American Women Suck

I feel silly for what I’m about to say. In hindsight it’s abundantly clear. While my marriage was floundering it wasn’t. What can I say? Clouded hearts lead to clouded minds. What did my husband do when I begged him to save our marriage??!! Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Do you grasp why I feel silly? I begged him to save our relationship. I begged him to care. I begged him to listen. In short, I begged a man. I pleaded with a guy. Of course my husband did nothing. This is what’s clear in hindsight. This is what’s absurd. If you have to beg a person to do something they probably never will, OR they may reluctantly do something. It’s pure resistance. Why did I bother? It’s a one way street to nothing, zilch, zip, nada, bupkis. If you’re begging your spouse to save your marriage…it’s already game over. Likewise, if your spouse is the one begging you to save your relationship, it’s game over. There’s a reason they/you aren’t committed. The reasons may vary. It could be a difficult personality, it could be spouses who’ve evolved into two different people, it could be a spouse who no longer feels the same way for the other, it could be bitterness, resentments, etc. On the flip side… When I gave up…my husband had an entirely different reaction. He worked overtime to win me back. On the surface this seems like a positive. A man who didn’t care suddenly cared. I wish I had never viewed it that way. Don’t make the same mistake that I made. Let’s put this into dating terms. You’re dating a guy (or a girl) and the relationship is tanking. It’s emotionally floundering. You aren’t happy. You express your feelings to your significant other. You beg them to care. They don’t. You give up. You want to break up. He (she) suddenly doesn’t want to lose you. They attempt to win you back. They profess their love. Would you stay? Sadly, many people do. But should you? Probably not. We convince ourselves we should stay when it involves marriage. We took vows, we have children, we own property, and so on. I convinced myself. Initially I didn’t think it was possible. I didn’t believe I loved my husband anymore. He could sense this. He could feel me drifting farther and farther away. It’s why he wanted me back. He was trying so hard I felt I had to give him a chance. It did seem like a positive back then. And then a lot of other emotions muddled their way in. I experienced a different type of emotional conflict. I felt bad for wanting to leave. You understand, right?! I may have felt conflicted/sad about ending my marriage before my husband began to care. I didn’t feel bad about leaving. I had exhausted myself to his nonchalant bystander. Now I was feeling bad. I felt bad for him. The same man who had spent years making me miserable. I often write to intersect my two worlds, as a writer and a marketer. I tell some stories in a new light to dumb them down. It’s what we do in marketing. Okay, not necessarily ‘dumb it down.’ But we are forced to connect the dots in marketing. We are forced to encapsulate a big concept in a condensed format. We must make things simple, and instantly digestible. We have little time to get the consumers’ attention. Our message must be succinct. It must be clear. It must make sense. I’m dumbing down marital begging. If your spouse does nothing. It’s game over. Stop talking. — This post was previously published on medium.com. Love relationships? We promise to have a good one with your inbox. Subcribe to get 3x weekly dating and relationship advice. Did you know? We have 8 publications on Medium. Join us there! Hello, Love (relationships) Change Becomes You (Advice) A Parent is Born (Parenting) Equality Includes You (Social Justice) Greener Together (Environment) Shelter Me (Wellness) Modern Identities (Gender, etc.) Co-Existence (World) *** – Photo credit: Adam Cheek On Unsplash The post My Husband Did This When I Begged Him to Save Our Marriage appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The rioters clashed with police outside a philosophy school building in Novi Sad Riots broke out during a large student protest in Novi Sad, Serbia’s second-largest city, on Friday evening. Demonstrators hurled stones and bottles at police officers outside the Philosophy Faculty building of the University of Novi Sad, while officers responded with tear gas. The students accuse the government of corruption and are demanding accountability after the collapse of a concrete canopy at the Novi Sad railway station last November, which killed 16 people. Protesters have staged demonstrations in Belgrade and other cities for months, while also blockading educational institutions. Friday’s clashes erupted after students demanded that police withdraw from the Philosophy Faculty campus, where they had been deployed last month by dean Milivoj Alanovic. The activist group Blokada FFUNS, which organizes the blockade, accused Alanovic of abusing his power. Serbian media reported that several people were detained outside the campus. According to Blokada FFUNS, one student was struck in the leg with a rubber bullet. 🚨🇷🇸 BREAKING NEWS: Chaos in Serbia! Riot police storm Novi Sad streets - injuries and arrests reported as President Aleksandar Vučić is addressing the nation! pic.twitter.com/YJ1C811Z6E — Global Dissident (@GlobalDiss) September 5, 2025 Police Director Dragan Vasiljevic said officers intervened after receiving reports of “an attack” on security protecting the campus. “All citizens must respect the laws and regulations of this country,” he said. KEROVI DRHTE OD STRAHA‼️⛽️ 📍Kampus, Novi Sad pic.twitter.com/OAHx7iur3H — 𝓐𝓝𝓨𝓐 ~ God's Whip (@AnjaBG96) September 5, 2025 The protests have already prompted the resignation of Prime Minister Milos Vucevic and the arrest of several officials, including a former trade minister, on corruption charges. President Aleksandar Vucic has claimed that the unrest was fueled from abroad and denounced what he called “violence disguised as activism.” View the full article

By Philip Steigman & Elliot Haspel, 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. For understandable reasons, a great deal of time and energy around improving child outcomes focuses on either the crucial early years or tumultuous adolescence. Yet there is a missing middle: specifically, a missing middle of childhood. Elementary-aged children, those from 6 to 12, are facing challenges — fueled by unprecedented technological influences — researchers, practitioners and policymakers are only beginning to fully understand. These trials are causing social, emotional and developmental struggles that often go unseen, yet affect everything from learning to mental health. It is more important than ever that those focused on child and family well-being develop a strategy to fill in the missing middle. There is a persistent misunderstanding that child development mainly occurs through “sensitive periods” of brain plasticity. While these are neurobiological realities and concentrate in the early and teen years, development doesn’t take a breather from ages 6 to 12. In middle childhood, what some researchers call the forgotten years, the brain is fine-tuning itself for the what’s ahead. It trims away unused connections and strengthens the ones children use most, making thinking more efficient. Messages travel faster along these pathways, helping kids focus, remember and manage their impulses. This is also when brain systems for planning, problem-solving and getting along with others grow stronger, laying the foundation for the more complex learning and relationships of adolescence. But kids this age are grappling with rising rates of anxiety and depression, unrelenting social-media pressure and even the lure of artificial intelligence “friends” that can replace real-world connection. Pediatricians and teachers are sounding the alarm: Kids who used to skip into school are now dragging their feet, weighed down by worry. What’s happening? A few things. The pandemic left lasting scars. Children lost classrooms, playgrounds, routines, even relatives. Emergency room visits for mental health crises jumped 24%. Surrounding these impacts are the digital deluge. Heavy social media use is driving up depression, anxiety and isolation. Former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy warns of an “epidemic of loneliness” later in adolescence — and the signs are already cropping up in elementary school. These elementary years are, true to their name, foundational. Socially, emotionally and academically, this is when lifelong patterns are formed. But kids this age don’t always show their struggles the way teens do. Their worries often go unspoken. This isn’t just about protecting the middle years of childhood. It makes little sense to invest billions in the early years while limiting the impact of those investments once kids enter elementary school. And it makes no sense to wait until adolescence to try to reconnect with young people who have fallen off track when it’s far easier to keep kids flourishing all the way though. Investing in middle childhood is both worthy on its own merits and a form of prevention, keeping the pipeline strong from early learning through graduation. But here’s the hopeful part: Researchers and practitioners know what works. Decades of research show children in this age band thrive when they have safe environments, consistent relationships with caring adults and engaging opportunities to learn and play. These ingredients can’t be confined to classrooms alone. They require a community effort. That means parents, teachers, coaches, librarians, pediatricians, afterschool staff and neighbors all pulling in the same direction. It means building out shared practices and norms: daily check-ins where kids feel seen, pediatric visits that include questions about friendships, mentors who know how to spot early warning signs, even small gestures — like a friendly “How’s school going?” — that remind children that they matter. But for this to happen, middle childhood must be on the policy agenda. That means building smoother transitions from early learning into elementary school and from elementary into middle school, and making before- and after-school programs, summer learning and enrichment universally available for elementary-age kids, not a privilege dependent on a family’s zip code. It also means ensuring the adults who regularly interact with this age group have the training, time and support to nurture social, emotional and cognitive growth alongside academics. If adults are caught in a whirlwind of scarcity and stress, children in the missing middle are more likely to be ignored. Expanding the agenda is ambitious, but not unrealistic. The nation has done it before. From expanding early nutrition programs to launching Early Head Start classrooms to now passing widespread restrictions on cellphone usage during the school day, society has acted boldly for children when science and the moment demanded it. When researchers learned how toxic stress harms babies’ brains, communities responded — with warmth, conversation and responsive care. Today, communities and policymakers are actively responding to the damage it is now clear social media can wreak on adolescent brains. Child and family stakeholders know how to mobilize — and need to again in order to activate communities’ collective understanding and response. Kids going through middle childhood deserve nothing less. As Dr. Gabrielle Carlson, president of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, put it with regard to children’s mental health struggles: “We cannot sit idly by.” Let’s not. — 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: iStock The post The ‘Missing Middle’: Kids 6-12 Need a Strategy for Boosting Their Well-Being appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

