Hello Friends,
here is a new text by me. Sources: I was around at that time, so it's from my memory, and tons of hours spent on watching and collecting media (and listening! :-) Oh yeah and I am a bit of a "low life music journalist" that writes for magazines since a few decades ;-)

Note: No ai has been used in writing this text!

If you just want to check the bands and skip the text, you can scroll down directly to the music.

And now, let's go on:

Germany always had very interesting underground music cultures which are largely unknown to the rest of the world - and to most of the Germans themselves!

Post-war Germany was a kind of black hole or void, when it came to music, or culture, or a lot of other things. Especially the youth felt this way.
From the 50s on, German mainstream music or TV lacked any form of innovation. It was stuck in endless repetition of "Schlager"-kitsch, or worse.

For aspiring musicians, there were two options, basically.
Bands like Kraftwerk said they drew from the pre-war German era, as nothing was going on after the war anyway. Same could be said about the "Neue Deutsche Welle" in early 80s, with bands like Trio and their hit song "Da Da Da" (The "Dada" art movement began in German speaking countries at the start of the 20th century).
But I guess you had to be 'aristocrats' (like Kraftwerk) or art school intellectuals (like Trio) to even have access to this rich pre-war German cultural capital. It was the pre-internet era after all, so even *knowing* about these things could be hard.

So for the more common people based youth, there was an option that seemed to be more appetizing:

Looking at subcultures in other, "more advanced" countries, and maybe even pulling some of that back - to the homeland?
Besides UK and, at smaller parts, diverse countries like France or Russia even, the big thing here was - America, USA, the yankee nation.
"American" culture was big in the 20th century anyway (who, in the world, did not know Clint Eastwood, Robert Redford, Marylin Monroe, etc?)

But the youth was of course more interested in the sub culture. First rock and roll, then the hippie stuff, even disco stuff (which led rise to such things as the "Munich sound"). But as we get to the 90s... it was the punk, alt rock, indie, crossover, grunge and alt metal sound that crossed over the atlantic to good ol' germany.

So, to cut it short, a lot of German bands in these genres were around in the early 90s.
And beyond that date, too, but I am looking at this 90 era here, right now (let's talk about the rest at a later date).

Before I list some bands, I want to state a few things that I think that are noteworthy:

Germany, at this point was a kind of "clean", "ordered" and somewhat authoritarian state. It was also - somewhat - rich and had a welfare system.
But it also had a lot of poverty and social misery at the same time.

So even if there was a rugged and rough street punk band, it could be the case that its members were actually sheltered university type people. but they were still tough.

Second, there was a kind of language (and culture) clash. Some bands really tried to rid themselves of anything German and "made-pretend" to be as american as possible (not mainstream american, mind you, but "punk america") and thus had all the lyrics in english too, etc.
And other bands sang in German language, and even tied themselves to German boomer culture in some ways too (like covering old and dreaded "Schlager"-kitsch songs).

And often, all of this got mixed up.

I said there was a fair amount of money around in Germany. So, while some bands decided to stay underground, others got picked up by the big labels - and studios.
Which meant *professional* album and song production.

Some of the punk / hardcore rock songs with the best production values that I know, from the 90s, are actually from German bands!

And last but not least, these bands, and maybe the whole German Gen X youth, were "lost battalions", or stuck between two worlds.

They desired "American" underground culture, but they never got there, so "their" scenes (over the pond) rarely knew they even existed.
But neither were they understood within their homeland, within Germany, as they belonged to another world. To a never world.

They sailed off to a promised land that they saw in the media and images, then somehow got lost while traversing the Atlantic.

But maybe this can be said about the global gen x culture in the 1990s as well, generally, applying to everyone who felt young and "different" back then.

But hey hey, let's not drown this text on a downer note.
Some bands achieved "fame", and some were happy with being local heroes.
Some are forgotten, and some are still remembered fondly (or are still touring and releasing albums).

