: unsplash The post Kids Shouldn’t Access Social Media Until They’re Old Enough to Drive, Book Says appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The US president can call up members of his administration at any time of day or night, according to his VP US President Donald Trump works almost without resting, Vice President J.D. Vance has claimed, noting that the American leader frequently contacts his aides and cabinet members at any time of the day or night. Speaking in an interview with Fox News host Lara Trump, Vance explained that the president can call up his team at 12:30 am or 2 in the morning and then be on another call at 6 am. “It’s like, ‘Mr. President, did you go to sleep last night? Like, what is going on here?’” Vance said. “One thing I’ve learned just working with him every day is, he doesn’t have an off switch,” he said. Media reports have long described Trump as a light sleeper who averages less than five hours of rest each night. Members of his administration have echoed similar experiences. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in July that Trump often telephones him shortly after midnight. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. also told reporters last month that Trump calls him “three or four times a week” about health policy matters. Vance’s comments come as speculations about Trump’s health have increased in recent weeks. Observers have pointed to his minimal rest and photographs showing bruises. The White House has attributed these to frequent aspirin use and a condition known as chronic venous insufficiency, dismissing claims of more serious health issues. Last month, rumors spread online that Trump had supposedly died after a brief absence from public events. Hashtags such as #TrumpIsDead gained traction on social media. However, the president soon reappeared in public. View the full article

Paris has little chance of reining in its finances amid ongoing “political destabilization,” the German state media network has reported France’s ballooning sovereign debt coupled with political infighting could threaten the fiscal stability of the Eurozone, Deutsche Welle has reported, citing an expert. France has one of the highest national debts in the EU, currently standing at €3.35 trillion ($3.9 trillion) — about 113% of GDP. The ratio is expected to climb to 125% by 2030. Its budget deficit is projected at 5.4–5.8% this year, well above the bloc’s 3% limit. Friedrich Heinemann of the ZEW Leibniz Center for European Economic Research in Mannheim, Germany, told the outlet in an article published on Saturday “we should be worried. The eurozone is not stable at this point.” A drastic austerity plan proposed by French minority government Prime Minister Francois Bayrou triggered a no confidence vote that he lost on Monday evening. The plan involved slashing public sector jobs, curbing welfare spending, as well as axing two public holidays. The right-wing National Rally, the Socialists, and the leftist France Unbowed vehemently opposed the proposal. An Elabe poll ahead of the vote also showed most respondents were against the measures. Heinemann told DW he doubts France will find a way out soon, given the bitter political infighting. In July, Bloomberg, citing ING Groep NV experts, similarly claimed that France’s rising debt could be a “ticking bomb” for EU financial stability. Despite the considerable budget deficit, France plans to hike military spending to €64 billion in 2027, double what the country spent in 2017. President Emmanuel Macron has repeatedly cited a supposed Russian threat. The Kremlin has consistently dismissed the claims as “nonsense,” accusing the EU of rapidly militarizing. In May, member states approved a €150 billion ($169 billion) debt program for arms procurement. View the full article

Prime Minister Francois Bayrou has been ousted by the National Assembly in a no-confidence vote The French government has fallen after Prime Minister Francois Bayrou lost a crucial confidence vote in parliament on Monday. Bayrou is the second consecutive prime minister under President Emmanuel Macron to be ousted, throwing the nation into political and economic turmoil. A no-confidence motion in the National Assembly requires at least 288 votes to pass. Monday’s motion received 364 votes, with the left-wing New Popular Front and the right-wing National Rally uniting in opposition to end a months-long standoff over Bayrou’s austerity budget. Having previously survived eight no-confidence motions, Bayrou called this vote himself, in a bid to secure backing for proposals that forecast almost €44 billion ($52 billion) of savings to ease France’s debt burden before the budget is presented in October. The prime minister, who has repeatedly warned that France’s national debt poses a “mortal danger” to the country, appeared to acknowledge his fate. In a bitter remark on Sunday, Bayrou lashed out at rival parties that he said “hate each other” yet joined forces “to bring down the government.” Bayrou is the second French prime minister in succession to be brought down following Michel Barnier’s ejection last December after just three months in office – and the sixth to serve under Macron since he was first elected in 2017. Bayrou’s ouster reportedly leaves the French president to choose between appointing a Socialist prime minister to steer a budget through parliament, effectively ceding control of domestic policy, or call snap elections that polls suggest favour Marine Le Pen’s National Rally. With Macron’s approval ratings already hitting historic lows, either choice risks further weakening his presidency. Analysts warn that if markets lose confidence in France’s ability to rein in its deficit and mounting debt, the country could face turmoil reminiscent of the UK during the brief Liz Truss premiership. Public discontent with Macron’s leadership has deepened, with the latest Le Figaro poll showing nearly 80% of French no longer trust the president. Thousands marched through Paris at the weekend demanding Macron’s resignation and carrying placards reading ‘Let’s stop Macron’ and ‘Frexit.’ View the full article

