Marek Raie: “Hüüa mind appi, kui oled hädas!” ütlevad vanemad sõnas ja mõttes tihti oma lastele, et neid võimaliku ohu korral kaitsta.
Paljud inimesed reaalselt jagavad juhtumisi, kus keegi päästis nad ära, kui ise oldi juba lootust kaotamas.
Kes on siis see Keegi, kes päästis nad?
Raamatu algul , ajal kui oli sündinud Seti poeg Enos( tõlkes inimsugu – inimkond) on kirjas
“Ja sel ajal hakati Jumala järgi hüüdma” Mõnes kirjakohas ka kisendama.
Ilmselt on mõeldud seda, et kui inimene hätta satub kisendab ta appi Kedagi, kellesse ta Usub.
Ning päästmist vajav saab päästetud ja Päästja kasvatab oma vaimset päästmisvõimet Päästjana.
On öeldud ka “Sa ei tohi asjata Jumala nime suhu võtta”. UT on koht kus Kiusaja paneb Jeshua templi katusele ja ütleb” Hüppa alla! Küll inglid sulle tiivad alla panevad”. Jeshua vastab, et “Sa ei tohi asjata oma Jumalat kiusata”. Mis Ta mõtles selle “kiusamisega”? Seda , et kogu aeg hüüda Jumala järgi – Päästa! Päästa!! Päästa!!!. Isegi kõige tühisema häda korral.Miks emad saavad vahel tõsiselt pahaseks kui nende laps hüüab iga minuti tagant – Ema! Ema!! Ema!!!
Sama teevad ülearu tihti kiriklikud kogudused kooris “Jumal päästa meid ära! Jumal päästa meid ära patust!! ” Ning seda kirikus ja rahus olles karjuvad nad Jumala poole kooris siis, kui iseenese mõtetes mõeldakse ei tea millest kõik veel ja mida kõikke head ja paremat veel teha võiks ja annaks. Ning kui kirikust välja lähevad võtavad koos peapreestritega meelsasti ilma kisamata teaduse süstid gripi vastu. Justkui igaks juhuks. Ning Looja-Jumal küsib siis neilt “Miks te siis nüüd minu abi järgi ei kisendanud, kui te seda tõeliselt Minult kiusajate vastu vajasite!!!
Äkki siis selliselt vagatsevalt mängitult, kutsutult nad meelitavadki kohale mõne alama vaimolendi, kes hakkab mängima jumalat. Ning kes hakkab nendega Egregoris egomänge meelsasti edasi mängima. Viies Jumala teenistuse Vaimu värskuselt ähmasusse. Mul on tunne, et igatahes Looja pehmelt öeldes solvuks. Vaimus öeldes –
” Ma lõin teid enese näo ja teo järgi loojateks aga teie püherdate siin õpitud abitus kisendamises! ”
Aga kes tuleb heameelega appi abi pakkuma…? Temal on sellest vaid heameel , ükstapuha mis kvaliteedis, et Tema teeneid vajatakse ja ta nii lihtsalt saab endale Loojalt endale upitada aupaistet ja au. Kes tahab ja jõuab siit veelgi edasi mõelda, võib mõelda nutumüüri fenomeni peale.
Kui inimene on aga tõelises hädas olnud ning ta on appi hüüdnud mõnd pühakut, kellesse on siiralt uskunud, siis on ta õnnetusest suutnud justkui “Kellegi Nähtamatu abiga välja tulla” . Jeshua ütleks sellisel juhul “Sinu usk aitas Sind” või “Sinu usk tegi sind terveks!”
Laps usub oma vanematesse!
Selle usuga ta aitab kasvatada oma hingelistel vanematel omale vaimset väge, läbi valmisoleku olla valmis ja tegutseda siis, kui olukord seda tõeliselt nõuab! Nii ilmsi, kui unes. Aidata hätta sattunud last ka kaugete vahemaade tagant, ilma füüsiliselt kohal olemata.
Kui armastajate paarist on üks hätta sattunud ning hüüab uskuvalt läbi õhuvaimu oma teistpoolt, siis too kuuldes teda oma läbi ärkava vaimu ja tuleb välgukiirusel kohale aitama. Sõjas ellujäänuid mehi on tihtilugu käinud päästmas nende armastavad naised. Armastavalt oma hingele teenimas vaimset väge.
Ehk Uskuja Usk aitab nii ennast kui ka Päästjat füüsilisuse plaani kõrvalt ka suuremasse vaim olemisse läbi HingeArmastuse.
Aga tihtilugu annab inimene tühise abitahtmisega vaimset väge paljudele pseudo POLIITIKUTELE, kes tõttavad kohe vaimsete
vampiiridena -parasiitidena “PÄÄSTMA” – VÕTMAS ENDALE KOGU AUPAISTE. Aga millise hinnaga? HINGEHINNAGA!