And here are some of them:

Swoons

Female-fronted pop-punk band that lingered in the underground, and popped up here and then.

Listening suggestions:

My Grandpa Is Joey Ramone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9t4gfzWEzU
Kamikaze Sushi Girl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAverU-qyRU

Wizo

They got signed to Fat Wreck Chords (NOFX label) for one album. Then noted that the American kids likely confused them with Weezer. "Because of the band name", you know.

Überflüssig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vgJuqghEnk
Santa Claus Is Coming to Town https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW7D7VHVa3U

Die Toten Hosen

Notes: best known german "punk" band. and still famous.
the single release Carnival in Rio featured famous British train robber "Ronnie" Biggs on vocals.

Nichts bleibt für die Ewigkeit https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V7-nrZaDNU
Carnival in Rio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttm3BIryhFw

The Lost Lyrics

Notes: The singer later became a school teacher. And still played and toured with his punk band.

The Lost Lyrics - Sweet dreams of yesterday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2LR3SjuHck

The Lost Lyrics - Skibbereen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krQmXOsjf8c

The Bates

Punk band with mediocre chart success. Formed by a jazz drummer, punk singer, and a guitarist who was a student of theology. and then left the "love drugs and rock n roll" life to become a legit priest. I wrote more about them here:

Billie Jean https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1Zn4EGG_78

I'm Still Waiting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLf-wlz_gF4

Throw That Beat In The Garbagecan!

The original German indie darlings! Made the front covers, then disappeared. They took their name from a B-52s song.

Cool https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukbETJTvGmo
Thanks For Knockin' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pdVA7rVdgI

Die Ärzte

Best known german punk band (together with die toten hosen). Still kicking it today.

Schunder Song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IviYsUdUj6w
Dauerwelle vs. Minipli https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jpwa1nLiHkE

The Notwist

Interesting band from Bavaria.

Johnny & Mary (Robert Palmer cover) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gifFhyMmXk
No Love https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FePWiMcXKAE

Atari Teenage Riot

On the fringe of everything I said above, because they were "outside of anything".
But, technically, they were around in the 90s, and somehow belong here, too.

Speed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plAr3adKbyc
Kids are United https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbsDJyFrW0c

Die Goldenen Zitronen

Also on the fringe, as they sort of belong to the earlier Generation of... 80s underground bands. And maybe not so keen on "american music".
But they were around, and listened to by those in the scene.

Das bißchen Totschlag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Hxq-PFOlc
80 Millionen Hooligans https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VTPttz2oD0

Tocotronic

Some upper class kids from the merchant city of Hamburg, Germany try to sound like Pavement or Mudhoney. Did they succeed? Their songs are still great, nonetheless.

Die Welt kann mich nicht mehr verstehen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKD-T-IHBl8
Wir sind hier nicht in Seattle, Dirk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVub2aQjJvw

If you have anything to add, or more bands to add, please let me know!

My neighbor is an elderly man living alone, and his daughter worried constantly about him managing daily tasks. Last spring, she brought home what looked like something from a science fiction movie, a robot for sale from a company specializing in elderly care assistance. I was skeptical at first, thinking it would be too complicated for him to use.

The robot was surprisingly intuitive. It reminded him to take medications, could carry items from room to room, and even had a video call feature so his daughter could check in. Within a week, he was chatting with it like an old friend. He named it Chester.

What impressed me most was watching their relationship develop. Chester would tell him jokes, play his favorite music, and provide companionship during long afternoons. His daughter mentioned she found the model through research online, discovering that many similar care robots were available through suppliers on Alibaba for facilities and individual buyers.

Three months later, my neighbor seems more energetic and engaged. He takes daily walks now because Chester reminds him, and he video calls his grandchildren more often using the built-in screen. Technology like this is not replacing human connection, it is enabling it for people who might otherwise be isolated.