I once watched a conscious couple break up. They weren’t the type to hurl insults or storm out over whose turn it was to do the dishes. They didn’t weaponize silence or keep score of who cared more. They were the kind of couple who actually sat with presence instead of defensiveness, who could name their projections before they became daggers, who tried—really tried—to meet each other without turning love into a battlefield. And still, it ended. Meanwhile, there I was in the corner like an unpaid extra in a Nicholas Sparks movie—red-eyed, mascara streaked, clutching tissues like they were sacred scripture. At one point, I even blurted out a trembling, “Can you work it out, bone it out—ANYTHING?” Spoiler: nope. They could not. The Myth of Forever Here’s the thing I realized watching them: conscious relationships don’t guarantee forever. They don’t promise rocking chairs on a porch at age 80 just because you’ve mastered eye contact, can name your childhood triggers, and have impeccable communication skills. Consciousness isn’t a ticket to permanence. It’s a commitment to honesty. And sometimes honesty means admitting that the love you’re holding no longer feels alive. That doesn’t mean failure. It means truth. But our culture doesn’t quite know what to do with that. We treat longevity like a gold medal. “How long have you been together?” gets asked at dinner parties as if years alone are proof of love’s depth. The Silver Anniversary Couple I’ve seen another picture too: the silver-anniversary couple, glasses raised, proudly announcing, “We made it 25 years!” Everyone claps. On the surface, it looks like triumph. But I’ve also noticed the way their eyes wander past each other, the way their bodies sit stiff and separate, like strangers wearing wedding rings. There’s no worse ache than feeling lonely while sitting next to the person who’s supposed to be your person. This isn’t to dismiss the beauty of endurance. Some couples genuinely deepen with time, and longevity can be a testament to devotion. But sometimes “staying together” is just endurance dressed up as devotion. Conscious Love vs. Endurance Love Watching that conscious couple end their relationship, I saw love that refused to rot in silence. They weren’t bowing out because they didn’t care. They were bowing out because they cared enough not to turn each other into prisoners of the relationship. That’s the difference: Endurance love says, “We survived. We stayed.” Conscious love says, “We were honest. We stayed while it was alive, and we left before it became a life sentence.” It’s not about who wins the longevity race. It’s about who shows up with truth. Rethinking Success in Love So no, conscious couples don’t always make it to the silver anniversary. Sometimes they bow out early. Not because they failed—but because they loved each other enough not to pretend. And maybe that’s the new definition of success in love. Not how long we can hold on, but how willing we are to hold each other with truth. To stay when love is alive. To let go when it isn’t. Because forever isn’t the point. Presence is. The Last Word Here’s the paradox: both stories—the conscious breakup and the silver-anniversary toast—sit side by side in our culture. One gets tissues and mascara streaks, the other gets applause. But I’d argue they’re not opposites. They’re mirrors. Both remind us that love without presence isn’t really love at all. And presence doesn’t always last forever. Sometimes it bows out. And when it does, the bravest thing we can do is let it. — iStock image The post Conscious Couples Break Up Too appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

🔋 Find power-hungry apps on your phone: On iPhone, go to Settings > Battery and check the Activity chart and Battery Usage by App. On Android, open Settings > Battery > Battery Usage to see the app list. Once you track down the main culprits, cut down their background refresh, notifications or sync times. The post Find power-hungry apps on your phone appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

The Hungarian prime minister says Ukraine should be split into areas controlled by Russia and the West, separated by a buffer zone Partitioning Ukraine into Russian and Western zones of influence is the likely outcome of the conflict and the only reliable guarantee of the EU's security, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has said. Kiev has pressed its Western backers for security guarantees as a precondition for a settlement with Russia, first pushing for NATO membership and later floating ideas such as ‘peacekeepers’ and a buffer zone with Western military patrols. Moscow has rejected Ukrainian membership in NATO or Western troops on its territory, stressing that any settlement must include Kiev’s neutrality, demilitarization, and recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as Russian territory. Orban, however, has suggested it is time for the West to acknowledge Russia’s “inevitable” military victory and to begin deciding how Ukraine should be partitioned. ”Europeans all so elegantly talk around security guarantees, but the security guarantee actually means the division of Ukraine,” Orban told guests at the annual Civic Picnic in Kotcse on Sunday. “The first step has already been taken – the Westerners have accepted that a Russian zone exists.” He referred to earlier remarks by US President Donald Trump that Ukraine regaining Crimea was “impossible.” “The result would be a Russian zone, a demilitarized zone and, eventually, a Western zone…The only question is how many kilometers away from the border of the Russian zone a demilitarized zone should be established,” he stated. Orban noted the outcome would only slightly differ from the pre-conflict balance, when Ukraine itself acted as a buffer between Russia and NATO with “50% influence” each in the country. He said this division would help end the conflict and benefit all sides, particularly the EU, which he warned is on the verge of “collapse” and lacks the means to fund the conflict further. The Hungarian leader has long criticized Brussels over its “warmongering” stance on Russia and support for Ukraine. In his speech, he repeated his warning that Ukraine’s EU accession would trap the bloc in a permanent conflict with Moscow, calling instead for an EU-Russia security pact. View the full article