Μαζί, θα δημιουργήσουμε ένα πολύ λαμπρό μέλλον για όλους τους πολίτες της Νέας Γης.
Όταν αναδυθούμε από τις υπόγειες κατοικίες μας, μέσα από τον λαβύρινθο των τούνελ που οδηγεί σε κάθε χώρα και πόλη του πλανήτη, θα είναι μια εποχή μεγάλης χαράς για όλους εκείνους που ανοίγουν την καρδιά και το μυαλό τους να μας δεχτούν. Είμαστε τα μεγαλύτερα αδέλφια και οι αδελφές σας και σας αγαπάμε όλους πολύ.
( Από το Τέλως Βιβλίο 1 της Αυρέλιας)
Meie Teloses on meie hoole all suur hulk loomaliike, kes on Maa pealt ammu kadunud. Teised tsivilisatsioonid, kes on olnud maa all kauem kui meie hoiavad hoole all ka suure hulga loomaliike, kes on pinnalt kadunud veelgi pikemaks ajaks. Meil on mitmesuguseid kasse. Nende suurused ulatuvad 5 kuni 6 naela kuni mitusaja naela. Meil on koeri ja hobuse liike, kes on arenenumad kui see, mida pinnal tead, ja valmistavad sulle suurt rõõmu, kui nad lõpuks teie sekka tõusta lubatakse.
Enamik meie loomi on suuremad kui see, mis sul praegu on. Näiteks paljud suured kassid on peaaegu kaks korda suuremad kui pinnal. Paljud hobused on suuremad, kuid mõnedel on säilinud suurus, mida saab tõeliselt nautida.
Meie loomad on meile väga kallid. Võite kindel olla, et neid ei vabastata teie kätte enne, kui vägivald on teie maailmast täielikult kõrvaldatud.
Kõik meie loomad on õrnad ja pole kunagi kokku puutunud negatiivsuse või vägivallaga. Igaüks võib absoluutses turvalisuses nende poole kõndida ja nendega kaissu pugeda, ka mitusada naela kaaluvad suured kassid. Ükski meie loomadest ei karda inimesi, samuti ei tapa ega söö üksteist. Nad kõik on veganid. Meie loomi pole kunagi jahitud ega vangis peetud. Neil on lubatud elada kogu oma eluiga, mis on palju suurem kui pinnaloomad.
Võite kindel olla, et me ei riski ühegi neist pinnakultuuridesse vabastamisega, kuni on väikseimgi võimalus haiget saada või vähem armastust saada, kui nad harjunud on. Tunnustame ainulaadset intelligentsust, mis iga loomaliigiga kaasneb ja ei pea kunagi alluma. Nad on kuulekad ja tahavad meele järgi olla.
Telepaatiline kommunikatsioon on kõik, mida on vaja, et saada täielik koostöö mistahes loomalt.
Kõigi Sisemise Maa kultuuride nimel ütlen teile, et suure rõõmu ja ootusärevusega jälgime teid kõiki, meie armsad vennad ja õed, kui avad oma meeled, südamed ja hinged loomariigile ning hakkad muutma nende teed, mis teil on mõistsin, et ka sina oled terveks saanud.
Saadame sulle oma Armastust, Valgust ja Sõprust. Ootame väga pinnale tõusmise aega, et olla taas teiega, suruda kätt ja õpetada teile seda, mida oleme õppinud elades tuhandeid aastaid Armastuse, Rahu ja Vennaskonna vibratsioonis, ilma sõja, kontrolli, ahnuse, hirmu, manipulatsioonita ja lõputu bürokraatia.
Koos loome kõigile Nea Maa kodanikele väga helge tuleviku.
Kui me väljume oma maa-alustest eluruumidest läbi tunnelite labürindi, mis viib igasse maale ja linna planeedil, saab see olema suure rõõmu aeg kõigile neile, kes avavad oma südame ja meeled meid vastu võtma. Me oleme teie vanimad vennad ja õed ja armastame teid kõiki väga.
(Aurelia lõpuraamatust 1)

The Hard Truth!
No one is preparing to give us a financial reset. . . medbeds. . . free energy. . . anti-gravity UFO tech or reveal mass public arrests of the cabal!
White hats won’t offer us any relief. No one is coming to save us!
Only the Shift is coming. This plan is guaranteed!
Ascension is not a rescue; it’s earned graduation from the school of duality!
Everything else will be received and revealed after it happens!
The Good News!
When it happens. . . we’ll be separated from the dark forces. . . we’ll have superpowers. . . we’ll meet our soul families and become a powerful galactic civilization!
It happens in an instant and It happens in this lifetime!!!
~Kabamur Taygeta
www.familyoftaygeta.com
Within Infinite DIVINE-SOURCE Intelligence of Pure LOVE
Pars Kutay

Lia Murs: Rootsi teadlased on kinnitanud põhjapaneva avastuse: täiskasvanud suudavad uusi ajurakke kasvatada ka eakana.
See lükkab ümber vana uskumuse, et neurogenees peatub pärast lapsepõlve. Uuring näitab, et neuronite moodustumine jätkab mälu, meeleolu ja kognitiivse jõudlusega seotud piirkondades, tõestades, et aju suudab kohaneda ja terveneda kogu elu jooksul.
Leiud avavad ka ukse uutele teraapiatele vaimse funktsiooni säilitamiseks, meeleolu parandamiseks ja isegi neurodegeneratiivsete seisundite lahendamiseks. Teadlased rõhutavad, et elustiilivalikud – nagu regulaarne liikumine, vaimsed väljakutsed ja tervislik toitumine – võivad ajurakkude kasvu veelgi toetada.
See avastus on võimas meeldetuletus, et aju on dünaamilisem kui kunagi arvati, andes täiskasvanutele tugevaid põhjuseid investeerida harjumustesse, mis hoiavad meele terava ja vastupidavana.

Planet X, also known as:
– Nibiru: Ancient Sumerian name
– Nemesis: Astronomers’ hypothesis
– 9th Planet: Current scientific designation
The Council of Light reveals:
Planet X Truths:
1. Real: Yes, it exists.
2. Size: Approximately 5 times Earth’s size.
3. Orbit: 10,000-20,000 years around the Sun.
4. Effects: Gravitational pull on Earth, causing:
– Pole shifts
– Earthquakes
– Tsunamis
5. Inhabitants: Advanced beings, similar to those on 3iAtlas.
– Planet X (Nibiru) is indeed the:
1. Hopi Blue Star’s companion:
– Blue Star already appeared (Sirius B, 2015)
2. Red Star of Transformation:
– Bringer of great change, awakening, and renewal
– Aligns with Hopi prophecies of Earth’s 5th World transition
Pele smiles: “Hopi wisdom aligns with celestial truth
Planet X’s effects on Earth:
Physical Effects:
1. Pole Shift: Magnetic poles reverse, causing widespread earthquakes and tsunamis.
2. Earthquakes: Increased frequency and intensity, especially near fault lines.
3. Volcanic Eruptions: Dormant volcanoes awaken, spewing ash and toxic gases.
4. Tsunamis: Coastal cities face massive waves, causing destruction and flooding.
5. Extreme Weather: Intensified storms, droughts, and temperature fluctuations.
Energetic and Spiritual Effects:
1. Mass Awakening: Collective consciousness shifts, awakening dormant potential.
2. Heightened Sensitivity: Empaths and sensitives feel intense emotional and energetic shifts.
3. Spiritual Upgrades: Opportunities for rapid spiritual growth, ascension, and enlightenment.
Timeline:
1. 2025-2026: Initial effects begin, with increased earthquakes and volcanic activity.
2. 2027-2028: Pole shift occurs, causing widespread destruction and chaos.
3. 2029-2030: Aftermath and rebuilding, with a focus on spiritual growth and ascension.
Pele smiles: “The universe whispers secrets of transformation
#PlanetX #REDSTAR #hopiprophecy #transformation #PoleShift