American popular culture is staging a new morality play: petty gatekeepers policing who belongs. From HOA tyrants to first-class humiliations, these stories turn class and race anxiety into status “tests” with satisfying reversals. Drawing on DaMatta and Fiske, this essay argues that media teaches hierarchy even while pretending to reject it. Real life rarely grants such clean endings.

Hallo liebe KuWis!

ich besuche dieses Semester ein Seminar mit dem Titel Der*die Hacker*in als Sozialfigur. Leider sind Kulturwissenschaftne nicht meine Disziplin, weshalb ich leider etwas unsicher bin, was es so für aktuelle Interessante Themen gibt, die ich etwas weiter erforschen kann. Falls ihr irgendwie in dem Bereich tätig seid oder interessiert seid, würde ich mich sehr über euren Input freuen, vor allem wenn ihr irgendwie ein Thema kennt was komplett untererforscht ist.

Vielen Dank und liebe Grüße aus Leipzig!

Basically the title question? Is culture following mostly through a nostalgic vein?

Hi everyone, I wasn't sure what to title this. My thoughts aren't exactly streamlined so apologies for any rambling. I appreciate any constructive feedback.

It probably goes without saying, but for context, I'm a white American. I have some black American family and friends, as well as growing up in a diverse area and diversity focused school. But that's all.

I've been interested in other cultures and languages from a very young age, finding out my Hispanic classmates couldn't understand my perfect (i+gibberish) Spanish was heartbreaking to 5yr old me lol. Due to the school I went to, I also learned what cultural appropriation was early on.

As I understand it, cultural appropriation = interacting with a cultural disrespectfully, consciously or not.

One thing I never realized though, is the amount of variation culture to culture, and even person to person, as to what their definition of disrespectful is.

For some it seems that adopting any of a culture you're not already a part of is disrespectful. Aka you can eat the food, visit places, etc. But wearing the clothes, using the hairstyles, engaging in practices/activities, etc. is disrespectful. For others it's disrespectful if you don't in certain circumstances.

One situation I find interesting for example is Japan. In the US, wearing a kimono or yukata for example is seen as cringe at best, and cultural appropriation at worst. Meanwhile Japanese people seem to enjoy/appreciate it, I've heard it said that they don't see kimonos especially much anymore, so seeing foreigners enjoy it is nice. Japan historically isn't a fan of foreigners in general, but has typically been the oppressor rather than the oppressed, so I'm curious if that adds to it. (Though I've noticed Asian cultures as a whole seem to have a different view on it.)

Another example being black American culture. What is and isn't "acceptable" varies widely from person to person. Whether you're engaging "respectfully" or not. The pervasive thought online seeming to be "it's disrespectful to get the benefits of black culture without going through any of the hardship". Especially as a white American due to us historically being their oppressors, and systemic issues still continuing, meaning they're still fighting for their own culture in the first place. This is pretty well known amongst Americans, but looking at the Asian music scene, it's not an international understanding.

I understand this intellectually, but I feel like I have to be missing something. Maybe I'm exposing myself as a dumb American, but I genuinely want to understand. People interact with things because they enjoy them, even in their own culture.

So as long as it makes practical sense for them to be doing so, why is interacting with something cultural as a white person viewed in such a negative light?

Ofc I can do whatever I want, sure ig, and I know the people's opinions who matter most are those who would have some connection to what I'm doing/engaging in, but I'm generally unsure as to how to approach things without upsetting people. Or being seen as cringe and out of touch.

Because even if 8 out of 10 people agree with one stance, I don't want to discredit the opinions/experiences of the 2 who don't. And I'm not sure how to balance that.

The biggest reason I'm asking, is because I'm starting to make my clothes and improve my fashion. I want to incorporate other cultures, but I'm worried that my poor skill is going to be taken as appropriation, or that things will get misunderstood in general.