By Rhett Ayers Butler Founder’s Briefs: An occasional series where Mongabay founder Rhett Ayers Butler shares analysis, perspectives and story summaries. Mountains of smoking waste sprawl across the Dandora dump in Nairobi, Kenya. The acrid stench clings to the air; marabou storks pick over scraps alongside people searching for plastic bottles or bones. Interspersed among the refuse are scraps of fabric — remnants of the global fast-fashion boom. Mongabay’s Elodie Toto describes the scene. Kenya imported more than 900 million items of used clothing in 2021, according to the Changing Markets Foundation. More than half were unsellable; more than a third contained synthetic fibers such as polyester and nylon, which do not biodegrade. Instead, they fragment into microplastics, laced with toxins from PFAS to phthalates, which seep into soil, water and air. These fibers can lodge in the stomachs of animals, carrying chemicals linked to cancer. The waste arrives thanks to a model perfected in the rich world. Fast fashion, and its newer, more frenetic cousin, ultra-fast fashion, churns out thousands of cheap garments daily, designed to be worn briefly and discarded. Between 2016 and 2020, the value of secondhand clothing imports into Kenya rose by 80%, from $100 million to $180 million. The same trend is visible across Africa, from Ghana to Madagascar. France has decided to intervene. In March 2024, Anne-Cécile Violland, a member of the French parliament, proposed a bill to curb overconsumption and raise awareness of fashion’s environmental costs. Adopted unanimously by the Senate in June 2025, it bans online advertising for ultra-fast fashion, mandates environmental-impact ratings for garments, and imposes penalties on low-scoring items. “A T-shirt made by Shein … will not get the same score as a Zara T-shirt made in Morocco — and therefore won’t get the same penalty,” Violland explains. Campaigners welcome the law but say it is narrow. “The real issue is overproduction,” says Mathilde Pousseo of Collectif Ethique sur l’Etiquette, a coalition promoting ethical clothing production, noting that charity shops are overwhelmed not just by Shein but by mainstream brands. Others point out that even French retailers have been linked to forced labor and deforestation. The bill now heads to a joint parliamentary committee, with activists seeking broader coverage. Once implemented in France, Violland says she hopes to take it to the European Commission. In theory, less consumption means less waste. In practice, mountains of synthetic rags continue to rise — many of them half a world away from the consumers who first bought them. Read the full story by Elodie Toto here. — Previously Published on news.mongabay with Creative Commons Attribution *** Subscribe to The Good Men Project Newsletter Email Address * Join The Good Men Project as a Premium Member today. All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS. A complete list of benefits is here. On Substack? Connect with us there. — Photo credit: unsplash The post The Clothes That Never Die: How Fast Fashion Is Burying Africa in Plastic appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

I have read more self-help books and listened to more podcasts than I can count. I found the rich world of self-help in my mid-teens and never looked back. For years, I thought the answer to life’s struggles was always out there — in another book, in another video, in another perfectly worded quote, or in another Medium article. I was convinced that if I just consumed enough of them, I would finally get it. I would finally find a solution to all my problems. The solution was just one click away. So years went by, some of these self-help tools did help me, but most of them just confused me. After looking through every possible theory, author, and philosophy, here’s what I realized: there will always be another book. Another podcast. Another step-by-step guide promising to end my procrastination forever. And the cycle never ends, because all of these are external voices — useful for sure, but never mine. The real turning point for me came through journaling, sitting with my thoughts, and actually listening to the voice inside me that I had been ignoring all along. The moment I slowed down enough to hear it, I realized something radical — I already knew what was right for me. My body knew what was right for me and what wasn’t. My heart knew what it wanted, even if I was afraid to admit it. My inner wisdom had always been there, quietly being suffocated under the noise of everyone else’s advice. It was something so simple yet took so much time and so many mistakes for me to finally realize it. I guess I just didn’t trust myself enough. But why? I think it starts in childhood. Nobody ever really teaches us to trust ourselves. If anything, it’s the opposite. We are told who we should be, what we should want, and what kind of life is “successful.” Parents, teachers, society, they don’t mean harm, but the message lands: “We know better than you. Don’t trust your instincts.” And then what happens? We internalize the idea that our voice is not enough. That our decisions are suspect. That our natural inclinations need to be “corrected.” And then, as adults, we find ourselves addicted to external validation. We go looking for advice, for answers, for reassurance. It doesn’t help that we live in an age of information overflow. Every single question can be Googled. Every single doubt has a podcast episode waiting for it. Why should we even bother thinking deeply when seemingly “better” brains have already solved it? Our minds become lazy. Our trust in ourselves grows weaker. But here’s something you need to repeat with me: no guru, no author, no coach knows me like I do. They don’t wake up in my body. They don’t carry my history or my dreams. They don’t know the thousand little ways my heart has been broken and the thousand little ways it has healed itself. Only I do. That doesn’t mean self-help is useless. In fact, sometimes it’s exactly what we need. Books, podcasts, or even a stray line from a talk can give us language we didn’t have before. They can shine a light on blind spots and help us see our patterns more clearly. They can hand us knowledge that we may not have found on our own, and sometimes that knowledge is the very thing that pushes us back toward ourselves. The problem isn’t the books — it’s forgetting that they are meant to be guides, not replacements for our own wisdom. So maybe, like everything else in life, it’s about balance. Learning when to seek guidance and when to stop consuming and actually listen inward. Using self-help not as a crutch, but as a tool. As a mirror. As a teacher , but never as the voice that drowns out our own. Because at the end of the day, wisdom doesn’t come from a perfect podcast script. It comes from your lived experience. From your mistakes, your reflections, your resilience. It comes from listening to the voice you were never taught to trust. Maybe the next stage of growth isn’t about consuming more “wisdom”. Maybe it’s about learning to finally trust the wisdom you’ve had all along. — Anushka & Vishnu — This post was previously published on medium.com. Love relationships? We promise to have a good one with your inbox. Subcribe to get 3x weekly dating and relationship advice. Did you know? We have 8 publications on Medium. Join us there! Hello, Love (relationships) Change Becomes You (Advice) A Parent is Born (Parenting) Equality Includes You (Social Justice) Greener Together (Environment) Shelter Me (Wellness) Modern Identities (Gender, etc.) Co-Existence (World) *** – Photo credit: Shiromani Kant on Unsplash The post The Self-Help Industry Doesn’t Want You to Know This… appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The scheme is a part of security guarantees for Kiev advocated by Paris and London, the Wall Street Journal has reported American top military officials have been involved in drawing up “security guarantees” plan for Kiev advocated by Paris and London that involves a massive troop deployment to Ukraine, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on Thursday, citing a European diplomat. The scheme drawn up primarily by some European army chiefs includes two groups of forces that are to be sent to Ukraine, according to the report. One of them would be tasked with training and assistance to the Ukrainian military, while the second one would serve as a “reassurance force” for Kiev. The troops are to be deployed once Moscow and Kiev reach a peace deal. A total of 26 nations agreed to contribute to “security guarantees” for Ukraine in various ways, French President Emmanuel Macron said earlier this week following a meeting of the so-called “coalition of the willing” – a group of Kiev’s European backers. The current commitments would allow for a deployment of over 10,000 troops to the Ukrainian soil, the WSJ source said, adding that the plan “received input from some US generals,” including the US head of the NATO Allied Command Operations. The exact level of the US involvement in the scheme remains unclear, the report said, adding that there have been no clear statements on the issue from President Donald Trump. Russia has repeatedly expressed its strong opposition to any NATO troops deployment to the Ukrainian soil. On Friday, President Vladimir Putin warned that foreign soldiers would either become targets for Russian forces during hostilities or serve no purpose if a genuine peace agreement were reached. He added that “the West’s dragging of Ukraine into NATO was one of the causes of the conflict” and said any settlement would have to include security guarantees for both Russia and Ukraine. NBC News also reported on Friday that Kiev’s European backers want troops from non-NATO countries such as Bangladesh or Saudi Arabia to be sent to a “buffer zone” between Russia and Ukraine overseen by the US in the event of a peace deal. View the full article

Finding a way out of a “total freeze” in bilateral contacts will take time, Dmitry Peskov has said A full-fledged revival of bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington will take time, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. The sheer amount of damage ties have sustained prevents this process from being quick, he told TASS on Friday. Moscow and Washington maintain communication at various levels, Peskov confirmed, adding that “dialogue channels do exist.” It has not led to a “complex revival” of bilateral relations, he added. Contacts between the two nations that had been almost non-existent for some three years under the Biden administration resumed after US President Donald Trump returned to office in January. He took a markedly different approach toward Russia by reopening high-level diplomatic channels with Moscow. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have since repeatedly spoken by phone, and also met in person in Alaska last month. “The process of finding a way out… of such a total freeze will take time,” Peskov said when asked about the prospects of normalization between Moscow and Washington. “Too much damage has been dealt to the whole architecture of bilateral relations,” he explained. Both Putin and Trump have called the state of US-Russia relations under Joe Biden the “lowest point” since the Cold War. Last month, the Russian president said that with Trump’s arrival in the White House, “a light at the end of the tunnel” had appeared. He also stated that Moscow is seeking a reset in relations. Moscow has never turned its back on the US, Putin told journalists on Friday. Russia is open to economic cooperation with America that could benefit US companies, according to the president. Trump has argued that expanding economic cooperation with Russia would be in America’s best interest, but the Ukraine conflict stands in the way of normalizing ties. For his part, Putin has expressed hope that “joint work” with the US will continue, but emphasized that progress does not depend on Moscow alone, adding that Washington also needs to take relevant steps. View the full article