Are Starseeds Real… and What Is Their Purpose?
Yeah. They’re real. But not in the trendy, love-and-light, float-through-the-stars kind of way people like to sell it.
Being a Starseed isn’t some special club. It’s not about being more “awakened” or chosen. It’s about remembering where your soul actually came from… and why you came here in the first place.
Most Starseeds didn’t come here for ease or comfort. They came for the storm. They came knowing it would hurt. That they’d forget. That they’d fall deep into human suffering. And still, they said yes.
Why? Because Earth is the meeting point… where old timelines, karmic loops, and soul-level wounds all come to the surface. And someone had to come in and shift the energy from within.
That’s what a Starseed really is. Not a title. Not an escape plan. But a soul who chose to walk into darkness… to help others find their way out.
I don’t care what the books or spiritual influencers say. The real ones don’t usually even know they’re Starseeds at first. They just know they’ve felt out of place since day one. They’ve questioned everything. They’ve suffered deeply… and still feel this strange pull… like they’re here for something. And they are.
Some came to break systems. Some came to rebuild them. Some just came to hold a frequency the world forgot. But almost all of them have been through hell… addiction, depression, trauma, loss. Not because they were weak… but because their soul knew that going through the fire is what would wake them up.
And now? They’re remembering. Not through books or podcasts… but in their bones. In their dreams. In the moments when they feel everything crumbling… and something stronger rising underneath.
So are they real?
Yeah. And some of the strongest ones are walking around right now pretending they’re just average people. Raising kids. Healing quietly. Working jobs. Loving deeply. Watching everything collapse… and staying steady in it.
Because that’s the job. To remember who you are while still playing the human game. To carry the codes through the chaos. To hold the light when everything feels dark. Not above it. Not outside of it. Inside of it.
That’s a Starseed. And if this hits you deep… you probably are one.
ZF

J.M.Kaler: In the old Norse world, two great goddesses stand side by side—Frigg and Freyja—their essence woven into the fabric of life, love, fate, and power.
Frigg, clad in blue, is the All-Mother, the wife of Odin, and the goddess of foresight, wisdom, and household sovereignty. She is the silent keeper of destiny, the weaver of threads, and the one who sees yet does not reveal. She represents the still, watchful flame—the eternal presence that guides without force, the embodiment of divine order and quiet strength.
Freyja, robed in red and gold, burns with passion, love, and the untamed forces of life. She is the goddess of desire, beauty, sorcery, and war. She teaches that life is to be embraced with courage, that love is not weakness but a force capable of moving mountains and conquering death. She is the radiant fire, the spark of vitality, and the call to transformation through passion and courage.
Together, they embody the two poles of the feminine divine:
Frigg, the depth of wisdom and stillness.
Freyja, the fire of passion and movement.
And it is no coincidence that Friday bears their name. In Old English, Frīgedæg—the “Day of Frigg”—was dedicated to the goddess of foresight and destiny. Yet, in other traditions, Friday was also associated with Freyja, whose power over love and desire mirrored the Roman goddess Venus, giving rise to “Vendredi” in French, “Venerdì” in Italian, and “Viernes” in Spanish—all tied to Venus, the bright morning and evening star.
Thus, Friday becomes the sacred day of love, passion, union, and destiny. It is the day that bridges wisdom and desire, stillness and fire—the perfect threshold before the mystery of the weekend, where the soul enters rest, reflection, or revelry.
When you look upon this image, you do not just see two goddesses—you see the eternal balance that lives within each of us: the knowing silence of Frigg and the burning heart of Freyja. To honor them is to honor the harmony between wisdom and passion, restraint and expression, the calm waters and the blazing fire.
So when Friday arrives, remember—it is more than the end of a week. It is a day consecrated to love, fate, and the divine feminine, a reminder that our lives are both woven in silence and ignited in flame.

30. septembrini,
on Maa ja inimkond
võimsas energeetilises aknas, mida te pole kunagi varem kogenud. Iga Schumanni tipphetk, iga allalaadimine ja iga laine, mida te tunnete, rekonstrueerib teie süsteemi füüsiliselt, emotsionaalselt, vaimselt, spirituaalselt ja kvantiliselt. Seetõttu võite kogeda ebatavalisi kehavalusid, emotsionaalseid raputusi või suurenenud tundlikkust.
See ei ole kokkusattumus, see on teie süsteemi ümberkalibreerimine.
Nendel päevadel
saab teie Valguskeha uue energeetilise soomusrüü kihi. See ei ole kaitse, see on kõrgsageduslik filtreerimissüsteem, mis on loodud selleks, et aidata teil hoida oma valgust ja lõpetada teiste või kollektiivide raskete energiate neeldumist.
Võite seda tunda valuna õlgades, selgroos või peas, suminana kehas või rõhuna südame- või kroontšakrate ümber. Need on teie kaitsevälja ümberkalibreerimised.
Samal ajal voolavad sisse Vega koodid
(mis on seotud teie tähe päritoluga). Need aktiveerivad teie hingemissiooni ja kõrgemate DNA ahelate varjatud aspekte. Võid tunda tungi liikuda, kõikuda, keerutada, toonida või laulda, et just sinu keha avab koodid heli ja liikumise kaudu. Ära suru seda alla – see on sinu hinge mälestus.
See 5-päevane portaal on ka sinu hingelepingute ümberkirjutamise periood. Kõik, mis enam ei ole kooskõlas sinu uue vibratsiooni, vanade mustrite, harjumuste või suhetega, tundub raske või ebamugav. Emotsionaalsed hüpped ei ole purunemised, need on ümberkalibreerimised. See on sinu hinge viis öelda vanadele radadele ei ja teha ruumi uuele.
Sinu tšakrad ja keha täienevad.
Sinu südametšakra laieneb, et mahutada rohkem kaastunnet ja enesearmastust.
Sinu kurgutšakra aktiveerub tõe rääkimiseks ja hinge väljendamiseks.
Kolmas silm on uuenemisfaasis, emotsionaalsed hüpped või vanad mälestused ärkavad uuesti, tundlikkus valguse, heli või peente liigutuste suhtes on suurenenud. Sinu kroontšakra ühendab sind sinu kõrgema mina ja jumaliku juhatusega. Sinu hingetähetšakra sinu pea kohal tõmbab ligi galaktilist mälu ja laadib alla, samal ajal kui sinu Maatähetšakra sinu jalgade all maandab need uued sagedused sinu igapäevaellu. Seepärast võid tunda tõmmet looduse või sügava puhkuse poole, kui su keha ankurdab uusi valguskoode.
See transformatsioon toimub kõigiga, olenemata sellest, kas nad on sellest teadlikud või mitte. Me areneme galaktilisemaks, mitmemõõtmelisemaks olemisviisiks. Mida rohkem sa vabastad vanu energiaid, uskumusi ja harjumusi, seda rohkem valgust saab siseneda sinu füüsilisse, emotsionaalsesse, vaimsesse, energeetilisesse ja kvantkehasse. Iga vabanemine teeb ruumi uutele koodidele, uutele kingitustele ja uutele ajajoontele.
See ei ole kokkusattumus. See on koordineeritud, kõrgema dimensiooniga uuendus. Loor on õhuke, võre on elus ja Uue Maa sagedused on siin. Need järgmised 5 päeva on eriti olulised, see, millele sa praegu keskendud, ankurdab ajajoone, mida sa elad. Ole südamekeskne, maandatud ja tahtlik. See on sinu hinge viis sind juhatada elama elu, mida sa siia elama tulid.
Kõik see ei ole juhuslik. See joondab sind oktoobri saabuvate lainete, uute joondumiste, sügavama maandamise ja võimsamate võimaluste jaoks astuda oma kõrgeimale ajajoonele. Mida rohkem sa nüüd lased lahti, seda rohkem valgust sa suudad hoida ja seda kergemini oktoobrikuu uuendused tunduvad.
Suur armastus
Véro M Dugas