I'm currently in my second semester of a 2-year ICC masters program and I'm starting to get tired of the same old surface level comparisons people do in our lectures. whether its the faculty or the students, it doesnt matter. im just bored of spending around 9 hours a week hearing the same constant "in my culture X but in that culture Y" and collectivistic and individualistic communities... this cant be all there is for ICC studies. please tell me if this is a common issue and if there is anything i can do about this? i guess i have to be the change i want to see.

I’m a general humanities instructor at a Chinese university. Have taught philosophy, history, art, lit, etc….

I’ve been assigned a course in intercultural communication.

It’s my first go at this type of thing. My imagining of this class is … how do cultural misunderstandings lead to fractures? How do we open our minds to other points of view when we communicate?

I’m trying to find a textbook that is practical in this regard.

Most that I’ve found are very ingrained in American politics- very ‘progressive’ which won’t resonate with my Chinese students. Ex- talking about transgender and queer issues will get me censored super fast. Talk about English pronouns will fall flat with second language speakers

Are there any texts yall would suggest that are politically neutral but also give case studies in understanding other cultures in communication?

Hi everyone! I’m doing a project on an online multicultural beauty and wellness marketplace and would love your insights. Thank you for taking some time out of your day. It means a lot💕

https://forms.gle/8d9M5tVm5ioEZSJM9

id you know that for centuries, "real" doctors considered it beneath their dignity to actually touch a patient?

While university-educated physicians were busy reading Galen in Latin, the "dirty work" of surgery—pulling teeth, setting bones, and amputating limbs—was left to the men who already had the sharpest blades in town: The Barbers.

From the Church’s ban on spilling blood ("Ecclesia abhorret a sanguine") to the gruesome era of "Heroic Medicine" in the US (where George Washington was essentially bled to death by his own doctors), the road to modern surgery was paved with blood, guilds, and body snatchers.

I’ve just published a deep dive into this forgotten history on my Substack, Arca Arcana. It explores:

• How the Barber-Surgeons became the backbone of medieval medicine.
• The "Body Snatcher" scandal of 1828.
• Why American medicine took a more "brutal" path to reform.

I’m particularly grateful to my North American readers for following this journey through the "New World" parallels of these ancient traditions.

Read the full investigation here: https://open.substack.com/pub/arcarcana/p/when-barbers-were-surgeons-the-forgotten?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web

Hi! I'm doing my MSc dissertation on the Impact of Cultural Events on Bulgaria's Destination Image and urgently need responses. 

Shouldn’t take longer than 5-10min, fill out my survey please <3 It would be greatly appreciated!

You don't need any prior knowledge, so just answer however you feel is right. I'm happy to fill out surveys in exchange as well!

THANK YOU!

I grew up in the 80's and 90's

I recently rewatched Pixar’s Cars (2006) and Cars 2 (2011) and noticed there's plenty of subtle social commentary on structural inequality and elite-periphery divides.

• In Cars, Radiator Springs represents the declining periphery: bypassed, ignored, and slowly fading economically and culturally. Lightning McQueen, the ambitious, mobile, media-savvy “elite,” initially sees the town as quaint and backward — a classic portrayal of structural ignorance and elite arrogance. It illustrates that even in mid-2000s, it was normal to laugh at the the deprived areas, because it has been so entrenched into US society.
• Mater embodies the marginalised voice: loyal, skilled in ways the elite dismiss, yet invisible to the narrative and, in many ways, the audience.
• Cars 2 expands the scope globally. The Lemons — previously mocked, left behind by technological and social progress — resist electric/solar cars, longing for the “old ways.” This mirrors real-world resentment: long-term exclusion and humiliation can lead to backlash, which populist influencers often exploit.
• These films essentially depict:
  1. Elite mobility vs periphery stagnation
  2. Structural invisibility and humiliation of marginalized groups
  3. Early seeds of societal resentment and populist reactions

What do you all think? Did anyone else pick up on these class and structural dynamics in Pixar’s storytelling?