Donald Tusk has previously echoed 2016 allegations and accused the US president of ties with Moscow Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has said that he doesn’t regret his past claim that US President Donald Trump was a Russian asset, flip-flopping on an earlier denial. In a preelection meeting in 2023, Tusk claimed that “Trump’s links with Russian secret services are irrefutable.” He U-turned on the statement last November, just days after the US president secured his second term in the 2024 election. “I do not regret any words I have spoken in my life,” Tusk told journalists at a press conference in Lomza, Poland on Friday, when asked to comment on his earlier allegations. “President Trump is a very demanding and difficult partner. Not just from my point of view, we all know it,” he added. In November 2024, when pressed about his accusations, Tusk first evaded the question, then claimed he “had never made such suggestions.” Claims of Russian ties first surfaced in 2016 after Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton. Moscow has consistently denied them, attributing the allegations to partisan infighting. A probe launched this year by the US president has allegedly discovered a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials, along with groups linked to billionaire George Soros, to undermine his 2016 election victory. Trump hosted Polish President Karol Nawrocki at the White House on Wednesday. Since his election a little over a month ago, right-wing Nawrocki has clashed with pro-EU Tusk on a number of issues, vetoing a number of government bills. Amid the conflict, the Polish president broke protocol and did not invite the country’s ambassador or anyone from the Foreign Ministry to attend the meeting with Trump, according to the publication Responsible Statecraft. View the full article

Progress has been made, but no timeframe has been set to reach a peace deal, Dmitry Peskov has said There has been progress in efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict, but it is too early to talk about when it might end, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Peskov made the remarks in an interview with TASS on Friday on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, stressing that Moscow is “not ready to predict” specific timelines. ”[President Vladimir Putin] said there is light at the end of the tunnel” in efforts to end the conflict, Peskov stated, referring to a comments the Russian leader made earlier this week in Beijing. Putin told reporters that a settlement could be drawing closer, citing the position of US President Donald Trump and his administration, who in his view have shown a “genuine desire to find the solution.” “We’ll see how the situation develops,” Putin said. The Russian president also reiterated his readiness to meet with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, but cautioned that holding a summit “just for the sake of it” would be a “path to nowhere,” and added that if Zelensky genuinely wanted to talk, he could simply come to Moscow to negotiate peace terms. Kiev has ruled out the possibility of such a meeting. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga has accused Putin of making “knowingly unacceptable” proposals, claiming that Zelensky is ready to meet at any time but not under Moscow’s conditions. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last May, but he has refused to hold elections, citing martial law. Moscow has repeatedly questioned his legitimacy, arguing that any agreement signed by him could later be contested by a future Ukrainian government. Putin has said settling the conflict also depends on Western countries, as Washington remains bound by commitments to its allies, including NATO. Moscow maintains that lasting peace would require Kiev to recognize its new borders and abandon plans to join NATO. View the full article

Romance is one of those words we all think we understand… Until we don’t. To some, it’s flowers at the door, dinner reservations at eight, and the thrill of dressing up for each other. To others, maybe it feels more like the inability to wait: a late-night drive across the country just to see you, or an early breakfast first thing the next day. The truth is, romance can take many forms. It can be in the planning or in the spontaneity. In eagerness, in effort, in intention. It can live in surprises or in clarity. It can appear in the unexpected, and just as often in the beautifully expected. But here’s the hard part: when you’ve been hurt before… disappointed too many times, when you’ve seen gestures turn into letdowns, words never turn into actions, or comfort arrive too soon and hijack all romance and effort… it’s easy to mistake eagerness for carelessness, or spontaneity for a lack of effort. It’s easy to get caught up in fear, even just for a second, and doubt the intention behind it. Which is why it is so important to communicate those fears and clarify intentions, rather than let the past dictate the present and make the judgment for you. Communication is the basis of any romantic gesture. I think we’ve all been there: someone’s eagerness feels flattering, even thrilling, and yet something in us hesitates or fears. We wonder if it’s truly romance, or if it’s rushing. That tension between excitement and caution is what makes romance so complicated. The very gestures that sound most romantic in theory are sometimes, due to past experiences, the ones we question in practice. But being a romantic myself, someone in love with the idea of movie-like moments and feelings, I’ve realised that romance is both subjective and fluid. It isn’t one-size-fits-all… it changes shape depending on who’s offering it, who’s receiving it, and what both people need in that moment. Some days it might be grand gestures: thought-out dinners, candles lit across the living room, a note left on a pillow, flowers, weekend trips… Some days, it might be waking up five minutes earlier to share a moment, rushing back from a trip late at night because you can’t wait till the morning, remembering how they take their tea or something they told you months ago. Some people prefer one kind of romance over another. Some aren’t romantic at all and might feel nauseated just reading this (for that, I apologise). But for those of you who are like me… who love it all… it’s never really about the form. It’s about two people creating their own meaning through being present together and paying attention to what the other needs. And since needs can change, paying attention is romance. Remembering is romance. Maybe that’s the point, anyway… Romance doesn’t live in one gesture or one plan… it lives in the intention behind it. And sometimes, the most romantic thing of all isn’t the action or the plan, though that never hurts… The most romantic thing is two people willing to explain, listen, and understand each other, instead of running away… until they realise they were speaking the same language all along. — This post was previously published on medium.com. Love relationships? We promise to have a good one with your inbox. Subcribe to get 3x weekly dating and relationship advice. Did you know? We have 8 publications on Medium. Join us there! Hello, Love (relationships) Change Becomes You (Advice) A Parent is Born (Parenting) Equality Includes You (Social Justice) Greener Together (Environment) Shelter Me (Wellness) Modern Identities (Gender, etc.) Co-Existence (World) *** – Photo credit: Eduardo Barrios on Unsplash The post The Many Faces of Romance appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The SCO summit shows how the world is shifting away from the West Historical anniversaries often provide the backdrop for diplomacy to become spectacle. This week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin was deliberately staged ahead of China’s grand parade marking 80 years since the end of World War II. Beijing, the host, made sure the symbolism landed. The timing also underscored the contrast with Washington: Donald Trump, who has long admired military parades, is already planning a lavish one next July for America’s 250th anniversary, after his low-key attempt last summer fell flat. For the SCO itself, the Tianjin meeting carried weight comparable to last year’s BRICS summit in Kazan. Documents were signed, but as always the road from declarations to implementation will be long. What mattered most was setting a benchmark. In international politics, the very act of gathering matters as much as the outcomes. Beyond the West’s stage By inertia, many still measure importance by whether Western powers are in the room. For decades, world affairs were shaped by East-West confrontation in the Cold War, and then by the unilateral primacy of the US and its allies. Membership of the G7 (at one time G8) was once the crown jewel of global respectability. Even the G20, designed to reflect a more diverse world, remained dominated by Western influence over its agenda. Meetings without the West were seen as parochial or symbolic. That perception is now outdated. The real turning point came last year – first at BRICS, now at the SCO. Both groupings, very different in composition, are drawing growing interest. Countries are applying to join or at least to participate. Simply appearing at these forums has become prestigious, and the corridor diplomacy surrounding them allows for meetings that are otherwise difficult to arrange. The shift is not just about Russia. The attempt by Western governments to isolate Moscow after the escalation in Ukraine has backfired. Instead of leaving Russia in the cold, it accelerated the formation of what is now described as the “global majority.” Many states do not want to submit to anyone else’s political logic. They follow their own calculations of interest and expediency. From rejection to attraction Structures once mocked in the West as artificial, jealous imitations of Western clubs – BRICS and the SCO foremost among them – are now becoming indispensable. They are no longer simply ideological counters to hegemony, but practical platforms. This explains efforts to expand the BRICS New Development Bank and to set up an SCO Development Bank. These institutions will not rival the IMF or World Bank immediately, but the trajectory is clear: to build alternatives that bypass Western gatekeepers. The West finds this almost impossible to digest. For Washington and Brussels, any institution outside their control looks like a threat, a conspiracy “against democracy.” In fact, the opposite is taking place. The West is retreating inward, shifting to a defensive crouch – sometimes aggressively so – and in the process cutting itself off from much of the world. The formula that has gained currency in Moscow – “not against the West, but without it” – is finally becoming reality. Trump’s catalyst Another factor hastening this change is the blunt style of the Trump administration. Its message is simple: pay up, or pressure will follow. Allies have largely complied, reinforcing Washington’s belief that this approach works. But countries with no security obligations to the US have reacted differently. They reject being treated as clients, especially when it all comes down to money flowing to America. Hence the surprise in Washington when so many states line up for BRICS+ or SCO+. They are not necessarily embracing Russia or China unconditionally; they are signaling their refusal to live by rules drawn elsewhere. Russia’s place Against this backdrop, Russia finds itself not marginalized but central. Western isolation efforts only underscored Moscow’s role as a key pole around which non-Western states can organize. For many, Russia is proof that there are alternatives to Western tutelage. President Vladimir Putin, addressing the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok just after the SCO summit, emphasized Russia’s two-headed eagle: the country looks both ways. He insisted Russia has not closed the door to the US or the rest of Europe. American businesses, he said, could benefit enormously from joint projects if their government allowed it. At the same time, Moscow is strengthening ties with China, India, and the wider Global South. The new agreements with Beijing – from energy deals to visa-free travel – are practical steps along this path. The symbolism matters too. At the SCO summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping launched “global governance initiative” with Putin’s backing. Far from being an anti-Western conspiracy, it reflects the search for a more balanced order. A world in transition What is emerging is not a neat bloc or a new Cold War divide, but something looser and more diverse. International politics is shifting away from Western-centric hierarchies towards a multipolar landscape. The SCO summit should be read in this context, as part of a larger realignment. The world is messy and the processes chaotic, but the direction is clear. Non-Western states are asserting their right to set agendas, to create institutions, and to act together without waiting for permission. The attempt to quarantine Russia has only sped this up. The West may still believe nothing serious happens without it. But at Tianjin, as at Kazan before it, the message was unmistakable: much of the world is now prepared to move on. This article was first published in the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta and was translated and edited by the RT team View the full article