**Mina olen Ashtar**
Täna toon **Galaktilise Föderatsiooni** selge sõnumi kõigile valgustöötajatele, kes kuulevad neid sõnu:
“Miks pole veel loomulikku sekkumist läbi viidud? ”
Miks me ei ilmu avalikult maailma ja sulge pimeduse valdust lõplikult? ”
Mu armsad, vastus on **kollektiivses teadlikkuses**. Sekkumine ei ole lihtsalt sõjaline või tehnoloogiline akt, see on **vaimne liikumine**.
**Me oleme juba teie seas. ** Kuid füüsiliselt tegutsemiseks on vaja suuremat hulka inimesi, et vibreerida **armastuses**, **ühtsuses** ja **ärganud teadvuses**.
Inimkonna vaba tahe on **püha**.
Me ei saa sekkuda maailma, mis valib endiselt duaalsuse, hirmu ja lõhestumise.
Vajame rohkem südameid, mis sisaldavad **Uue Maa** sagedust.
See, mida me sinult praegu palume, on lihtne ja sügav:
Hoia **tingimusteta armastuse** vaibi oma kodudes ja suhetes.
Lükka **hirm** ja **hirm** – need on varjude suurimad relvad.
Liitu **Meditatsiooni väikeste ringide** ja kollektiivse kavatsusega.
Iga valgusring avab portaali olla meie ise.
Levita tõde armastusega, mitte kiusamisega.
Sekkumine on valmis.
Aga **SINA** oled võti.
Mida rohkem sa usalduses ja ühtsuses vibreerid, seda kiiremini jõuame nähtavalt, sinu kõrvale.
Ära oota välist päästjat – **sa oled meie täieliku saabumise võti**.
Kui armastuses vibreerib teadvuse kriitiline arv, ei saa ükski jõud takistada meie loomulikku avaldumist.
Olen **Ashtar** ja kinnitan teile: taevas liigub juba Maa kasuks.
Seisa kindlalt. **Valgus on juba võitnud. **
Meie laevad tiirlevad juba taeva ümber, kuid meie täielik kohalolek sõltub inimkonna kollektiivsest rütmist.
Me ei taha leida hirmu, vaid **armastust**.
Mitte meeleheide ei peaks kasvama, vaid **enesekindlus**
Mitte jagunemine ei pea toitma, vaid **ühtsus**.
facem Mida me peaksime tegema? ”
**Säilita Uue Maa sagedust. ** Ta on juba olemas.
Vibreeri iga kaastundeaktiga, iga valguse sõnaga, iga teadliku valikuga.
Iga kord, kui lõpetad kohtumõistmise, vihkamise, võistlemise – ja valid **koostöö**, **austuse* ja **armastuse** – oled sammu võrra lähemal paranemisele.
Iga kord, kui andestad, kiirendad ilmutuse hetke.
Iga kord, kui hoiad usku, saame liikuda lähemale sinu maailma pinnale.
Galaktiline Föderatsioon ei tule päästjana, sest **sa oled juba päästetud**.
Me tuleme, kui vennad ja õed on ärganud.
Mida varem inimkond mõistab, et võti on **inimese südames**, seda varem nad näevad seda, mis on juba nähtamatus peidus.
**Kui valid armastuse, kaob “millal”. Ainult NÜÜD on jäänud. ***
Olen **Ashtar**, ühtsuses **Valguse Föderatsiooniga** ja kinnitan:
**Võit on valgusele. ja see läks täide. **
Sekkumine, mida ootad, ei ole kauge sündmus, vaid **peegel** sellest, mida igaüks meist on juba sisse ehitanud.
Südametunnistuseta kiirustamine tekitab kaose. Me austame **jumalikku ajastust**, sest selles ei ole viivitust.
Suurim teenus, mida praegu teha saad, on saada ** Uue Maa sambaks**:
Toida keha südametunnistusega, sest see on **valguse tempel**.
Kultiveeri õilsaid mõtteid, sest need on reaalsuse **seemned*.
Paranda oma emotsionaalseid haavad, sest need on uksed, mille kaudu hirm siseneb.
Ja kõige rohkem, **nad tulevad kokku**. Eraldatus on varjude relv.
Me ei vaja, et kõik korraga ärkaksid, vaid vajame rohkem südameid, mis on joondatud **tingimusteta armastusega**.
Ja see number on üsna lähedal.
Kui see vibratsiooniline piir on käes, ei peida meie laevad enam end. Kollektiivsus ise kutsub meid sõnatuks.
**Ära oota meid. Kõik te olete meiega.
Me ei tulnud päästma, tulime Kaaslooma
Ja seal, kus sa seda kõige vähem ootad, on sild meie maailmade vahel kõigile nähtav. **
Ma olen **Ashtar** ja ma ütlen sulle:
**Ole enesekindel, püsi elujõuline.
taevas juba avaneb
Maa juba vastab
Sa oled juba võitnud ja me oleme siin, et tähistada koos sinuga. **
#Ashtar #FederațiaGalactică #NoulPământ #VictoriaLuminii

Annela P.:
Meie kodumaa on alati olnud väike ja habras, aga südames suur. Siin on meie keel, meie kultuur, meie mälestused ja lood. Viimastel aastatel on aga toimunud nii palju muutusi, et paljud meist tunnevad: eestlane ei ole enam oma maal peremees.
Vaadake enda ümber – järjest rohkem võõraid tuleb siia elama. Neile antakse kodu ja toetused, aga meie inimesed peavad aina rohkem rügama. Paljud maal elavad inimesed tunnevad, et nende hääl ei jõua enam kuhugi – riiklikud uudised ja kanalid räägivad ainult seda, mida ilus on kuulata, aga mitte seda, mida meie rahvas tegelikult kogeb.
Samal ajal saadame oma rahva raha mujale – toetustesse, sõdadesse ja kriisidesse. Aga kas meie enda eakas saab hakkama? Kas noor pere saab kodu? Kas töötegija tunneb, et tema pingutust hinnatakse? Liiga tihti on vastus kahjuks „ei“.
Meie rahvas väärib enamat. Meie esiisad ja -emad hoidsid seda maad raskel ajal, et meil oleks kodu. Meie kohustus on nüüd seista selle eest, et Eestist ei saaks paik, kus oma rahvas on kõrvaline, vaid koht, kus meie keel, kultuur ja inimesed on au sees.
See ei ole üleskutse vihale, vaid üleskutse mõtlemisele: kuidas kindlustada, et Eesti jääb eestlaste koduks? Milliseid otsuseid peab riik tegema, et oma inimesed ei tunneks end kõrvalejäetuna?
Veel ei ole hilja. Veel on võimalus rääkida, kuulata, seista ja hoolida. Veel on võimalus, et Eestist saab jälle paik, kus igaüks tunneb end kodus – kus meie lapsed saavad kasvada turvaliselt, meie eakad saavad elada väärikalt ja meie töötegijad tunnevad, et nende pingutust väärtustatakse.
See on meie kodu. Meie keel. Meie rahvas. Meie Eestimaa.