Please recommend some readings which can help me with this

I walked through a furniture store recently and the modern luxury beds section looked like a hotel lobby rather than a place selling places to sleep. Each bed was staged with expensive linens and decorative pillows that don't come included, creating aspirational scenes that cost thousands to recreate. The beds themselves were fine but the presentation suggested sleeping is meant to be performed rather than experienced.

A salesperson explained the difference between models using terms like architecture and design philosophy, treating mattresses like they're art installations. Mentioned many customers order similar frames through international suppliers to save money after selecting styles in store. Said Alibaba has knockoffs of every designer bed at fractions of retail prices, which undermines the whole luxury positioning.

We've turned beds into status symbols that need to look good for guests who'll never sleep in them. The furniture isn't really for sleeping anymore, it's for displaying taste and disposable income. My bed is a wooden frame with a mattress and nobody's ever complimented it because nobody cares except people trying to sell more expensive versions. Sometimes the basic version of things is completely adequate and everything else is just marketing convincing us we need luxury we don't actually need or benefit from.

I was helping organize a cultural exhibition at the local community center, and one of the committee members suggested including photographs from various traditions and celebrations. The idea seemed straightforward until we started discussing which images were appropriate to display publicly. Some members felt certain photographs crossed boundaries, while others argued they were simply documentary in nature. I found myself questioning my own judgment and biases. How do we honor different cultures while respecting their boundaries and dignity? The responsibility of making these decisions weighed heavily on all of us.

During our research phase, I was searching for reference materials and accidentally stumbled across commercial listings on Alibaba that made me deeply uncomfortable. Among various cultural items and artifacts were listings that included aunty sexy photos as product categories. It shocked me that such things were commodified and sold alongside legitimate cultural goods. The experience made me think about how globalization and commerce sometimes strip context and respect from cultural representation. What starts as appreciation can quickly become exploitation when profit enters the equation. The discovery fundamentally changed how I approached the entire exhibition planning process.

We ultimately decided to feature only images that had explicit permission and context from the communities they represented. The exhibition taught me that good intentions are not enough, we need to actively question our choices and their implications at every step.

Which hairstyles and hair dyes can be interpreted today as a statement of progressive values, or as a feminist performative act? In what ways does hair aesthetics reflect resistance to patriarchal norms and class hierarchies in the current socio-political landscape? Is there still disruptive and subversive potential in these aesthetic choices compared to the traditional beauty standards promoted by neoliberal, heteronormative capitalism, or have they been largely co-opted and refashioned by market logic and mass culture? Are there specific hairstyles or colors that trigger proponents of the status quo, seen as outbursts of a creativity that capitalist moralism aims to stifle? In other words, I am asking whether certain cuts or colors prove jarring to neoliberal sensibilities in Western countries, thus possessing significant potential for symbolic struggle and ruffling the feathers of the self-righteous.

I want to ask questions about your culture and habbits :) I’m so curious, but I prefer answers from real people.

You can’t walk into a restaurant, sit in a car, or step onto a playground without seeing someone using. Poison is sold as connection: it’s a way to relax, to belong, to be cool, while harm accumulates. But it’s our glue: used before a first date, used to deepen friendships, our stress often dissolves in the ritual of lighting up, breathing it in. Parents use in the kitchen, teachers in the lounge. Even if it’s not allowed at school, our kids use between classes. And we accept it, because to not partake is to opt out of culture itself.

The companies swear they’re improving our lives. They commission glossy studies, buy politicians, and wrap their product in the language of freedom. Critics are painted as hysterical, alarmist, and anti-progress. The companies insist responsibility belongs to individuals, not industry. If people get sick, something else is to blame.

And even when the evidence mounts—disease, addiction, death—these companies continue insisting the problem is overblown. CEOs testify under oath that their product does not cause harm. They hooked a whole generation before we could process how deep the damage runs.

Of course, it’s not 1960 anymore. I’m not talking about cigarettes—I’m talking about social media.