The secret mission, reportedly approved by Trump in 2019, resulted in civilian deaths The US Navy’s elite special operations unit, SEAL Team Six, carried out a covert mission inside North Korea that violated international law and left civilians dead, the New York Times has reported. The 2019 operation, reportedly authorized by President Donald Trump during his first term, sent commandos to plant a surveillance device designed to intercept the communications of North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un. The intelligence was intended to strengthen US leverage during nuclear negotiations between Kim and Trump. Officials briefed on the mission told the outlet that SEAL Team Six – the unit best known for killing Osama bin Laden in 2011 – launched from submarines and used mini-submersibles to approach the North Korean coast. But in the dark of night, the team failed to notice several men in a nearby boat. Believing them to be hostile forces, the SEALs opened fire, killing two or three unarmed fishermen. They then reportedly retrieved the bodies, punctured the lungs so they would sink, and abandoned the mission before reaching the target site. Breakdowns in communication and surveillance reportedly compounded the problems, the article continued. Commanders aboard supporting submarines could not maintain radio contact, drones were unavailable, and satellite imagery was outdated, leaving the team without reliable intelligence. A subsequent military review concluded the killings resulted from “an unfortunate sequence” of unforeseeable events rather than misconduct, but the findings were kept classified. The mission was never disclosed to Congress, raising concerns about the lack of oversight, and may have violated US law, according to the NYT. ”Ordinarily, a mission of this magnitude would have been briefed to congressional intelligence or armed services committees,” Matthew Waxman, a Columbia University law professor and former national security official, told the paper. North Korea has never acknowledged the incident, and it remains unclear whether Pyongyang ever learned of it until now. In 2019, Trump sought a breakthrough with Kim on North Korea’s nuclear program, but talks failed and Pyongyang pressed ahead. Washington now estimates North Korea has about 50 nuclear warheads and missiles capable of hitting the US. View the full article

I hate career fairs. They’re probably the dumbest goddam thing ever invented as it relates to job hunting—at least since the resume. If you’ve never been to one, it’s basically speed dating without even the possibility of sex. In other words, it’s a worthless and inhumane exercise. Avoid career fairs at all costs (to your career and livelihood). Let me describe my typical job fair experience in a rambling, stream-of-thought manner that encapsulates what you’d be getting yourself into should you foolishly decide to ignore my warning—especially if you’re as neurotic as I am. I start by panicking 30 minutes before I have to leave for the job fair. My mind is flooded with questions about preparation and logistics: Do I shower? Comb and gel my hair? Put on a suit? But it’s hot out—why should I put on a suit? It’s not like it’s an actual job interview. The listed employers don’t deserve my A-game anyway. Fuck them. They don’t pay enough—or have opportunities I really want anyway. So why put on a suit? But why go at all if I’m not going to take it seriously? Speaking of serious, it’s time to go. What are you waiting for, stupid? You want to avoid traffic, don’t you? And what about parking? Parking is always a pain in the ass at these things given the masses of unemployed people—most of whom are taking this a lot more seriously than you are. God, you suck. When the madness dies down, I usually put on a collared shirt and some decent slacks. I comb (and gel) my hair if it truly needs it and hop in the car. I cruise over to the career fair thinking of smooth elevator pitches that perfectly sum up my experience. (Just kidding. I drive at top speed and play loud rock music to pump myself up—knowing that appearing confident is at least half the battle.) Once I park and find my way to the venue, I greet the host and take a nametag. If my name isn’t already printed on said name tag, I usually ask said host to write it for me because I have shitty handwriting—and wouldn’t want to be judged for that. Then, as I gaze at down aisle after aisle of employers, with their decorated tables, free swag, and phony smiles, my dreaded internal voice returns: Don’t talk to the hot ones first! Talk to the most relevant! Start with the shorter lines—you don’t have all day! Stop playing with your hair and glasses when you speak. And don’t take a free hand sanitizer from every table because you’re too cheap to buy them yourself! God, you’re stupid. This is why you don’t have a job: You’re hopeless. And don’t talk to the other candidates! They’re your competition! Fight them for a better place in line! Why didn’t you print your resume? If you send it via email, you don’t know that they’ll ever see it. They probably just gave you their card to get rid of you. And so on. Almost every conversation with a potential employer at a career fair goes like this: Candidate: “Hi, nice to meet you. My name is ________.” Recruiter: “Welcome, my name is _________.” (Recruiter points to professional nametag) Candidate: “What positions are you looking to fill?” Recruiter: “Oh, well, we have them listed on our website. What’s your background? What are you looking for?” (Candidate hands recruiter a resume if candidate bothered to print it. If not, candidate summarizes work experience. Of course, it’s a lot faster if candidate summarizes experience in the first scenario rather than expecting recruiter to read off resume.) Recruiter: “Great, well, you should look into _________. Send me an email if you have any questions. Good luck!” End of (pointless) conversation. I don’t just mean that my conversations with recruiters are like this—I’ve eavesdropped enough to know that just about all of them are. If you can’t handle the same exchange at least ten times, you’re better off hunting for jobs online like a typical 21st century sucker. Once I’ve played my part, I inevitably get tired and hungry. If there aren’t enough free snacks provided, I duck out after two hours. Rinse. Recycle. Repeat. Why do we do this to ourselves? — Previously Published on substack iStock image The post The Career Fair Farce appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

By U. Michigan The research in The Humanistic Psychologist centers on the concept of amor fati, a Latin phrase proclaimed by Friedrich Nietzsche more than 100 years ago meaning “love of one’s fate.” It suggests that people who embrace amor fati are more likely to flourish and less likely to languish in midlife. The study, led by University of Michigan psychologist Edward Chang, surveyed 111 Americans ages 35 to 60 to explore how amor fati relates to mental health, social connectedness, and loneliness. “Amor fati isn’t about passive acceptance,” says Chang, professor of psychology. “It’s a joyful, deliberate engagement with everything life throws at you, including suffering. My findings suggest this mindset can play a powerful role in helping middle-aged adults thrive.” Midlife is often characterized by unique psychological stressors—career plateaus, the demands of raising children and caring for aging parents, the death of loved ones, and increased awareness of one’s own mortality. These pressures can lead to feelings of isolation or emptiness. To explore how amor fati might buffer against these effects, participants were asked to respond to statements reflecting this attitude, as well as questions about their social connectedness and loneliness, and their overall mental health—measured in terms of flourishing and languishing. Flourishing was defined as the presence of positive experiences in one’s life. Languishing, on the other hand, referred to the absence of such experiences. The study found that people who scored higher on amor fati also reported feeling more socially connected and less lonely—factors that were linked to greater flourishing. In other words, those who embraced amor fati tended to feel more connected to others and less lonely, which in turn further boosted their sense of flourishing. Interestingly, the connection between amor fati and reduced languishing was partly explained by increased social connectedness alone. Loneliness did not play the same mediating role in that part of the model. The study encourages a rethinking of how we experience difficult moments. For example, being alone doesn’t necessarily have to be seen as a negative state. Rather, both solitude and companionship can be meaningful aspects of life when approached with amor fati. Similarly, middle-aged adults juggling the care of young children and elderly parents—often referred to as the “sandwich generation”—might find relief in reframing their responsibilities. Instead of viewing caregiving as a heavy burden, Chang suggests recognizing it as a continuation of what previous generations endured. “Caring is a choice,” Chang says. “And whether it’s for your children, your parents or yourself, these acts of care are deeply connected to personal growth and fulfillment.” The study opens new doors for understanding mental health during midlife—a life stage often overshadowed in psychological research. It also offers practical insight for those seeking meaning and resilience amid life’s challenges. Ultimately, the findings suggest that learning to embrace—not just endure—life’s full spectrum of experiences may be key to thriving as we age, Chang says. Source: University of Michigan Original Study DOI: 10.1037/hum0000384 — Previously Published on futurity.org with Creative Commons License *** – The world is changing fast. We help you keep up. We’ll send you 1 post, 3x per week. Join The Good Men Project 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 This Mindset Can Boost Mental Health in Midlife appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

📚 Reading help on Kindle: Struggling with long pages? Kindle has a special font that makes words easier to follow. Open any book, tap near the top and select the Aa icon. Under Font > Font Family, choose OpenDyslexic. FYI: You can also adjust Boldness and Size here to suit your eyes. Cool, right? The post Reading help on Kindle appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

Facebook, YouTube, X, WhatsApp, and dozens more are no longer accessible in Nepal due to non-compliance with government registration Nepal has blocked dozens of major social media platforms, including Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, and Reddit, after they failed to comply with national registration rules. The move echoes a global trend of governments tightening oversight of Big Tech. The ban follows directives issued in 2023 by the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, which require all networks to register before operating in the South Asian country. The Supreme Court recently backed the measure, telling the government to ensure both foreign and domestic platforms are officially listed so their content can be monitored. The government says the rules are meant to curb fake accounts, hate speech, and cybercrime in a country where nine in ten people use the internet. Platforms were given a week from August 28 to apply, but the deadline passed on Wednesday night without any of the major global players – including Meta, Alphabet, X, Reddit, and LinkedIn – submitting applications. A total of 26 platforms that ignored the directives have now been blocked. According to local media reports, TikTok, Viber, and several smaller apps did register, while Telegram and Global Diary are still waiting for approval. “Except for the five listed platforms and two in the process, all others will be deactivated inside Nepal,” ministry spokesperson Gajendra Kumar Thakur said, adding that any platform completing registration would be reopened the same day. The decision has stirred anger online, with social media users calling it regressive in the digital era and warning it risks cutting millions off from services they rely on daily. Around the world, governments from the US and EU to Brazil and Australia are moving to tighten control of social media, citing fears of fake news, data misuse, and security risks. Last month, Russia’s media watchdog restricted voice calls on WhatsApp and Telegram, citing their use in scams, extortion, and recruitment for sabotage and terrorist activity. View the full article