With special guest Kenji Yoshino Kenji Yoshino is the Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at the NYU School of Law and the Director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging. He is the author of the new book Say the Right Thing. On this episode we discuss how to shift from a cancel culture to a coaching culture. Moving from Cancel Culture to Coaching Culture This podcast episode features Kenji Yoshino, the Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at NYU School of Law and Director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. Yoshino shares his journey from civil rights law to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work, noting his realization that while law is effective for “brute force” changes, cultural work is essential for addressing more nuanced forms of discrimination and achieving true inclusion. He co-founded the Meltzer Center with David Glasgow six years ago, driven by a passion for building beyond the legal “floor” of civil rights. The conversation highlights their latest book, “Say the Right Thing: How to Talk About Identity, Diversity, and Justice,” which addresses the fear many aspiring allies have of “saying the wrong thing” and getting “cancelled”. Yoshino argues for a shift from a “cancel culture” to a “coaching culture,” where mistakes are viewed as learning opportunities. He introduces their “traffic light” scale for disagreements (red, yellow, green zones), providing guidance on when and how to engage in difficult conversations about identity and DEI. The discussion also covers their 4R’s framework for crafting effective apologies: recognition, responsibility, remorse, and redress, emphasizing the importance of authenticity and a commitment to future behavioral change. Finally, Yoshino provides practical “call-in” phrases for addressing microaggressions in real-time, encouraging allies to choose authentic responses and act promptly rather than delaying. He concludes by expressing concern over current legal impediments to DEI initiatives, seeing law as a “ceiling that threatens to crush” progress, and calls for mobilization to counter these threats Key Takeaways: Law as a Floor, Culture as the Build: While legal frameworks provide a foundational “floor” for civil rights, sustained diversity and inclusion require cultural work to address subtle discrimination and achieve true belonging. Shift from Cancel to Coaching Culture: To encourage allyship, it’s crucial to move away from an indiscriminately punitive “cancel culture” towards a “coaching culture” that supports learning from mistakes and offers practical tools for improvement. Navigating Disagreements: Utilize the “traffic light” scale (red, yellow, green) to assess the appropriateness of engaging in disagreements on DEI topics. Understand that some issues are non-negotiable (“red zone”), while others are open for debate (“green zone”) or require careful consideration (“yellow zone”). Effective Apologies: Craft genuine apologies using the 4R’s framework: recognition (fully acknowledging harm), responsibility (taking ownership without excuses), remorse (showing authentic sorrow), and redress (committing to changed future conduct). “Call-In” Phrases for Microaggressions: Develop and practice a few authentic, short, and sharp “call-in” phrases (e.g., “Ouch,” “Yikes,” “I see things differently, could I explain my perspective?”) to address inappropriate comments in real-time and affirm the person while criticizing the conduct. Addressing Legal Threats to DEI: Be mindful of and mobilize against increasing legal challenges and impediments to DEI initiatives, as current legal developments threaten to undermine progress. Actionable Allyship Takeaway: Actively practice and keep a few “call-in” phrases in your “back pocket” that feel authentic to you, to address microaggressions or inappropriate comments in real-time, fostering a coaching culture by affirming the person while clearly addressing the problematic conduct, rather than letting moments pass due to fear or hesitation. Follow Kenji’s work at https://kenjiyoshino.com/KY/ and find Julie at https://www.nextpivotpoint.com/ Full Episode Transcript Available Here — This post was previously published on Next Pivot Point. *** You may also like these posts on The Good Men Project: White Fragility: Talking to White People About Racism Escape the “Act Like a Man” Box Why I Don’t Want to Talk About Race What We Talk About When We Talk About Men Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * Subscribe If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here. Photo credit: iStock The post Moving From Cancel Culture to Coaching Culture With Kenji Yoshino appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The US president has urged the Palestinian militant group to accept a deal to release Israeli hostages in Gaza US President Donald Trump has issued a “last warning” to Hamas, demanding the Palestinian militant group release Israeli hostages held in Gaza. Trump warned of unspecified consequences if Hamas refuses to cooperate, in a post on his Truth Social platform on Sunday. “The Israelis have accepted my terms. It is time for Hamas to accept as well. I have warned Hamas about the consequences of not accepting. This is my last warning,” the US president said without providing further details. Hours after Trump made the remarks, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz threatened Hamas with annihilation and demanded the Palestinian militants lay down their arms. “This is a final warning to the Hamas murderers and rapists in Gaza and in luxury hotels abroad: Release the hostages and put down your weapons – or Gaza will be destroyed and you will be annihilated,” Katz wrote on X. Hamas has signaled readiness to “immediately sit at the negotiating table” after hearing what it described as “some ideas from the American side aimed at reaching a ceasefire agreement.” The latest “last warning” echoed a threat made by Trump in March, when he urged Hamas to immediately release all the living hostages and turn over the bodies of the deceased or end up “dead.” Hamas took around 250 people hostage during the October 7, 2023 surprise attack on southern Israel that left at least 1,200 people dead and prompted the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The group is believed to still hold in custody nearly 50 of them, with around half presumed to still be alive. The conflict, which has dragged on for nearly two years, has taken a heavy toll on the Palestinian enclave, leaving at least 64,000 dead, according to the local health authorities. Israeli military ground operations and heavy artillery and aerial bombardment caused widespread destruction across Gaza and displaced most of its residents. View the full article