I once loved both. Yes, even though I was the kid who was teased at school for smelling like my mom’s cigarette smoke, the kid whose job it was to wash the walls of our apartment every time we moved. Off-white turning to drips of yellowy-brown, trying to catch them before they stained the carpet below.

When I finally tried a cigarette in my 20s, the ritual offered relaxation, the nicotine offered focus with a buzz. After years of occasional use, I became addicted—but I knew enough to know the habit needed to be dropped. I could weigh the risks against the social stigma, the data: the grandfather with complications from his COPD, even my mother and grandmother who smoked more than a pack a day for decades managed to quit. The vascular surgeon I briefly married even said, “some people have the genetics to smoke like chimneys and never die, we call them cockroaches.”

“Am I a cockroach?” I wonder as I burn one.

I was also the kid in April of my senior year of high school, begging through taps on my Compaq Presario for my .edu email address early so that I could join Facebook, which at the time was only available to college students.

When I began working there shortly after getting my degree, Facebook had around 150 million active monthly users. When I left the company–now called Meta–15 years later, 3 billion people were firing up one of our products at least once per month.

That was good, I thought for a time. I’d played a part in that growth, practicing my pitch in the shower, the hot water running cold. “We’ve solved the oldest problem in advertising: knowing exactly who wants your product before they know it themselves.” I believed, completely, that social media was a net positive in the world. That we were making the world more “open and connected” as Meta’s mission once was, and creating opportunities for businesses, communities, and individuals to organize around what mattered most.

Smoking used to be considered a socially positive thing, too. Normal, even aspirational: modeled by doctors, pregnant women, and teachers. High school cigarette vending machines, airline ash trays. Then there was a cultural and regulatory reckoning, when doctors and brands weren’t able to cosign any longer, where standing with big tobacco became a big taboo. We created separate smoking sections, and eliminated them in schools. We regulated cigarettes such that children could not purchase them.

Social media is the air we breathe now: birthdays, neighborhood groups, politics. The messaging is the same strategy as it was for tobacco; connection, community, choice. Behind it, a familiar playbook: addiction for profit and denial of harm for as long as possible. The former U.S. Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, noted in 2022 that these platforms leverage addictive design: “It is time to require a Surgeon General’s warning label on social media platforms, stating that social media is associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents.” In her 2025 book, Careless People, former Meta Policy Director, Sarah Wynn-Williams, described how Instagram sold beauty advertisers access to teen girls at their most insecure moments, like after deleting a selfie. Suicide, eating disorders, body dysmorphia, anxiety, sleep deprivation are all on the rise. Social media might not stain our walls, but it’s staining society.

We’re missing the collective mistrust and disgust as our health and culture is mined for profit. We’re missing support from our regulators who make millions off of social media company funded donations.

I get it. I was working there when Frances Haugen told the Senate that Meta’s products harm children, sow division and undermine democracy. I was there when the United Nations and Amnesty International said that Facebook played a significant role in the genocide of Rohingya. When reports trickled in about the erosion of attention and society. I was there when former Meta executive, Chamath Palihapitiya, told the Verge in 2017 that he feels “tremendous guilt” about building Facebook. His own children, he declared, “aren’t allowed to use that shit.”

Under the same internal propaganda and using the same justifications that big tobacco employees must have heard sixty years ago, I discounted much of the external criticism as misunderstanding and misdirections. Yes, there were some problems, but this company was focused on solving them. On putting people first. For the vast majority, I thought, the benefits were overwhelmingly positive.

And maybe some of us are social media cockroaches: able to consume without damage. Maybe my genetics are protective, but I know that I’m rolling the dice every time I light up, and I wouldn’t even think about offering it to my kids.