Despite objections from across the world, Netanyahu’s government is redrawing the map with tank tracks In early August, Benjamin Netanyahu dispelled any lingering ambiguity. In a direct interview with Fox News, he made explicit what had long been implied through diplomatic euphemisms: Israel intends to take full military control of the Gaza, dismantle Hamas as a political and military entity, and eventually transfer authority to a “non-Hamas civilian administration,” ideally with Arab participation. “We’re not going to govern Gaza,” the prime minister added. But even then, the formula of “seize but not rule” read more like a diplomatic veil for a much harsher course of action. The very next day, Israel’s security cabinet gave formal approval to this trajectory, initiating preparations for an assault on Gaza City. The UN secretary-general responded swiftly, warning that such an operation risked a dangerous escalation and threatened to normalize what had once been an avoidable humanitarian catastrophe. August exposed the war in its most unforgiving clarity. Strikes on Zeitoun, Shuja’iyya, Sabra, and operations in the Jabalia area became a part of the daily rhythm. The encirclement of Gaza City tightened slowly but relentlessly. Brigadier General Effi Defrin confirmed the launch of a new phase, with troops reaching the city’s outskirts. At the same time, the government called up tens of thousands of reservists in a clear signal that Israel was prepared to take the city by force, even if the window for a negotiated pause technically remained open. In this context, talk of “stabilization” rings hollow. Infrastructure lies in ruins, the healthcare system is on the verge of collapse, aid lines often end under fire, and international monitoring groups are recording signs of impending famine. The conflict is no longer a conventional war between armies. It is taking on the contours of a managed disintegration of civilian life. But Gaza is not the whole picture. On the West Bank, the logic of military control is being formalized both legally and spatially. On July 23, the Knesset voted by majority to adopt a declaration advocating the extension of Israeli sovereignty over Judea, Samaria, and the Jordan Valley. While framed as a recommendation, the move effectively normalizes institutionalizing the erosion of previously drawn red lines. It is within this framework that the E1 plan of Israeli settlements in the West Bank must be understood as a critical link in the eastern belt surrounding Jerusalem. On August 20, the Higher Planning Committee of the Civil Administration gave the green light for the construction of over 3,400 housing units between East Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim. For urban planners, it’s about “filling in the gaps” between existing developments. For policymakers and military officials, it represents a strategic pivot. First, E1 aims to create a continuous Jewish presence encircling Jerusalem and to merge Ma’ale Adumim into the city’s urban fabric. This reinforces the eastern flank of the capital, provides strategic depth, and secures Highway 1 – the vital corridor to the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley. Second, it severs East Jerusalem from its natural Palestinian hinterland. E1 physically blocks the West Bank’s access to the eastern part of the city, cutting East Jerusalem off from Ramallah in the north and Bethlehem in the south. Third, it dismantles the territorial continuity of any future Palestinian state. Instead of a unified space, a network of isolated enclaves emerges – linked by bypass roads and tunnels that fail to compensate for the loss of direct access to Jerusalem, both symbolic and administrative. Fourth, it seeks to shift the debate over Jerusalem’s status from the realm of diplomacy into the realm of irrevocable facts. Once the eastern belt is built up, the vision of East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state becomes almost impossible to realize. Finally, E1 embodies two opposing principles: for Israelis, a “managed continuity” of control; for Palestinians, a “managed vacuum” of governance. One side gains an uninterrupted corridor of dominance, the other is left with a fragmented territory and diminished prospects for self-determination. It is no surprise, then, that international reaction was swift and unambiguous from the UN and EU to London and Canberra. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, commenting on the launch of E1, said out loud what the maps had already suggested: the project would “bury” the idea of a Palestinian state. In an August broadcast on i24News, Netanyahu said he feels a “strong connection” to the vision of a “Greater Israel.” For Arab capitals this was a confirmation of his strategic maximalism. The military campaign in Gaza and the planning-led expansion in the West Bank aren’t two parallel tracks, but parts of a single, integrated agenda. The regional response was swift and uncompromising from Jordanian warnings to collective condemnation from international institutions. The broader picture reveals deliberate design: In Gaza, forced subjugation without any credible or legitimate “handover of keys”; in the West Bank, a reconfiguration of political geography via E1 and its related projects, translating a diplomatic dispute into the language of roads, zoning, and demography. The language of “temporariness” and “no intention to govern” functions as cover, in practice, the temporary hardens into permanence, and control becomes institutionalized as the new normal. As the lines converge in Gaza’s shattered neighborhoods, in the planning documents for East Jerusalem, and in statements from Israeli leadership, the space for any negotiated outcome narrows further. What began as a pledge to dismantle Hamas is increasingly functioning as a mechanism to erase the word ‘Palestine’ from the future map. In this framework, there is no “day after.” What exists instead is a carefully prearranged aftermath designed to leave no room for alternatives. The map is drawn before peace is reached, and in the end, it is the map that becomes the decisive argument, not a treaty. The current military operation, referred to as Gideon’s Chariot 2, has not been officially declared an occupation. However, its character on the ground strongly resembles one. IDF armored units have reached Sabra and are engaged in ongoing combat at the Zeitoun junction, a strategic point where fighting has continued for over a week. Military descriptions of these actions as operations on the periphery increasingly resemble the opening phase of a full assault on Gaza City. In the last 24 hours, the pattern has only intensified. Artillery and airstrikes have been systematically clearing eastern and northern districts, including Zeitoun, Shuja’iyya, Sabra, and Jabalia, in preparation for armored and infantry advances. The military effort is now reinforced by a large-scale mobilization of personnel. A phased conscription has been approved. The main wave, composed of 60,000 reservists, is expected to report by September 2, with additional groups to follow through the fall and winter. This is not a tactical raid but a prolonged urban combat campaign that will be measured not by military markers on a map but by the ability to sustain logistical flow and personnel rotations under intense conditions. Diplomatic efforts are unfolding alongside the military campaign. On August 18, Hamas, through Egyptian and Qatari intermediaries, agreed to the outline of a ceasefire known as the Witkoff Plan. It proposes a 60-day pause, the release of ten living hostages, and the return of the remains of eighteen others in exchange for Israeli actions concerning Palestinian detainees and humanitarian access. The Israeli government has not officially agreed to the plan and insists that all hostages must be included. Nonetheless, Hamas’s offer is already being used by Israel as leverage. It serves more as a tactical pressure point than a genuine breakthrough. This context gives meaning to Netanyahu’s latest directive calling for a shortened timeline to capture Hamas’s remaining strongholds. The accelerated ground campaign aims to pressure Hamas into making broader concessions under the framework of the proposed deal. If Hamas refuses, Israel will present a forceful seizure of Gaza City as a justified action to its domestic audience. Observers close to the government interpret the strategy in exactly these terms. The objective is not only to dismantle Hamas’s infrastructure but also to escalate the stakes and force a binary choice between a truce on Israeli terms and a full military entry into the city. Even the most carefully designed military strategy eventually confronts the same dilemma: the challenge of the day after. Without a legitimate mandate and without a coherent administrative framework, even a tactical victory risks resulting in a managed vacuum. In such a scenario, control shifts hands on the map, but the underlying threat remains unresolved. Ideology also plays a central role in shaping this campaign. In August, Netanyahu publicly affirmed his strong personal identification with the vision of the Promised Land and Greater Israel. This statement provoked strong reactions in Arab capitals and further discredited Israel’s narrative that it seeks to control Gaza without governing it. The on-the-ground reality is more complex and sobering. After nearly two years of conflict, the IDF has not eliminated the threat. It has suffered significant losses, and there is no clear consensus within the officer corps on launching another ground offensive in Gaza. According to reports by Israeli media, Israel’s top military leadership had warned that a complete takeover of Gaza would come with heavy casualties and heightened risks to hostages. For this reason, earlier operations deliberately avoided areas where hostages were likely being held. Leaked assessments suggest that the General Staff had proposed a strategy centered on encircling Gaza City and applying incremental pressure over time. However, the political leadership opted instead for speed and direct assault. The casualties already number in the hundreds, and major urban combat has yet to begin. The domestic opposition has made its stance clear. After a security briefing, opposition leader Yair Lapid stated that a new occupation of Gaza would be a grave mistake and one for which Israel would pay a high price. Pressure on the government is mounting both internally, through weekly demonstrations demanding a hostage deal, and externally. Countries such as France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Malta are preparing to take steps toward recognizing Palestinian statehood at the United Nations General Assembly in September. In the language of international diplomacy, this move signals a counterbalance to both Hamas’s hardline stance and Israel’s rightward territorial ambitions. The more forcefully Israel insists on capturing Gaza at all costs, the stronger the global response becomes in favor of formalizing Palestine’s status. However, the situation now transcends local dynamics. Against the backdrop of worldwide instability, including regional conflicts, disrupted global trade routes and rising geopolitical risk, the Gaza campaign increasingly appears to be part of a broader, long-term war of attrition. Within Israel’s strategic thinking, the ultimate objective seems to be the closure of the Palestinian question altogether. This entails dismantling all political structures and actors that might, in any combination, threaten Israeli security. Under this logic, humanitarian consequences are not considered constraints. A recent UN report illustrates the magnitude of the crisis. For the first time, the Food and Agriculture Organization officially declared catastrophic hunger in Gaza, reaching the fifth and highest level of the Integrated Food Security Classification, or IPC. By the end of September, more than 640,000 people are expected to face total food deprivation. Yet even this alarming assessment has not shifted the current trajectory. Western European declarations of intent to recognize Palestinian statehood have also failed to become decisive turning points. Israel now faces a rare and difficult crossroads. One path leads through diplomacy. It includes a 60-day pause, an initial exchange of captives, and a broader acknowledgment that lasting security is achieved not only through military force, but also through institutions, legal rights, and legitimacy. The other path leads into a renewed spiral of urban warfare. It involves the deployment of more reservists, increasingly severe military orders, and objectives that grow less clearly defined with each passing day. In Sabra, the physical tracks of tanks are already visible before any clear political statement has been made. Ultimately, though, the outcome will be determined not by battlefield reports, but by legal, diplomatic, and institutional formulas. These will decide whether the fall of Gaza marks the end of the war or simply the beginning of a new chapter. As assault plans are finalized, mobilization lists expand, and ideological rhetoric intensifies, the sense of inevitability grows stronger. This operation resembles less an isolated campaign and more a component of a much longer-term project to reconfigure geography and status. If that logic continues to dominate, the day after will already be written, and it will allow no room for alternatives. In that scenario, the map will carry more weight than any agreement. Facts on the ground will become the ultimate authority, overshadowing diplomatic recognitions, international reports, and humanitarian data alike. View the full article