🍏 Apple’s iDrop: Tomorrow at 1 p.m. ET / 10 a.m. PT, Apple will roll out its new, smarter Siri, along with the ultralight iPhone 17 Air, base iPhone 17, 17 Pro and 17 Pro Max. We’ll also see Apple Watches and smart home gear. Stream it on YouTube or Apple’s site. I’m just hoping the iRon will work with the iWash, iCook and iClean network. (That was so bad, it was so good!) The post Apple’s iDrop appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

That’s how much Google owes for ignoring your “do not track” setting. Apparently, when you said “no thanks” to being tracked, Google heard “just a little bit.” The fine’s big, but considering the plaintiffs asked for $31 billion, it’s more of a slap than a shutdown. The post $425 million appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

— Men often face significant hurdles when trying to maintain consistent fitness routines. Common obstacles include time constraints and a lack of motivation, both of which can derail even the most determined individuals. Innovative solutions, like gym membership management software, can help overcome these barriers by offering structured scheduling and personalized reminders. Balancing personal and professional commitments can make it challenging for men to prioritize their health and fitness goals. Despite good intentions, time constraints and motivation gaps often hinder consistency in fitness routines. Finding practical solutions to stay on track is crucial, as maintaining an active lifestyle is vital for overall well-being. With the advancement of technology, there are now innovative tools designed to assist in overcoming these common challenges, such as gym membership management software. Understanding fitness challenges The modern man juggles numerous responsibilities that often leave little room for personal fitness. Busy schedules filled with work obligations, family duties, and social commitments can make it difficult to find time for exercise. As a result, physical health may become a secondary priority, leading to inconsistent workout routines. This inconsistency can be frustrating and demotivating, especially when progress stalls. In addition to time constraints, motivation plays a significant role in achieving fitness goals. The initial enthusiasm for starting a new workout regimen can quickly wane without the right support system in place. Men often struggle with maintaining the discipline needed to keep up with regular exercise. This lack of motivation is a key factor contributing to the abandonment of fitness goals. Finding ways to integrate fitness into daily life despite these challenges is essential. Technology offers viable solutions that address these specific barriers by providing structured guidance and accountability measures. Understanding these challenges is the first step towards developing effective strategies that ensure consistency and progress in fitness routines. Technology’s impact on fitness Technological advancements have transformed how individuals approach fitness, offering tools that make it easier to maintain regular exercise routines. One such innovation is gym membership management software, which provides users with personalized workout plans and reminders tailored to their schedules. These tools simplify the process of planning workouts and ensure that users stay committed to their fitness journeys. By integrating these technological solutions into daily life, men can more effectively manage their time and resources dedicated to fitness. The automation of scheduling workouts removes much of the guesswork associated with planning exercise sessions. This leads to increased adherence to workout regimens as individuals receive timely reminders and updates on their progress. Moreover, these innovative tools offer a level of personalization that traditional methods lack. Users can set specific goals and track their achievements over time, fostering a sense of accomplishment that further motivates them to stay consistent. Technology thus plays a pivotal role in reshaping how men approach their health and wellness. Creating structured workout plans Implementing structured workout plans is critical for achieving long-term fitness goals. Innovative tools provide users with the ability to create comprehensive schedules that outline daily or weekly exercise routines. These plans take into account individual preferences and availability, ensuring that workouts are feasible and sustainable over time. Timely reminders are another feature offered by these technologies that help users remain accountable. Notifications prompt individuals to adhere to their schedules, minimizing the risk of procrastination or forgetfulness. This level of structure provides the discipline needed to form lasting habits around physical activity. These tools also allow for adjustments based on evolving needs or preferences. Flexibility in modifying workout plans ensures that users remain engaged without feeling overwhelmed or restricted by rigid routines. Such adaptability is crucial for maintaining motivation and preventing burnout. Accountability in fitness journeys Accountability is a crucial component in realizing fitness aspirations. Having a mechanism in place that tracks progress keeps users motivated by highlighting achievements and identifying areas needing improvement. Technological solutions enable detailed tracking of workouts, calories burned, and other key metrics essential for monitoring progress. This transparency fosters self-awareness regarding one’s health journey, allowing users to make informed decisions about their routines. By seeing tangible results over time, individuals are more likely to remain motivated and committed to their goals. Furthermore, sharing progress with peers or communities through these platforms enhances accountability through social support networks. Engaging with others who share similar objectives creates an environment where encouragement thrives, pushing individuals towards achieving their targets more effectively. — This content is brought to you by membersolutions.com Photo provided by the author. The post Streamlining Fitness Routines with Innovative Tools appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