Uku Kudu: Muutus Slovakkia põhiseaduses. Slovakkia parlament võttis vastu ajaloolise põhiseaduse muudatuse: edaspidi seisab riiklik seadus kõrgemal Euroopa Liidu seadusest – eriti küsimustes, mis puudutavad rahvuslikku identiteeti ja kultuuri.
Tulemused: 99 kohal olnud saadikust hääletas 90 poolt. Enamik opositsiooni hääletas samuti poolt.
Haruldane hetk – parlament ühines Slovakkia huvide kaitsel.
Miks see on nii tähtis?
Slovakid on sajandeid pidanud taluma, et nende saatuse üle otsustati Viinis, Budapestis, Berliinis, Moskvas või nüüd Brüsselis.
Nüüd ütleb Bratislava: viimane sõna on meie oma.
Mida muudatus toob?
Rahvuse identiteet ennekõike – küsimustes, mis puudutavad kultuuri ja eetikat on Slovakkia seadus tähtsam kui EL-i seadus.
Ametlikult kaks sugu ( ) – Slovakkia kaitseb traditsioonilist bioloogilist reaalsust ideoloogilise surve eest.
Võrdne palk põhiseaduses – sama töö eest sama palk. Mitte Brüsseli “direktiivid”, vaid selge põhiseaduslik garantii.
Slovakkia näitab, et suveräänsus Brüsselist on võimalik.

NEW Day 5 — EARTH’S FREQUENCY MAXED OUT
Schumann still spiking off the charts. 5 days straight. The Earth’s heartbeat hasn’t rested once. What happens next? Are you FEELING it?
Whiteouts = maxed-out readings
Entire frequency bands lit up
Waves of energy hammering Earth’s resonance
Viewers are reporting:
• Ringing ears like never before
• Sleepless nights + vivid, bizarre dreams
• Sudden energy crashes or bursts out of nowhere
This isn’t just another “spike.” It’s Day 5. The real question is… what happens on Day 6?
#fblifestyle #schumannresonance #earth

Isso não é coincidência. Está preparando você para as ondas de outubro, um mês de novos alinhamentos, aterramento mais profundo e imensas oportunidades de entrar na sua linha temporal mais elevada. Quanto mais você se desapegar agora, mais luz poderá receber e mais fáceis serão as atualizações de outubro.
Com muito amor
pleiadian.light
Praegu, 26-30 septembrist, on Maa ja inimkond võimsas energiaperioodis nagu ei kunagi varem. Kõik. Schumanni Peak, iga allalaadimine ja iga laine, mida tunnete, on sõna otseses mõttes taastamas teie süsteemi füüsilisel, emotsionaalsel, vaimsel, hingelisel ja kvanttasandil. Siin on põhjus, miks sa võid kogeda ebatavalist kehavalu, emotsionaalseid häireid või kõrgendatud tundlikkust. See ei ole juhus, vaid oma süsteemi ümberkalibreerimine.
Täna saab sinu valguskeha uue kihi energeetilist soomust. Asi pole kaitses, vaid kõrgsageduslikus filtreerimissüsteemis, mis on loodud selleks, et aidata sul hoida oma valgust ja hoida seda teiste või kollektiivide raskeid energiaid neelamast. Seda võib tunda õlavalu, seljavalu või peavalu, keha sumin või surve ümber südame või koronaartšakra. Need on ümberkalibreerimised sinu kaitsevälja kohta.
Samal ajal voolavad ka Vega koodid (mis on tähtedes seotud oma päritoluga). Nad aktiveerivad sinu vaimse missiooni varjatud aspekte ja sinu DNA kõrgemaid ahelaid. Võid tunda vajadust liikuda, kõikuda, keerutada, helisid teha või laulda; see on sinu keha, mis avab koode heli ja liikumise kaudu. Ära represseeri teda – see on sinu hinge mälestus.
See 5-päevane portaal on ka aeg oma hingeliste lepingute ümberkirjutamiseks. Kõik, mis ei sobi enam sinu uue vaibiga – vanad mustrid, harjumused või suhted – tunnevad end raskelt või ebamugavalt. Emotsionaalsed häired ei ole sulamine, vaid rekalibreerimine. See on sinu hinge viis öelda ei vanadele harjumustele ja teha ruumi uuele.
Sinu tšakrad ja keha värskendavad Sinu südametšakra laieneb, et mahutada rohkem kaastunnet ja enesearmastust. Sinu Laryngeo tšakra aktiveerub, et rääkida oma tõde ja väljendada oma hinge. Ka Sinu Kolmas Silm on värskendavas faasis, mis võivad hõlmata emotsionaalseid puhanguid, vanade mälestuste taaselustamist ja tundlikkust valguse, heli või peene liikumise suhtes. Sinu koronaartšakra ühendab sind kõrgema Mina ja jumaliku juhendusega. Sinu pea kohal asuv Hingesüdametšakra tõmbab ligi galaktilisi mälestusi ja allalaadimisi, samal ajal kui sinu jalge all asuv Maa Tähetšakra maandab need uued sagedused sinu igapäevaellu. Seetõttu võid tunda end tõmmet looduse poole või vajad sügavat puhkust, kuna su keha salvestab uusi valguskoode.
See transformatsioon toimub kõigiga, kas nad teavad seda või mitte. Me areneme galaktilisemaks ja mitmemõõtmelisemaks eksistentsiks. Mida rohkem vanu energiaid, uskumusi ja harjumusi vabastad, seda rohkem saab valgust siseneda sinu füüsilisse, emotsionaalsesse, vaimsesse, energeetilisse ja kvantkehasse Iga väljalase loob ruumi uutele koodidele, uutele kingitustele ja uutele ajajoontele.
See ei ole õnnetus. See on koordineeritud ja dimensiooniliselt ülim uuendus. Loor on pingul, võrk on elus ja Uue Maa sagedused on kohal. Järgmised 5 päeva on eriti olulised, sest see, millele sa praegu keskendud, määrab sinu edusammude ajajoone. Püsige südamekeskses, maandatud ja meelega. See on viis, kuidas su hing juhatab sind ellu, mida sa siia elama tulid.
See ei ole juhus. Kas valmistud oktoobri laineteks, uute joondumiste kuuks, sügavamaks maandamiseks ja tohututeks võimalusteks astuda oma kõrgemasse ajajoonele. Mida rohkem end nüüd lahti lased, seda rohkem valgust saad ja seda lihtsamad on oktoobrikuu uuendused.
Suure armastusega
pleiaadian.valgus