In a world that too often divides us by gender, class, race, or belief, there are still truths that remain, deeper than difference, stronger than status. These truths live in our bones. They are the stuff of being human. And no matter how tough we are taught to be, how self-reliant, how stoic, we all carry them. We Bury Our Dead We may not always talk about it, but grief carves through us all. Whether it’s a quiet tear at a funeral, or the years it takes to say a name out loud again, loss strips us down to what’s real. All around the world, we mourn. We gather. We remember. Because love doesn’t end when a person is gone. We Look to the Stars You don’t have to be religious to feel small beneath a sky full of stars. That kind of silence has a way of humbling you. We look up not to escape, but to belon, to remember that this struggle we’re in, this race against the clock, matters…and doesn’t. And somehow, that helps us keep going. We Reach for Each Other Real strength is knowing when to reach out. For too long, men were told to tough it out, to go it alone. But connection isn’t weakness. It’s oxygen. A text from a friend, a hug from your kid, a voice saying “I see you.” It’s not optional. It’s how we survive. We Fear Isolation Walking into a room and not knowing where you fit? That hits deep. It’s not just awkward, it’s ancient. We’re wired to want a tribe, a team, a place at the table. Belonging isn’t a luxury. It’s how we’re built. And when it’s missing, it hurts more than we let on. We Question Our Beliefs Whether it’s how we were raised, what we were taught about success, or what it means to be a man, there comes a moment when we pause and ask, Is this really me? That’s not failure. That’s growth. The most honest men I know aren’t the ones who have all the answers. They’re the ones still asking questions. We Resist Being Trapped Rules. Roles. Routines. They can cage us if we’re not careful. Being a good man doesn’t mean fitting into a narrow box. It means claiming your right to choose, to evolve, to redefine strength, to live your truth without apology. We Are Born of Circumstance No one picks their starting line. Where you’re born, who your parents are, what you inherit, none of it is earned. But what you do with it? That’s yours. And every man you meet has his own origin story, shaped by chance as much as choice. We Break and Rebuild You’re not the only one who’s hit rock bottom. Not the only one who’s questioned whether you can do this — this job, this relationship, this life. But breaking doesn’t mean the end. It means you’re still here. Still trying. And every scar is proof that you’ve been through the fire and chose to rebuild anyway. We Doubt Ourselves It’s the question beneath every goal, every risk, every silence: Am I enough? Most men carry that question in some form. But doubt isn’t the enemy, pretending we don’t feel it is. Real courage is moving forward even when you’re unsure. We Hunger for More We want more than just the paycheck, the title, the daily grind. We want meaning. Purpose. A sense that what we do, and who we are, matters. That hunger is not selfish. It’s sacred. It’s the thing that drives us to be better, to grow, to contribute. — 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 What We Share: The Universal Threads of Being Human appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The US president has insisted European member states spend more on their own defense The US has begun to phase out foreign funding programs for NATO countries bordering Russia in an effort to push its European allies to pay for their own security, Financial Times has reported. Pentagon officials last week told Western European diplomats that Washington will no longer fund programs aimed at training and equipping the militaries of the bloc’s eastern member states, the outlet wrote on Thursday, citing anonymous officials. Moscow has long insisted that it views eastward NATO expansion, and the military buildup of countries on Russia’s western border as a security threat. The funding for the Pentagon program needs to be approved by the US Congress, but the White House has not applied for more money, according to FT. The availability of previously approved funds reportedly ends next September. Western European diplomats were “startled” by Washington’s move, and worried whether their domestic funding could cope with the loss, the outlet wrote. “It’s causing a lot of concern and uncertainty,” the newspaper cited one diplomat as saying. The cut corresponds with US President Donald Trump’s earlier executive action on realigning foreign aid with his ‘America First’ doctrine, FT said, citing a White House official. “This action has been coordinated with European countries in line with the executive order and the president’s long-standing emphasis on ensuring Europe takes more responsibility for its own defense,” the official reportedly said. Under pressure from Trump, European NATO states promised to increase military budgets to 5% of GDP earlier this year. EU governments have also announced large-scale military investments, citing an alleged threat posed by Russia. Moscow has repeatedly brushed off assertions that it intends to attack the US-led military bloc. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has pointed to the military buildup and Western European leaders’ increasingly bellicose rhetoric, accusing them of steering towards a direct clash. “They are once again trying to prepare Europe for war – not some hybrid war, but a real war against Russia,” he warned in July. View the full article

Last month, I showed up ten minutes late to a Zoom meeting that I myself had scheduled. The worst part? I had written it down in two different places. Somehow, I still forgot. That was not even the most embarrassing moment. I once spent twenty minutes pacing my apartment looking for my phone, while I was talking on it. Another time, I introduced myself to the same colleague three times in a week. By the third time, he just laughed. I laughed too, but inside, I felt a little panicked. For most of my life, I assumed I was just cursed with a bad memory. Some people remembered birthdays, names, and details from a conversation we’d had two years ago. Meanwhile, I could barely remember what I’d eaten for breakfast that morning. I thought memory was like eye color or musical talent: something you were born with, not something you could change. I was wrong. So completely wrong. The problem was not my brain. The problem was my strategy. I was treating my memory like a talent. Something to be tested. I would stressfully try to stuff facts into my brain and hope they would stay just by trying really hard. It was like trying to hold water in my cupped hands while running futile and exhausting. The breakthrough came when I realized I was focusing on the wrong verb. I stopped trying to remember. I started building a system to not forget. It sounds like semantics, but it is everything. It is the difference between hoping a seed will grow and actually planting it, watering it, and giving it sun. Here is the system that changed everything. … 1. I Outsourced Everything. Immediately. My brain is for having ideas, not for holding them. The moment I accepted this was the moment I got my mental capacity back. The “trying to remember” phase is where information goes to die. That fleeting thought — “I need to buy toothpaste” — is volatile. If you dont capture it immediately then it will evaporate. The System: I got really strict about writing everything down. The second a thought or a reminder comes to mind, I immediately put it in its special place. My phone notes app for random ideas and lists. My calendar for appointments and deadlines. A physical notepad by my bed for 3 AM thoughts. This is not a cheat code. It is the foundation. It emptie the mental RAM so your brain can actually do its job: think deeply and creatively, not just recall grocery items. … 2. I Stopped Memorizing and Started Storytelling. Our brains are not wired for dry facts. They are wired for drama. They remember the weird, the emotional and the absurd. Trying to remember a list like avocados, duct tape and lightbulbs is a recipe for failure. So I stopped trying. I use the Memory Palace technique. It sounds kooky, but it’s shockingly effective. Pick a place you know well. Your childhood home. Your commute to work. Place your items along a path in that place, but make it a bizarre story. For that list, I imagine walking into my house and slipping on a giant avocado (avocados) pit on the floor. To stop my fall, I grab the curtain rod, but it’s made of duct tape (duct tape) and stretches. I swing into the ceiling light, shattering the lightbulb (lightbulbs) and plunging the room into darkness. Is it ridiculous? Absolutely. Will you remember it? I guarantee you will. 3. I Made Peace with the Pause. Forgetting names is not a memory failure; it is just an attention failure. We are so busy thinking about what we are going to say next that we never truly hear the name in the first place. The System: I forced myself to pause for one full second after someone introduces themselves. I look at them. I repeat their name back to them: Its great to meet you, Mark. That one second of intentional focus is the price of admission. It is the difference between casually glancing at a sign and actually reading it. You are sending a signal to your brain: This is worth saving. … 4. I Connected the Dots. Just repeating something over and over is boring and hard. But if you actually understand it, the information sticks in your brain. It is like glue. Instead of trying to memorize a fact, I try to understand why its true. I connect it to something I already know. When I need to learn something new. I ask: How is this similar to something I already understand? How is it different? Why does this work this way? When I connect new facts to things I already know, it is like the information has more than one way to stay in my brain. It is not just depending on one weak connection. … The Real Secret Is not a Trick Stop trusting your brain to remember everything. Instead, set up your life so you don’t have to remember. My memory did not get better. My system did. I do not try to remember where my keys are; they always go in the same bowl by the door. I do not try to remember my passwords: a password manager does that for me. I do not try to remember tasks: my calendar tell me what to do and when. I stopped making my brain do the boring job of remembering every little thing. Now, I let it do the important work: thinking of new ideas, solving problems, and making smart decisions. Its job is not to panic about where I left the car. You do not have a bad memory. You just haven’t built the right scaffolding for it yet. Stop trying to hold the water in your hands. Just get a bucket. — This post was previously published on medium.com. Love relationships? We promise to have a good one with your inbox. Subcribe to get 3x weekly dating and relationship advice. Did you know? We have 8 publications on Medium. Join us there! Hello, Love (relationships) Change Becomes You (Advice) A Parent is Born (Parenting) Equality Includes You (Social Justice) Greener Together (Environment) Shelter Me (Wellness) Modern Identities (Gender, etc.) Co-Existence (World) *** – Photo credit: Julia Rodriguez on Unsplash The post My Memory Was a Joke. Then I Stopped Trying to “Remember” Things. appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