As recently as five years ago, courageous folks who dared to name and investigate what’s really happening in our social and ecological worlds were labelled ‘alarmists’ or ‘doomers.’ The consensus was that these ‘doomsayers’ were antisocial, misguided, dangerous, and wrong. But there is a thing called ‘reality’ — and reality has a funny way of intruding into our willful (and often delusional) human affairs and denial. No matter how hard we try (and try and try, endlessly) to reassure ourselves that everything is OK and things will ‘work out’ in the end, our actual reality keeps rearing its ugly (or beautiful?) head and screaming, “Do you see it yet? Do you get it yet?” Sadly, terrifyingly — humanity as a whole is not ‘getting it.’ The great refusal You may be asking, “What the hell is he talking about?” It’s quite simple, really. I’m talking about the fact that much of the world — especially the U.S. — is turning its back on most of the social, ecological, political, and scientific advances of the past 80+ years. The dominant ‘powers that be’ are sucking our planet dry, wringing every last ‘resource’ from Her, and in the process… leaving only a desiccated, collapsing shell for future generations. For decades, the ‘doomers’ sounded the alarm about climate disruption, plastic pollution, overpopulation, and vast social and economic inequities — but all along, we were either ignored or scorned. Even worse, sometimes the ‘powers that be’ appeared to be paying attention and gave lip service to the concerns we were raising. They often acted as if they, too, were concerned and would DO something to address our realistic concerns. Then, they almost always turned around, capitulated to ‘business as usual,’ and reneged on positive necessary action. The foremost — and most telling — example is the utter failure of our global ‘climate initiatives’ designed to slow down climate disruption. (The bland term ‘climate change’ is intentionally inadequate; it’s the term preferred by the fossil fuel industry.) For the last 30+ years, the nations of the world have gathered annually for the so-called ‘COP’ (conference of parties) meetings, with the stated goal of agreeing on emissions reductions and enacting real reforms and rules. Yet, not once have these goals been met. Never. Even when nations have ‘agreed’ to certain limits or rules regarding CO2 emissions — such as capping emissions and defining an ‘acceptable’ amount of warming — there has been NO agreement on how to do this. Thus, there has been little follow-through and NO meaningful action. Meanwhile, reality keeps ‘acting out’ around us. It’s screaming loudly in our faces as climate disasters, floods, droughts, heat waves, and massive storms keep intensifying. The real world keeps intruding on our delusional, ‘separate’ (from nature) human societies, and in effect disproves and destroys all our arrogant, human-centered illusions. The pure insanity of ‘climate denial’ There’s a whole other layer to this accelerating social and ecological disaster: ‘climate change denial.’ This added, c-r-a-z-y layer was quietly developing for many years, but then burst out into the open in the late 2010s. Its basic tenet is rejection of established scientific consensus and public efforts to rein in accelerating climate disruptions. It reached its peak over the past few years when climate denialism became accepted ‘public policy’ for the GOP and MAGA. Not content with mere denial, there’s also a growing, vast subset of active, destructive ‘climate deniers’ — including Trump. These folks willfully proclaim that nothing will stop or slow our ‘progress,’ so we’re pushing ‘full steam ahead’ to keep mining, logging, drilling, and building data centers (huge energy hogs) and new power plants. This mindset pits humanity against nature — and discounts all ecological and climatological data as ‘insignificant’ or downright harmful. That’s right. In this view, scientific information and climate data merely get in the way of our human plans and desires — so we have to get rid of them. It’s basically a new form of ‘kill the messenger’. We’re supposed to stop worrying about stupid nonsense like the climate and our environment and just “Drill, baby, drill!” In this area, the ‘alarmists’ and ‘doomers’ have been completely correct. And, the insane, science-rejecting beliefs and actions people are now enacting are both disastrous and delusional. In this area, especially, the ‘alarmists’ are now the only realists — swept aside by a vast tide of illusion, greed, and idiocy. Our rapid capitulation to Trump’s ‘hostile takeover’ of America Here’s another potent example: the pathetic response and capitulation to Trump’s ‘hostile takeover’ of the U.S. Back in 2017, a group of 37 psychiatrists banded together to publish an extraordinary book titled “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump.” (It’s sitting on my bookshelf.) During Trump’s first administration, many diverse public servants, advisors, Cabinet members, and even generals who worked with