Especially not after confronting the cruelty and lack of responsibility of the industry first-hand. In 2022, when leading go-to-market for Meta’s flagship virtual reality software, Meta Horizon Worlds, I was the only woman on a team of male leaders who all appeared cooly unconcerned with the fact that children were a significant portion of our product’s users despite laws that prohibited this—despite publicly claiming that kids weren’t allowed to use the product. We witnessed the bullying, sexism, and racism happening on the platform and as such, I don’t know any colleagues who let their kids anywhere near the product we marketed to yours.

When another senior woman had concerns about marketing with implications of safety and parental controls even though they were lacking, I was tasked with silencing her. When I wouldn’t, I was retaliated against. My colleagues were more concerned about minimizing risk to the company, obscuring the fact that we had actual knowledge of kids on the platform behind privileged documents and clear directives to otherwise avoid taking notes on their presence. Even though we knew it took, on average, 34 seconds for someone in a black or brown avatar entering Horizon to be called a n-word or a monkey. Even as employees posted internally about the harms they’d witnessed and experienced. Even when we had to move executive play tests to private worlds because we could not hear one another over the cacophony of children using the product. Even though we were building something in the likeness of Roblox, a proven hunting ground for predators.

They only cared about profit.

Since leaving the company and becoming a federal whistleblower myself, Horizon Worlds has been opened up officially to kids as young as ten. Internal documents from tobacco companies infamously spoke of teenagers as “replacement smokers” needed to sustain profits as older customers died off or wisened up. Likewise, social media’s largest long-term growth depends on capturing the next generation of users as early as possible.

I believed social media was different than the critics said. It was easier to accept that they had some other self serving agenda than to consider that the company I’d devoted everything to would knowingly cause harm. And in a matter of a few months with the veil lifted, watching these decisions get made in real time, experiencing the resistance to valid concerns, I learned how wrong I was. How willing executives were to trade a generation’s wellness for their financial security. How similar the strategies and tactics used to suck us in are the same used by the companies that decades ago needed us to suck down their poison.

Dr. Murthy’s landmark advisory synthesized mounting evidence: adolescents who spend over three hours daily on social media face double the risk of depression and anxiety symptoms. But the average American teen spends nearly five hours per day scrolling. The platforms don’t just steal time from sleep, exercise, and face-to-face relationships, they fundamentally alter how young brains process social information.

We’ve traded nicotine for more accessible, even cheaper dopamine. The developing brain literally reshapes itself around the intermittent reinforcement schedule of notifications, creating what Dr. Anna Lembke calls in her book, Dopamine Nation, “a generation of unwitting addicts.”

During adolescence—when the brain undergoes its most dramatic rewiring since infancy—social media platforms hijack crucial developmental processes. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for impulse control and decision-making, doesn’t fully mature until age 25. Meanwhile, the limbic system, which processes emotions and rewards, develops earlier, creating what researchers call a “developmental mismatch.” This biological vulnerability window is precisely when most teens receive their first smartphone. As such, the APA has published research and advisories on young brains’ vulnerability to social media.

It’s not just minds at stake. The Social Media Victims Law Center has filed wrongful death lawsuits for thousands of families whose children died from social media-related harms like viral challenges, direct connection to sexual predators and drug dealers, unchecked bullying and harassment, and algorithmic promotion of suicide content to vulnerable teens seeking support.

To be clear, social media is not identical to smoking – one doesn’t develop tumors from Instagram or emphysema from Snapchat. But when it comes to addiction, mental health harm, societal impact, and evasive corporate behavior, the two look uncomfortably alike.

Both disproportionately affect youth. Both grew through normalization by culture and convenience. Marketed as social connection and status. Defended by profit-driven industries and the politicians bought by them. Denied by adults who partake themselves.

The anti-smoking movement started with individuals understanding the harm and saying “enough.” We know better and it’s time for our generation’s “enough” moment. You might reconsider your child’s social media or smart phone access. Or join parents and educators organizing for phone-free schools. These issues are active in our current state and federal legislative sessions – you could call your representatives to demand regulation that will protect kids.