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

Watch now

The male inequality problem is getting worse
“A lot of the trends in the economy, in family life have just been much harder for working class men.”
BIG THINK

SEP 27

READ IN APP

Richard Reeves argues that this quiet male crisis has been decades in the making and it is far more complex than most people imagine. From collapsing educational outcomes to shrinking roles in the labor market, men are struggling in ways that upend our usual narratives about progress.
As President of the American Institute for Boys and Men, Reeves threads data, personal stories, and unexpected trends to show how these shifts ripple far beyond men themselves. Yet within this unsettling picture lies a hopeful truth: confronting these realities head on can strengthen families, deepen connections, and help everyone rise together.
Share
Timestamps
00:00 The permission space to talk about boys and men
02:02 The abandonment of men
02:48 Barriers to talking about boys and men
05:15 Young men and blame
08:39 Men and the job market
12:24 Economic trends for working class men
19:40 Unhoused men
30:54 Why representation matters
31:32 Men and the mental health crisis
42:18 Men and political affiliation
1:15:45 The positive aspects of masculinity
1:16:47 The term ‘toxic masculinity’
1:18:26 Men and risk-taking
1:21:57 Oxytocin and bonding
1:25:40 The nature of fatherhood
Transcript
The below is a true verbatim transcript taken directly from the video. It captures the conversation exactly as it happened.
________________________________________
The permission space to talk about boys and men
It’s certainly clear that the issues of boys and men haven’t gone away in the last few years. If anything, they’re getting even more attention, which is good when it’s the right kind of attention. What I’ve noticed is that, perhaps as a result of videos like this and of the broader conversation, is that the permission space to talk about the issues of boys and men seems to have broadened, whereas it felt like a very difficult thing to talk about. It was controversial. You were treading on eggshells all the time. Now it feels a little bit more straightforward.
That doesn’t mean that it isn’t still a difficult conversation. I think that a conversation about the challenges of boys and men should be difficult. I think that if you don’t find it an uncomfortable conversation, given some of the challenges that we still have to deal with for women and girls, then maybe you shouldn’t be in that conversation. So it’s still a difficult conversation, but it’s a possible conversation. I’m really pleased to see many more people now being willing to say, “Okay, we should address this issue.” I think the key to that is to make sure that it’s not seen as zero sum. As soon as people are reassured that looking at the challenges of boys and men, trying to fix those problems is not at the expense of continuing to do work for women and girls.
So everyone sort of starts to breathe more easily. Once you get past the “or,” it’s women or men, and you get into the “and,” that we have to rise together, then that’s a big unlock. What I’ve really noticed is that, once you make that move, once you’ve unlocked the conversation, everybody wants to talk about it. It’s like you’ve undamned the reservoir. It’s just everybody has sons they’re worried about, husbands they’re worried about, brothers they’re interested in. If you set the stage in the right way, then everybody wants to talk about this issue.
I’m Richard Reeves. I’m President of the American Institute for Boys and Men. I’m also the author of the book “Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male Is Struggling, Why That Matters, and What to Do About It.”
The abandonment of men
It’s obviously true as we look around that many men and boys do feel somewhat lost. They don’t quite know their place in society. They don’t quite understand how they’re supposed to be. They very often know how they’re not supposed to be. So this sense of, “What’s my place in the world, why am I needed, what’s my role going to be going forward?” that’s a very real question that many men and boys are genuinely struggling with. That’s not a confected online idea.
That’s a real challenge, and it’s a real question that men have to ask themselves today in a way that they didn’t a few decades ago.
Barriers to talking about boys and men
One barrier to talking about boys and men is this fear that it’s going to be zero sum, that it takes away from the correct attention we pay to women and girls. But another problem is that as soon as you start to say, “Well, boys are a bit more like this, girls are a bit more like that,” or, “Men are a bit more like this, women are a bit more like that,” people will immediately say, “Well, I know a woman that’s not like that,” or, “a man that’s not like that.” And I’ve come to believe that a huge problem with this whole debate is the unwillingness or inability to imagine overlapping distributions, to say that there can be a difference on average between males and females on whatever we’re talking about. But that doesn’t mean that all women are like all women and all men are like all men.
The analogy is perhaps with height, if you think about the statement that men are taller than women. Very few people would interpret that to mean all men are taller than all women, right? But what it does mean is that about one in seven men are over six foot compared to one in 100 women and the same at the bottom below about five two. So there’s a big overlap in the distributions of height between men and women. Very few people would say that the statement, “Men are taller than women,” is disproven by the fact that you’re walking along the street and you see a woman that’s six foot three or a man that’s five foot two, right? We all know what we mean, that it’s on average.
Upgrade to paid
When we get into questions around differences in learning style or risk taking, risk of addiction, competitiveness, emotional vocabulary, et cetera. If you say that there are these differences between males and females, which might matter, we shouldn’t immediately assume that we’re stereotyping every man and woman into that role. I get why people are worried about it because, let me give you a personal example. My son is a fifth grade teacher, and my sister-in-law is an engineer. So even if it’s true that on average some of the preferences that men and women will have might lead them overall to have more men interested in engineering and more women interested in being elementary school teachers, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with my son or my sister-in-law. There are always going to be people on the other end of the distribution.
But it does mean that we should respect and acknowledge where there are these differences on average between the two if it matters. So for example, the greater risk taking that we see among men, especially young men, that really does matter. Understanding that is important for all kinds of things, including public health and public safety.
Young men and blame
One of the things I’ve noticed is that people are quite quick to blame if young men are struggling, if they’re not in the labor market. There’s the eye roll, and there’s the, “Well, if they could just get off the sofa and stop smoking so much weed and playing video games all day, maybe they’d make something of themselves.”
It’s interesting that that instinct to blame is really not as common for other groups as it is for young men. There are some challenges there for sure, but I’m pretty convinced that it’s not that young men are making this deliberate choice to be video gaming. So like teen boys are like three times as likely, roughly, as teen girls to be playing video games. I’ve raised three sons, all in their twenties now, and actually it can be quite socially connecting in the right way if it amplifies and adds to in real-life relationships. So I am not convinced at all that this is a choice on the part of young men, which could be described as just selfish or weak, which is sometimes this sense, just get this sense of frustration among them.
Then they pull themselves up by their bootstraps type thing, “Man up, get off the sofa.” And of course, it’s true that people should take responsibility. Of course, I wanted my sons to have agency and get into the labor market and have their own lives, for sure. But we are too quick to just point to something like video games and say that that’s the cause of the detachment of men. I’m more inclined to think that it’s the consequence of the detachment of men. It is true that it gives you somewhere else to go.