Trump repeatedly warned the nation about his tyrannical ambitions and overall unfitness for office. There was a steady stream of anguished warnings about Trump’s character, amorality, racism, narcissism, and vengefulness. None of these dire warnings made the slightest difference. Then, we endured the divisive, bizarre 2020 election. In the post-election period from Nov. 3, 2020, to the time of Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2021, Trump kept spreading vile, dangerous conspiracy theories that the election was ‘stolen,’ fraud was rampant, and he was still the ‘real’ president. Then he instigated and directly fomented a huge insurrection at our Capitol on Jan. 6 that ended up killing several people and caused the Congress to shut down and hide from the violent mob. Only later that night was Congress able to reconvene and certify Biden’s win. Undeterred, Trump never conceded the election and kept saying it was ‘stolen.’ During Biden’s term, from early 2021 to January ‘25, Trump continued speaking and acting with total impunity. He undermined and trashed Biden’s presidency and legally appealed — endlessly — all the various indictments and court rulings against him. He kept himself in the forefront of America’s attention and the news cycle, even while out of office. Hell, he was probably in the news more than Biden! Meanwhile, the U.S. and the world were treated to the horrific spectacle of the GOP, one of our two primary political parties, fully surrendering and capitulating to Trump. Despite all his baggage and awful policy ideas — and his criminal conviction — the GOP chose to align with this terrible human being and make him their presidential candidate again. And despite all his baggage, criminal behavior, accusations of sexual assault, and an endless stream of warnings from ‘alarmists,’ he won. Again. Press enter or click to view image in full size David TrinksUnsplash A much more dangerous ‘reality’ Everyone knows, by now, what happened next. Trump swept into office on Jan. 20, 2025, hit the ground running, issued a long string of tyrannical ‘edicts’ (executive orders), and initiated a barrage of tyranny and ‘strong man’ tactics that continue today. All the frantic warnings fell on deaf ears. Today, the situation in the U.S. is far worse than during his first term. Trump and the GOP are eradicating anything remotely ‘woke’ (that is, compassionate, caring, or ecologically sound) from U.S. policy. They are also utilizing terror-inducing police-state tactics to round up and deport illegal immigrants. In response, the same group of psychiatrists and psychologists — plus many new ones — released a new book with the ominous title “The Much More Dangerous Case of Donald Trump.” Of course, no one is paying attention or listening. And of course, things in the U.S. just keep getting… worse. Now, Trump and MAGA are going after and persecuting the judiciary. They’re trying to destroy the last bulwark of American democracy, which is the last thing standing between him and unlimited autocratic power. To quote a CNN.com article: “Six months into Donald Trump’s second term, his administration is at war with the federal judiciary, evading court orders blocking its agenda, suing judges for alleged misconduct, and veering toward what multiple current and former federal judges say could be a constitutional crisis.” Except, I’d say we’re already IN a massive and prolonged ‘constitutional crisis.’ We’re not “veering toward” something awful that “could” happen. We’re deep into it. And due to Trump’s bizarre, on-again/off-again tariffs and his Big, Horrible (debt-exploding) Bill, dire economic and healthcare crises are also brewing. They’re already unfolding — but we’re still in denial because the awful effects haven’t fully hit home yet. Our crazed, upside-down ‘reality’ These are just two examples out of many others (such as the intensifying ‘war on truth’ and accelerating MAGA/GOP attacks on ‘wokeness’ and diversity, equity, and inclusion). The two examples I explored reveal that the alarmists and concerned ‘warners’ tried hard for many years — but utterly failed. Instead, a new, toxic era of denial, deceit, and delusion was ushered in. Thus, we live in a bizarre, painful upside-down ‘reality.’ We now live in a world where absurd fictions are truth, pollution is acceptable, amorality masquerades as morality, and accelerating climate disruptions are either normalized or altogether denied. This is the (insane) world the right-wing ‘realists’ among us have created. It’s the triumph of delusion, greed, and racist, hateful nonsense. Regarding our near future: it looks really bad. For as far as our inner ‘eyes’ can see, the fools, haters, and delusional idiots have decisively won (for now). The only true realists left standing are the ‘alarmists’ that everyone is busily ignoring. — Previously Published on Medium iStock featured image The post It’s Official: Yesterday’s ‘Alarmists’ Are Today’s Only Realists appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