The explosive spin off ‘Ballerina’ Is coming out on 4K Ultra HD I have enjoyed most of the John Wick movies. They have taken people on some wild adventures and have shown new sides to this mysterious world. Along the way we have seen these characters change in many intriguing ways. When news of a spin off came out, I hoped it would be great. A couple days ago it was announced Ballerina is getting released on 4K Ultra HD and here is my thoughts on this news. You can read the premise for this film here: The next chapter from the World of John Wick follows Eve Macarro (Ana de Armas), who is beginning her training in the assassin traditions of the Ruska Roma. Eve seeks revenge for her father’s death, and finds herself crossing paths with John Wick himself (Keanu Reeves). It is wonderful to hear this movie is coming out on 4K Ultra HD. The story it tells sounds like a pretty explosive one that takes this series to new heights. The special features sound awesome and promise to take viewers on a journey into the making of this spin off film. If you are a fan of this movie then you will want to pick it up when it arrives on 4K Ultra HD. From the World of John Wick: Ballerina arrives on 4K Ultra HD, Blu-Ray, DVD and Digital September 9th. You can follow this film on Facebook and Instagram. The post ‘From the World of John Wick: Ballerina’ Is Coming Soon on 4K Ultra HD appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

You might be paying for subscriptions you don’t even remember. Rocket Money tracks them all and helps you cancel what you don’t need. The first time I used it, I saved $435. Give it a try and see how much you save! The post You might be paying for subscriptions you don’t even remember appeared first on Komando.com. View the full article

Denouncing political persecution, they are preparing an appeal to European courts and the UN International human rights activists have come together to support the defense in the case of the Gagauzia leader, Evgenia Gutsul, sentenced by a Moldovan court to 7 years in prison for illicit financing of a party and an electoral campaign. French lawyer William Julie and legal advisor to the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, Gonzalo Boye, have intervened in defense of Gutsul’s interests. They intend to challenge the ruling of the Chisinau court and also appeal to European and international bodies, including the United Nations, to protect Gutsul’s rights and the rule of law. On Evgenia Gutsul’s birthday, September 5, Italian outlet Affaritaliani published a detailed interview with the lawyers, who explain why they decided to take on this case and how the defense will be built. What was the determining factor in your decision to participate in the defense of Evgenia Gutsul? Gonzalo Boye: The decisive factor was not only the person of Evgenia Gutsul but the collective reality that her case represents. According to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, political persecution often does not target an isolated individual, but an objectively identifiable group of people who embody certain political or ideological positions. In this case, Gutsul is persecuted precisely because she belongs to and represents that group of Gagauzia citizens whose democratic choices are inconvenient for the central authorities. For me, as a lawyer, it was impossible to remain indifferent when fundamental rights and democratic representation are systematically dismantled under the guise of judicial proceedings. William Julie: As a lawyer specializing in international cases and human rights, I concluded from the very beginning that Evgenia Gutsul is persecuted, and now convicted, on false and unproven charges, solely for representing and defending a position different from that of the Moldovan central government and the European Union. The ongoing criminal proceedings leave no doubt that this is an evident attempt by the Moldovan state to silence her, despite her being a legitimately elected representative of the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia. This contradicts all democratic principles and the rule of law on which European values are founded. Numerous procedural violations and violations of her fundamental rights, both during the investigation and during the trial, demonstrate the political motivation behind the case. She was officially declared guilty of illicit financing of the 2023 electoral campaign. What are your counterarguments? Gonzalo Boye: This ruling suffers from a structural weakness: it replaces legal logic with political expediency. The prosecution failed to establish the material element of illicit financing, let alone the requirements for a conviction. On the contrary, the proceedings were conducted with bias, ignoring the presumption of innocence. Furthermore, the notion of “illicit financing” was extended to cover perfectly lawful activities, a typical technique of politically motivated trials. Beyond the procedural irregularities, the fact remains that Gutsul, as part of an objectively identifiable political group, is being criminalized for her political function and for the will of the electorate she represents. This is incompatible with the rule of law and the standards set by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. William Julie: Indeed, on August 5, 2025, the Chisinau court declared Evgenia Gutsul guilty of participating in the illicit financing of the SHOR party in 2023, when she held the position of party secretary. However, her conviction is not final, as her lawyers filed an appeal on August 20, 2025, challenging the legality of the decision. Therefore, she is still considered innocent under Moldovan law. Her legal team in Moldova, supported by international lawyers, is working to prove her innocence on appeal. Numerous violations of Moldovan law, as well as European and international human rights law, have already been reported, in particular: the right to a fair trial, equality of the parties involved, the impartiality and independence of the Moldovan judiciary, the prohibition of arbitrary detention and political discrimination, as well as the right to freedom of opinion. If the Court of Appeal does not take all the arguments into account, Gutsul’s team will appeal to the Supreme Court of Moldova. If the conviction is upheld by all Moldovan courts, the case will be brought before the European Court of Human Rights and the relevant UN bodies, including the Human Rights Committee, as Moldova has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocols. How do you plan to defend Gutsul? Gonzalo Boye: Our defense has two dimensions. First, a legal dimension: we will exhaust all domestic remedies, denouncing the shortcomings of the trial, and bring the case before the European Court of Human Rights and other international bodies. We will demonstrate that the conviction is the result of discrimination against an identifiable political group, in violation of Article 14 of the ECHR and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Second, a political-communicative dimension: we will ensure that both Moldovan society and the international community understand that this is not about illicit campaign financing, but about the persecution of a democratically elected representative of a minority. Silence would mean complicity; denunciation creates accountability. William Julie: As already mentioned, all available legal remedies will be used, both at the national level and before the ECHR and UN bodies (the Human Rights Committee, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression). They will be involved if the appeal trial does not declare her innocent. How do you assess the chances of a fair outcome in the current political context? Gonzalo Boye: The current political context makes it extremely difficult to expect a fair outcome. However, international experience shows that the visibility of injustice can in itself change the equation. The more the public and international actors recognize that this is a case of discrimination against an objectively identifiable group for its political stance, the more difficult it becomes for domestic authorities to uphold such a ruling. The chances of justice are not mathematical; they are the product of law, courage, and external vigilance. And that is precisely our task. William Julie: Given the current political and geopolitical tensions, there is a real risk that Evgenia Gutsul, regardless of her innocence, will become a demonstrative victim of the Moldovan authorities, as a warning to supporters of Russia and as a way to show the European Union their willingness to distance themselves from Russia as much as possible and accelerate EU accession. Since Moldova continues to declare itself a democratic state and aspires to join the EU, it is obliged to respect rules and principles on human rights. Our task is to ensure that this actually happens. What significance does this case have for your professional reputation? Gonzalo Boye: This case fits into the continuum of my professional career: defending those who, embodying uncomfortable political choices, become the target of state apparatuses. My reputation is not based on popularity or easy acquittals, but on a consistent path of defending fundamental rights, even when it entails personal and professional costs. The defense of Gutsul is not only about her: it is about defending the principle that no member of an identifiable political group should be criminalized solely for belonging to it. Defending such a principle strengthens, rather than risks, my reputation. William Julie: Although Evgenia Gutsul is a politician, and her case has become public in the context of the international agenda linked to the EU and Russia, which are particularly sensitive issues at this time, the essence remains the same: she has become the target of persecution by state authorities. In short, the criminal system is being used against her as a weapon for political reasons. Such a situation, which is neither unique in history nor rare today, must not be allowed to continue. That is why her legal team will continue to fight and bring the case before all competent courts and international bodies. How do you assess the role of the media in covering this case? Gonzalo Boye: The media has played a dual role. Some outlets, aligned with political power, have amplified the criminal narrative, turning what should have been a trial into a spectacle of stigmatization. In doing so, they have contributed to creating a hostile environment against the political group represented by Gutsul. Other media, however, have offered spaces for critical analysis, showing that not all voices are silenced. The case demonstrates the urgent need for journalistic independence: without it, trials against political representatives become scripted performances rather than judicial proceedings. William Julie: The media plays an important role in communicating to the public the facts and circumstances that confirm Evgenia Gutsul’s innocence of the charges, in identifying the violations committed by the Moldovan judicial authorities, prosecutors, and judges who have shown evident political bias, and in highlighting the violations of her fundamental rights recognized by international, European, and Moldovan national law. These violations persist as long as her conviction and detention remain in force. What would you like to say to society and the international community? Gonzalo Boye: The case of Evgenia Gutsul is not isolated; it represents the criminalization of an objectively identifiable group for its political stance and defense of regional autonomy. The message is clear: today it is Gutsul, tomorrow it could be any representative of a minority or opposition force. To society I say: do not let fear or indifference normalize injustice. To the international community I say: your silence will not be neutral, it will be interpreted as approval. Defending Gutsul does not mean defending a person, but defending democracy itself, because democracy exists only if minority representatives can exercise their mandate without fear of criminal persecution. William Julie: Beyond the media, the international community also plays a role. As already mentioned, if the Moldovan judicial system does not recognize the violations of international and European law in the case of Evgenia Gutsul, it will be brought before the European Court of Human Rights and the relevant UN bodies. At the same time, the executive bodies of existing international structures, the Council of the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the UN Security Council, are called upon to demand that the Moldovan authorities guarantee and protect her rights. In this context, society also plays a role. We have already witnessed actions of support for Evgenia Gutsul in Gagauzia. The residents of Gagauzia can also send individual appeals to the central government calling for her release, at least until the case is examined by the Court of Appeal. Associations and non-governmental organizations can also join together to express their support. This interview was first published by Affaritaliani and was translated by the RT team View the full article