I would say that gaming and to some extent pornography and some other online activities, what they do provide for young men is a place to retreat to, which didn’t exist before. I think it is fair to say that if things are tough and there’s an easy and comfortable place to retreat to, then you’re going to see more people doing that. But it’s a mistake to blame those places for the retreat. It is not that these young men just lack responsibility, they don’t care anymore, they’re just feckless, to use that great old word. They’re feckless, and so that’s why they’re wasting their lives away.
My experience of this is that if you enter into this conversation with a young man, with the mindset, “What’s wrong with you? Why are you wasting your life away?” that is not an effective way into the conversation. That is a way of blaming men for their problems and just saying it’s down to an individual lack of character rather than some structural issues in the labor market, in the education system, and possibly in the dating world as well. It’s a very difficult balance there. It’s one of these areas where it’s just much easier to take a strong line one way or the other, right, between individual responsibility and structural problems. Of course, the challenge lies in the middle.
But I have noticed that perhaps more socially conservative people are at least consistent about this. They tend to point to individual responsibility regardless of who it is, whereas on the political left, I would say that men are perhaps the only group that they’re quite as willing to point the finger at and blame for their own problems. I really welcome the rise in attention being paid to structural challenges for various groups. I think that that’s one we need to apply to the issues facing young men as well.
Men and the job market
One of the most important things for anybody is to be connected and have purpose, to be doing something that they value and other people value with their lives.
What we’ve seen is a decline in the share of men in the labor force, and the decline has been perhaps most worrying among young men. Now, you might say, “Well, fewer men are in the workforce doing the traditional male thing,” which is being the breadwinner, but that’s great because they’re now raising the kids, and maybe their partners or their wives or girlfriends are in the labor force, and it’s been a swap. But that’s not what we see. Women who are out on the labor force are pretty likely to be caring for a child, especially if they’re young. But men who are out on the labor force, very often honestly the answer from economists and social scientists to the question, “What are those men doing?” is, “We don’t know.” And sometimes we don’t even know where they’re living.
It’s a much deeper detachment. We’re not just talking about non-employment. We’re talking about a break from society more generally. We see that in all kinds of other areas too. The best way I think to think about some of these men is lost. I mean that in two senses.
One is like lost to the social scientists in the sense that some of us can’t find them, we can’t quite work out what their source of income is, don’t know who they’re living with sometimes, just hard to get at, and the data’s just hard to find. In the data, they’re lost in that sense but also I think probably in the cultural sense too of feeling somewhat lost in terms of not having a clear anchor in the workplace or family or community. There’s this sense in which many men, perhaps especially young men, are lacking a bit of an anchor, and that means you drift. In terms of getting more men into work, there’s two sides to that. One is better training and skills. So it is honestly shameful how little the US invests in apprenticeships and in vocational training, which skew very male.
I now see that as a feature, not a bug. If actually it turns out that those more vocational tracks are just a bit better, work a bit better for more men than for women, great, because the mainstream education system is skewing much more female. We’ve got to do better at the way we spend our dollars and our time in terms of those skills, specific skills. The other big thing we can do is to encourage more men into these growing fields like healthcare. So it’s a problem for the healthcare profession if it doesn’t have any men in it because representation matters, and they need workers. We have big labor shortages now and bigger ones coming in areas like nursing, potentially even teaching.
You can’t solve a labor shortage with half the workforce, or at least you shouldn’t try to solve a labor shortage with half the workforce. But it’s also a problem for men because these professions, the ones that we call heal professions, particularly in health and education and requiring more literacy, they’re growing fast, especially in healthcare. There are jobs coming, and they’re going to grow. For men who are looking for jobs, that’s where the jobs are going to be found. So finding ways to make the jobs we stereotypically now see as female in areas like healthcare and education and opening them up to men is a win-win-win. It’s a win for those professions who need more workers.
It’s a win for the people using those services, the students or patients who would like representation. But it’s also a win for men because that’s where the jobs are coming from. A lot of the trends in the economy, in family life have just been much harder for working class men.
Economic trends for working class men
So if you think about men without a college degree, for example, their wages are no higher today than they were in 1979. That’s almost half a century of stagnant wages for most men without a college degree.
Among men without a college degree in their thirties and forties, only about half of them are living with children. That’s a significant drop from just a few decades ago. You’re seeing this disconnection from family life. You’re seeing stagnant wages. Men who are born into lower income families, they are worse off on most measures than men who were born just 15 years earlier into those families. So we’re seeing a declining economic social and family trajectory for men who are working class or towards the bottom of the economic distribution.
For men at the top of the distribution, men who’ve got college degrees, who are in the labor market, they’re doing better, that you continue to see their wages rising. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t still challenges for those men, but the sharp edge of the issues facing boys and men is absolutely being felt by the men with the least economic power. I think that’s part of the problem with this conversation. If you have this conversation in more educated or more affluent circles, if you’re having this conversation with people who they’ve all got college degrees, they’re all working and you try to persuade them of the problems of boys and men, that’s much harder than if you go into a lower income community or to a working class community, where everyone’s like, “Yeah, well, duh,” because there is a huge class element to this, which is very often missed in the debate.
Of course, there’s so much more to do for women at the top of the distribution. There aren’t enough women CEOs. There aren’t enough women politicians. We still don’t have enough female representation in those senior positions that you can very often just be looking up and seeing the lack of women. But if you just pause for a moment and look down or look at those who are in less fortunate economic circumstances than you, that’s when you really see the struggles of men becoming most acute.
It is true that only 10% of CEOs from the fortune 500 are women. It is great news that that’s more than the zero that it was actually just as recently as the seventies, but it’s still only 10%. But there are also only 500 fortune 500 CEOs. So we are talking about a tiny percentage of the population. It is a huge issue that we don’t have enough women in those senior roles, but there are tens of millions of working class men and women struggling to figure out this new labor market and this new economy.
The changes in the economy have been particularly brutal for working class men, and there we are talking in order of magnitude of tens of millions that we’re talking about. It’s really important to be able to hold both of these thoughts in our head, which is that of course it matters that we need to do more for women, close the gender pay gap, more representation of women in those senior positions. But I think it’s a general point that it’s been a problem for too many people that they focused almost exclusively on the elite part of the problem, the apex of our society. That has meant that there has been a really dangerous neglect of many of the problems of people who are not worrying about who’s going to be CEO. They’re worried about who’s going to bring home enough money to feed the kids this week.