🔍 Track down contact info: Type “Jane Doe” with keywords like “email, phone or profile” into Google. If you know where they work, narrow it down with “Jane Doe” site:company.com. For social media, try site:linkedin.com Jane Doe, site:facebook.com Jane Doe or site:instagram.com Jane Doe. Still nothing? Reverse image search. The post Track down contact info appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

The bloc might not survive without reform and an end to the Ukraine conflict, the Hungarian PM believes The EU is on the verge of collapse and will not survive beyond the next decade without a “fundamental structural overhaul” and disentanglement from the Ukraine conflict, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has warned. Speaking on Sunday at the annual Civic Picnic in Kotcse, Orban said the EU has failed to meet its founding ambition of becoming a global power and cannot handle current challenges due to the absence of a common fiscal policy. He described the bloc as entering a phase of “chaotic and costly disintegration,” and warned that the 2028-2035 EU budget “could be the last if nothing changes.” “The EU is currently on the verge of falling apart and has entered a state of fragmentation. And if this continues like this… it will go down in history as the depressing end result of a once noble experiment,” Orban stated. He proposed transforming the EU into “concentric circles.” The outer ring would include countries cooperating on military and energy security, the second circle would comprise common market members, the third would contain those sharing a currency, while the innermost would include members seeking deeper political alignment. In Orban’s view, this would broaden cooperation without restricting development. “This means that we are in the same car, we have one gearbox, but we want to move at different paces… If we can switch to this system, the great idea of European cooperation… could survive,” he said. Orban accused Brussels of overreliance on common debt and of using the Ukraine conflict as a pretext to continue this policy. As long as the conflict lasts, the EU will remain a “lame duck,” dependent on the US for security and unable to act independently in economic affairs, he said. Orban also suggested that instead of “lobbying in Washington,” the EU should “go to Moscow” to pursue a security agreement with Russia, followed by an economic deal. Orban is not alone in his concerns. Analysts from the International Monetary Fund and other institutions have warned that the EU risks stagnation and even collapse due to structural challenges, weak growth, poor investment, high energy costs, and geopolitical tensions. View the full article

The newspaper claimed that the British island of Jersey had launched criminal proceedings against Roman Abramovich Representatives of Roman Abramovich have denied a Guardian report claiming that the British dependency of Jersey has launched criminal proceedings against the Russian businessman. His spokesman said the article is “misleading” and aimed at smearing him by suggesting he is under investigation for corruption and sanctions evasion. According to The Guardian report, Jersey, which is located in the Channel Islands, is pursuing Abramovich over alleged corruption tied to the 2005 $13 billion sale of oil company Sibneft and possible sanctions breaches after 2022. The paper cited Swiss Federal Criminal Court rulings from May that authorized the release of banking records from Swiss institutions to Jersey’s Attorney General as part of the probe. It has also noted that Jersey has frozen more than $7 billion worth of assets linked to Abramovich since March 2022. Abramovich’s lawyers have denied the allegations that he is facing criminal charges. They emphasized that even the Jersey courts have confirmed there are no proceedings against him. “We regret to note that The Guardian has decided to violate Mr Abramovich’s rights and publish these unsubstantiated, completely misleading and discrediting allegations,” a representative told TASS. Abramovich, born in the Russian city of Saratov, became widely known in the West as the owner of the football club Chelsea, which he sold in 2022 after being sanctioned in Britain for alleged Kremlin ties. The Guardian report has coincided with renewed pressure exerted by London for Abramovich to transfer the proceeds from the Chelsea sale to Ukraine. The UK government has demanded that he release £2.5 billion ($3.4 billion) from the deal to Kiev. Foreign Secretary David Lammy has warned that legal action could follow if he refuses. Western states have imposed sweeping sanctions since 2022, freezing more than $300 billion of Russia’s international reserves and targeting wealthy individuals accused of benefiting from the conflict. Moscow has condemned the measures, calling the seizures “outright theft” and threatening reciprocal action against Western assets in Russia. View the full article