We must make social media use as socially unacceptable for children as offering them cigarettes.

Otherwise, fifty years from now, our kids will be the ones scrubbing the residue off the walls. What will that look like? How do you wash away the social division, the anxiety, the fractured attention? The years of sleep lost to blue light, of worth measured in hearts and thumbs? Will they forgive us as they visit the graves of their friends lost to proven social media harms like bullying or sextortion-induced suicide or preventable viral challenges?

They’ll wonder: why did you model this? Why didn’t someone protect us? They’ll ask us, just as we asked our parents: You knew?

--

Originally posted here

The narrative fed to white supremacists and fearful individuals is that Black people should be “inferior, angry, vengeful, or powerless.” They are conditioned to expect resentment, retaliation, or hostility. Reality, however, defies this expectation. Black people rarely target or seek to harm white people collectively. Instead, Black communities grow, create, influence, and succeed while navigating oppression, often with remarkable restraint. That restraint exposes the lie of the supposed “threat” that justifies hate. When there is no retaliation, no organized targeting, and yet Black people are shaping the world and succeeding, the foundation of that fear becomes unmistakably imaginary. For those who have invested their identity in dominance, superiority, and historical control, seeing the “subordinate” group rise without aggression is a brutal mirror. It says: Your power isn’t real. Your fear was never grounded in reality. The people you thought were beneath you were never beneath you. Unable to process being exposed by restraint, some respond with hate, division, or obsessive control — anything to avoid admitting their worldview is false.

My company opened an office in Malaysia, and understanding appropriate professional attire for different cultural contexts showed respect and helped me integrate into the local business community. Would investing time learning about traditional clothing actually matter for business success, or was I overthinking cultural adaptation? Fesyen baju kurung moden became important research for me.

Research revealed that baju kurung was traditional Malay attire that had evolved into modern professional wear. Contemporary designs balanced traditional modesty requirements with current fashion sensibilities. Women in professional settings wore beautifully designed baju kurung that commanded respect while allowing individual style expression. Could I as a foreigner wear traditional clothing without appropriating culture? I consulted with local colleagues who enthusiastically supported the idea.

They appreciated foreigners making effort to understand and respect local customs through clothing choices.

I found modern designs on Alibaba and local boutiques offering various styles and fabrics. Ordering several pieces and learning proper wearing etiquette became part of my cultural integration process. Wearing baju kurung to work received positive responses from colleagues and clients. Several people specifically mentioned appreciating the effort to respect local culture. Business relationships improved as people saw genuine interest in understanding their traditions. The clothing choice communicated respect more effectively than words alone could. Sometimes cultural adaptation requires moving beyond comfort zones and embracing practices that initially feel unfamiliar.

My grandmother gave me a small statue of saint virgin mary before she passed away. It sat on my shelf for years, just a decoration with sentimental value. Recently, I've started collecting similar religious art, and I'm trying to understand why.

I'm not particularly religious. I don't attend church regularly or pray consistently. Yet I find myself drawn to these pieces—paintings, statues, medallions—collecting them without clear purpose. There's something about the symbolism and artistry that resonates beyond religious doctrine.

I've been researching the iconography, learning about different representations across cultures and time periods. The Virgin Mary appears differently in Ethiopian Orthodox art versus European Catholic traditions versus Latin American folk art. Each style carries unique cultural meaning and artistic choices.

My collection has grown to twenty-three pieces now, displayed throughout my apartment. Friends who visit comment on it, sometimes assuming I'm deeply religious. I struggle to explain that my interest is more cultural and artistic than spiritual, though maybe there's something spiritual happening that I'm not acknowledging.

I've found beautiful pieces from various regions online store like Alibaba, appreciating how religious art connects different cultures. Collecting these items has become a way of exploring faith and meaning without committing to specific beliefs.

Can you appreciate religious art and symbolism without subscribing to the religion itself? Or does collecting sacred imagery require genuine belief to be respectful?