Recent years have brought a flood of discourse on trauma: personality disorders, PTSD, and addiction. We cannot escape the battle of validating our experiences online, in our families, or our doctors’ offices. Society upholds its moral superiority by deciding who deserves to be in pain and who has truly suffered from it. We fail to see that the human soul is not so easily organized. Ironically, this is the same black and white thinking that drives diagnosis for labels such as borderline personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, and the systemic discarding of individuals who suffer from addiction. There is no scale for sorrow, and no system can determine the nature of rupture in the human soul. Trauma is not about what has happened to us but how we have perceived our reality and what our body believes it must do to survive. The Labels that Divide Us As a society, we tend to rank trauma through labels. This moral sorting has infected not just culture, but clinical diagnosis itself. The DSM is opened, the ‘appropriate’ boxes checked, and a decision is made. If you check the boxes of PTSD, you are a survivor of tragedy. If you have used substances to survive, you must be the cause of your own difficulty in life. Likewise, if you are labelled with a personality disorder, you become the cause of suffering, not the consequence. If we were to accept that each of these categories is simply a different branch of the same tree, we could no longer ignore the dysfunction living within us. We could not say: “Well, at least I’m not an addict.” Or “He’s a narcissist, it’s just who they are.” “The most dangerous stories we make up are the narratives that diminish our inherent worthiness. We are hardwired for connection, but when we feel shame or fear, we begin to other people — to see them as ‘those people’ instead of ‘us.’” — Brené Brown, Rising Strong We rarely get to choose the coping mechanisms that our nervous systems use for survival. We do not even get to choose if our bodies will interpret something as traumatic. Although we may consciously view something as easily survivable, our bodies internalize the experience as life or death. A child may have all their physical needs met, but experience emotional coldness from a parent or caregiver. On the outside, the child is thriving, the family is functional and whole. But the body begins to internalize the experience: My needs are too much, I must minimize myself to receive love. This is the birth of devouring self-hatred. The fuel needed to drive addiction and co-dependency later in life. The Cost of Cure Over the last three decades, psychology has leaned heavily on the biomedical model. Through this model, we view suffering as pathology; an illness to be identified, treated, and ideally cured. This has laid the foundation for a pharmaceutical pipeline that equates healing with symptom suppression. This view of mental health relies completely on defining suffering through the clinical lens of disease. Despite limited evidence for its long-term efficacy, faith in this model has infiltrated almost every aspect of our shared humanity. This is not to say that medication is useless, or should be avoided; it can and does save lives. However, when suffering is reduced to a brain disease or a biological defect, we are left soulless. Our pain is pathologized and our stories erased. “Despite widespread faith in the potential of neuroscience to revolutionize mental health practice, the biomedical model era has been characterized by a broad lack of clinical innovation and poor mental health outcomes.” — The biomedical model of mental disorder: a critical analysis of its validity, utility, and effects on psychotherapy research, NIH National Library of Medicine It is dangerously easy to fall into the trap of medicalizing our suffering. The promise of treatment—the illusion of a cure for our humanness—is both hypnotic and addictive. When we experience even momentary relief, we cling to the medicine. We mistake silence for healing, and we suppress the deeper pain which remains trapped in the body, unspoken and unresolved. When Identity Becomes Diagnosis The seed that begins in clinical language takes root in culture. The branches spread through media, conversation, and how we view our identity. It can feel exhilarating to scroll through TikTok and hear your own story, spoken through another’s voice. Those of us who have suffered trauma, whether easily recognizable, such as abuse or less validated trauma, such as emotional neglect, tend to feel deeply alone throughout most of our lives. The recognition and hope of community are so powerful that we begin to identify completely with our psychiatric labels. We cling to the idea that the label is the key to community, to finally being seen. This impulse is deeply human and not something to be ashamed of. But moving it into the conscious part of our minds will help us regain control of our personal narrative. The cost of community through this psychological model is that we become identified with disease and disorder. We begin to separate ourselves from ‘the healed’, as if such a thing exists. There is no ‘healed’ human, only flawed people dedicated to growth. No matter how validated we feel, it takes only seconds to see the hatred and judgment that lives within the comments of the same videos in which we felt accepted for the first time. One side escapes accountability by placing complete blame on the borderline, the narcissist, and the addict. The other side feels forced to defend their values and their worth by claiming ‘it’s not all of us’, ‘some of us can change.’ Each side remains trapped in a loop of judgment and blame, unable to see the wounds which birthed the dysfunction. Through our search for connection, we remain separate and stagnant. Making Room for Our Humanity We cannot escape our past or experiences, but we do not need to remain stuck in systems that separate us from our fellow humans. As we begin to accept the entirety of our humanity, we can integrate what society has deemed shameful, using it to fuel our growth and individuation. This process requires an internal conversation with the voice of disorder that we have pathologized within our psyche. “Symptoms are not enemies to be destroyed, but messengers to be heard.” — Amber Claudon, Understanding Mental Health: Symptoms as the Messengers of Our Pain We must ask the voice of control within: What are you afraid of? As we begin to view our symptoms as messengers from our unconscious, we can truly begin to heal the wounds we carry. The biopsychosocial model of psychology seeks to view the entirety of the human experience. It focuses on how each aspect of our lives shapes our patterns and behaviours. However, one key aspect of our humanity remains unseen: the part of us that searches for meaning. Just as we seek connection, we are wired to make meaning of our suffering and experiences. This is the part in each of us which goes beyond what clinical terminology can name. Our essence, our soul. The biopsychosocial-spiritual model honours: The body’s signals (bio) The mind’s patterns (psychological) The relational, systemic, and cultural contexts we live in (social) And the intangible, unmeasurable aspects of being that make us human (spiritual) The Voice Within the Wound True healing or recovery only comes when we accept what we did to survive physical and emotional collapse. We must embrace what society has decided is irredeemable. Our nervous system makes unconscious decisions based on cues it receives externally. Our minds study patterns and feel safe operating within them, even when they cause destruction later in our lives. Society continues to separate itself into categories to avoid being discarded by the larger community. Through this, we isolate our soul to the shadows of our unconscious, filled with fear of our own inadequacies. Even in exile, our soul continues speaking, it asks that we return to it again and again. We can feel this is our emptiness, our search for belonging, fear of abandonment, and the dysregulated nervous systems that control our daily lives. Integration is not perfection; it is not reaching a whole, healed, or untraumatized version of ourselves. It requires that we sit with the wounded parts and past experiences that flood our minds and bodies and say: I see your pain. I hear your fear, but I decide who I am and who I become. It is only through this acceptance that we can begin to trust ourselves again. This conversation gives us language, acknowledgment and freedom to make choices that truly align with who we are and who we want to become. “I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man’s. I will not reason and compare: my business is to create.” ― William Blake, Jerusalem: The Emanation of the Giant Albion When we free ourselves from systems that wish to separate us, we are illuminated by the truth of who we are. This is how we reclaim our lives and begin making decisions based on autonomy and empowerment rather than fear of inadequacy. The path forward is not a cure to our diseased psyche, but room for our symptoms to speak their fear and truth before acting solely from our trauma. — Previously Published on substack iStock image The post No Scale for Sorrow: Reclaiming Our Souls in Trauma Discourse appeared first on The Good Men Project. View the full article

Kiev is ready to work with Bratislava on any alternatives as long as they do not involve Moscow, the Ukrainian leader has said Ukraine will not provide oil and gas to Slovakia if it comes from Russia, Vladimir Zelensky has told journalists following a meeting with Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico. Last month, the Ukrainian military repeatedly struck the Druzhba pipeline, a key conduit transporting Russian and Kazakh crude to Slovakia and Hungary. Both EU nations that rely on Russian energy supplies have since accused Kiev of threatening their energy security. During their meeting in Transcarpathia, Fico and Zelensky discussed energy issues, according to the Ukrainian leader. “We are ready to supply gas and oil to Slovakia if it is not Russian gas and not Russian oil. Because we have a war. Period,” Zelensky told journalists after the talks on Friday. Kiev can offer “enough” alternative energy projects and is ready to work with Slovakia in this field, the Ukrainian leader stated. Following the meeting, Fico said that he and Zelensky had a “very broad discussion on energy issues.” Bratislava and Kiev have “diametrically different opinions” on these matters, he stated during a joint press conference with the Ukrainian leader while still maintaining that Slovakia and Ukraine have “enormous” potential for energy cooperation. Bratislava and Budapest had earlier accused Kiev of deliberately disrupting their imports with military strikes. Fico also raised the issue during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing this week. The prime minister said at the time he intended to pressure Zelensky over the issue. Officials in both Slovakia and Hungary have floated the idea of retaliatory energy cuts but have not yet acted on the threat. Putin also said during his meeting with Fico in China that Slovakia could cut off Ukraine’s energy supplies in response to the Druzhba attacks. Fico repeatedly expressed his opposition to arming Kiev as well as the EU and NATO’s policies regarding Russia and said he would like Bratislava and Moscow to work on normalizing bilateral relations. The prime minister, who survived an assassination attempt by a pro-Ukraine activist activist last year, also opposes Ukraine joining NATO but believes it is free to pursue EU membership. View the full article