New #research highlights how #deforestation for #mining, and oil #palmoil expansion are pushing rare species of #wildlife at #Indonesia’s #LakePoso to the brink. This unique ecosystem, home to critically endangered #fish and other endemic wildlife, is rapidly disappearing due to human-driven habitat destruction. Local indigenous communities and conservationists are calling for urgent action to halt the devastation. Protecting these species means addressing extractive industries head-on. Every action counts—use your purchasing power to support indigenous-led conservation and #BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4Wildlife. #News: #research finds Lake Poso of #Indonesia’s rare species of #animals #plants are vanishing due to #mining and #palmoil #deforestation. #Indigenous people are resisting. Use your wallet to fight back #BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4Wildlife https://wp.me/pcFhgU-a5p Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter Deforestation and Mining Destroying Indonesia’s Lake Poso Ecosystem New research led by advocacy organisation WAHLI reveals alarming habitat destruction at Indonesia’s Lake Poso, a freshwater biodiversity hotspot under threat from deforestation, mining, and expanding palm oil plantations. This fragile ecosystem, which supports critically endangered fish and endemic species, is being wiped out at an unprecedented rate due to human exploitation. Lake Poso: A Unique Ecosystem Under Siege Lake Poso is one of Indonesia’s oldest and most ecologically significant lakes, supporting species found nowhere else on Earth. The lake and its surrounding forests provide refuge for a variety of endemic fish, amphibians, and invertebrates that have adapted to its isolated conditions over millennia. However, aggressive mining operations, large-scale deforestation, and industrial palm oil plantations are driving habitat loss at a staggering pace. According to scientists, the destruction of Lake Poso’s ecosystem could have catastrophic consequences. The removal of forests destabilises water quality and eliminates the natural breeding grounds for fish and other aquatic species. Additionally, mining activity is releasing heavy metals into the water, poisoning fragile ecosystems and endangering both wildlife and local communities that depend on the lake for their livelihoods. Palm Oil and Nickel Mining: The Drivers of Destruction Palm oil expansion and mining are the main forces behind Lake Poso’s environmental crisis. Land clearing for oil palm plantations results in mass deforestation, stripping away the region’s biodiversity and leading to irreversible soil erosion. Mining operations, including nickel extraction, further compound the damage by leaching toxic chemicals into the environment. Experts warn that without immediate intervention, endemic species could face extinction within years. Several critically endangered fish, unique to Lake Poso, are already experiencing severe population declines due to pollution and habitat destruction. Local Communities and Activists Demand Urgent Action Indigenous communities and environmental activists are fighting to protect Lake Poso’s biodiversity. Grassroots movements are pushing for stronger regulations against deforestation, mining, and palm oil expansion. However, corporate interests and weak enforcement of environmental laws continue to enable destructive industries to operate unchecked. Protecting Lake Poso’s rare species requires bold action, including rejecting products linked to deforestation, supporting indigenous-led conservation efforts, and holding corporations accountable. Consumers can make a difference by choosing ethical products and avoiding goods containing palm oil. Take Action! Use your wallet as a weapon against deforestation. Choose indigenous-led conservation and agroecology. Support sustainable alternatives, demand accountability, and take a stand against corporate destruction of Lake Poso’s irreplaceable ecosystem. #BoycottPalmOil #Boycott4Wildlife. Kimbrough, L. (2025, January 22). Rising deforestation threatens rare species in Indonesia’s ancient Lake Poso. Mongabay News. Retrieved from https://news.mongabay.com/2025/01/mining-and-palm-oil-drive-deforestation-threaten-rare-species-at-indonesias-lake-poso/ Kaban, S., Ditya, Y. C., Makmur, S., Fatah, K., Wulandari, T. N., Dwirastina, M., … Samuel, S. (2023). Water quality and trophic status to estimate fish production potential for sustainable fisheries in Lake Poso, Central Sulawesi. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 32(5), 4083-4093. doi:10.15244/pjoes/168102 Damanik, A., Janssen, D. J., Tournier, N., Stelbrink, B., Von Rintelen, T., Haffner, G. D., … Vogel, H. (2024). Perspectives from modern hydrology and hydrochemistry on a lacustrine biodiversity hotspot: Ancient Lake Poso, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 50(3), 102254. doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2023.102254 ENDS — This post was previously published on Palm Oil Detectives and is republished on Medium. — Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * Subscribe If you believe in the work we are doing here at The Good Men Project, please join us as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here. — Photo credit: iStock The post Deforestation and Mining Threaten Rare Species at Lake Poso appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

🔌 Go ahead, walk into an EV dealership and ask how much they charge: So here’s the scoop: People are picking up brand-new electric cars for less than $100/month. One guy leased a $65,000 Kia EV9 for $189. It’s all because tax credits are about to expire on Sept. 30, and dealers are basically handing out keys like coupons. If your car’s dying, run, don’t walk to your local EV dealer. The post Go ahead, walk into an EV dealership and ask how much they charge appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

The countries plan to open market access to boost mutual trade and investment Russia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have reached a major economic agreement designed to stimulate bilateral trade and investment by lowering export-related costs and easing market access, Kommersant has reported. The agreement will simplify conditions for service providers and reduce expenses linked to transport and other cross-border activities, the outlet said on Sunday, citing the Russian Economic Development Ministry. Officials identified finance, transport, wholesale and retail trade, manufacturing, and mining as promising areas for cooperation. The treaty opens 64 Emirati sectors to Russian businesses, ranging from research and development to ship and aircraft repair, rail transport, computer services, and legal services. In some areas, such as engineering and passenger maritime transport, Russian stakes will be capped at 70%. Companies will also be able to establish banks, healthcare institutions, and news agencies in UAE special economic zones. In exchange, Emirati firms will gain access to 12 Russian service sectors, including healthcare, education and hospitality. Additionally they will be permitted to open retail outlets in Russia. The agreement also removes restrictions on transfers and payments related to services and trade. Officials stated that this provision is expected to significantly increase exports and mutual investment flows. The pact includes cooperation in logistics, which both sides said could boost the International North-South Transport Corridor, linking Russia with the Middle East, East Africa, and South Asia. The corridor is viewed as a key route for diversifying transport flows and expanding regional trade. Mutual trade in services between Russia and the UAE amounted to $14 billion in 2024, according to ministry data. Moscow expects exports of services to the UAE to double by 2030, with imports rising at a similar pace. The ministry also forecasts that accumulated Russian investment in the UAE will grow fourfold to $25 billion and Emirati investment in Russia will double from the 2024 levels to $17 billion. View the full article