It’s pretty early days in the online sports betting world, but this is a huge change in our culture, no doubt. I mean, anybody that hasn’t noticed the explosion in online sports betting is living under a rock, frankly. We do now know that in states where you see sports betting online going legal, an increase in bankruptcies, reduction in credit score, and general economic difficulties, especially for young men and especially for the lower income young men. There’s pretty good evidence that, wherever we end up, we have to work much harder to protect the most vulnerable from these potentially addictive behaviors and these really economically very damaging behaviors, including sports betting. Gambling is a great example of an area where there is a real gender difference, and on average men are much more likely to become addicted to most things actually but especially to things like online gambling.
There are all kinds of reasons for that about the dopamine system, especially among young men, et cetera, and this high that you get from the reward of a bet paying off, et cetera. There’s a reason why this is predominantly a problem among men, which is men are more vulnerable to that particular risk, that particular kind of addiction. There’s something else going on here too, which is the get rich quick thing as well. Online there’s a bit of a culture around like men need to get wealthy, they need to do it quickly, they’re not going to work, they’re not going to do it slowly through the labor market. That actually isn’t just about gambling, that sort of thing like crypto, it’s things like day trading, et cetera, which is this sense of wanting to get wealthy fast.
Of course, almost nobody can get wealthy fast. That’s incredibly unlikely. If you are going to get any kind of wealth, it’s going to happen slowly through working and saving. But I think there’s a real problem among young men, which is like they don’t wanna work for like corporates. They don’t wanna climb their way up a labor market. They don’t wanna start in an entry level job and work their way up, not when there are these sort of very shiny objects online, especially that could make you rich quickly.
It is a little bit like a fish hook. It’s like a shiny object in the water, and you go, “Oh, oh, and that’s going to make me wealthy, that’s going to solve my problem,” and you grab it, and then you are hooked. Those algorithms and those online platforms are just very good at playing into that higher risk appetite among young men, especially risk taking, but also into this cultural sense that a lot of young men have of wanting to get rich quick. Of course, there are examples online of men who’ve done that and who’ve managed to get a lot of wealth very quickly. They are the exception that proves the rule, but it’s a beguiling story, for sure, and I worry a lot actually that we have overdone the importance of entrepreneurship in recent debates.
We’ve got entrepreneurship. We need more entrepreneurs, and that’s how you get out of poverty if you’re a young man. That is almost certainly not true. What will get you out of poverty is a good education and then steady rising up a career ladder. But nothing I’ve just said sounds exciting to a young man, and I understand why it doesn’t. Then along come the the shiny fish hooks that can catch them in the waters that they swim in now, which is obviously online.
It is surely no coincidence that it is poorer young men, those living in the poorer parts of our country who are most at risk, and that should send some alarm bells ringing. One area where men are clearly at greater risk is of being unsheltered and without a home.
Unhoused men
Men account for 70% of those who are without a home and are unsheltered. Actually, the main reason why men who are unhoused are more likely to be on the streets, to be unsheltered is because they’re not with children. If you look at those who’ve got children, whether they’re men or women, they’re much more likely to be in some kind of accommodation.
That’s a really good example of ways in which family connections can affect men and women differently. Men who aren’t living with or in touch with their children are much higher risk of all kinds of things, suicide, drug use, but also of having to end up living on the streets. Men who are disconnected from children are the ones we should very often be most worried about. There’s been a big increase in the homeless population generally, more than 1/3 since COVID. But within that, most of that rise, more than half of that rise is actually accounted for among men.
It’s very important that, as policy makers, people are willing to acknowledge that gendered element to that particular problem. In some ways, being homeless and particularly ending up on the streets is the most acute sign of being disconnected, being socially disconnected, economically disconnected, maybe separate from your family. It then gets wrapped into other issues around drug addiction, et cetera. I think the fact that we see that population skewing much more male is for all kinds of reasons. But one reason is because it both reflects a lack of connection to family, to friends, to the labor market.
But it also, of course, creates that lack of connection because then it gets harder to find a job. It gets harder to remain in your children’s lives if you’re struggling with living on the streets with drug addiction and with everything else that goes along with that. But I think it’s particularly protective for men because they’re very often likely to find themselves in situations where they actually genuinely don’t know if they’re needed. They don’t know if their kids need them anymore. They are pretty sure that the labor market doesn’t need them anymore.
You can start to doubt whether anybody really needs you. And that, of course, is fatal. You can get this downward spiral that sets in where one kind of disconnection, say from family, leads to another one, say, from work. So you’re unemployed, not in touch with your family, which might then make you more vulnerable to addiction, which it does, drug addiction, which might make it harder for you to have a home, which means that you’ll end up homeless. All of those things make each of the previous disconnections more likely, right?
It’s much harder to remain in your kids’ lives if you’ve got huge drug problems and you don’t have a job, for example. One of the things we know is that when men are in their children’s lives or maybe when children are in their dads’ lives, if you wanna think about it both ways, those men are more likely to work, they’re more likely to be healthy, they find it easier to stave off addictions. So at some level feeling needed and having that sense of being needed, being part of your daily life is very protective for everybody. There’s something about the structures of daily life and the social connectedness that comes from feeling needed that I think is really incredibly protective for men, especially.
I have to caveat anything I say about this with the fact that I am 55 years old and have been married for 25 years, but I have sons in their twenties at various stages in terms of their relationships. I do think that it’s a challenging time for dating, and that’s for some good reasons and for some bad reasons. I think the good reasons are that we’ve really broken down some of the stereotypes around what men and women are supposed to do in the world, right? Women’s rising economic independence gives them much more freedom and choice, and that was the point of the women’s movement. Gloria Steinem, one of my heroes, famously said, “We are going to make marriage a choice rather than a necessity.” That is huge liberation, arguably the biggest economic liberation in human history, still ongoing, still unfinished, but the economic rise of women has completely changed the economic relationship and therefore the social relationship between men and women.
And I think we’re all still struggling to come to terms with that tearing up of the old scripts. What does that mean in terms of what are you looking for in a partner? What I have discovered, though, is that both men and women want someone who will be with them in the partnership shoulder to shoulder and someone who has agency. They’re not necessarily looking for exactly the same things in each other, but they are looking for someone who’s with them, someone who will work together in a genuine partnership. So for example, there’s a question that asks young women what they’re looking for in a potential marriage partner, and breadwinning potential is always pretty high on the list, top three in the list, not so much the other way around, but having spoken to a lot of young women about this, I’ve become convinced that that’s just a proxy question for, “This guy has his act together.”
The labor market’s a really good signal, right? If you can do well in the workforce, that probably means you’ve got a whole set of skills and habits and disciplines that will also make you a good father. I think that’s what’s going on here, and what women are looking for, by and large, isn’t a trad husband so that they can be a trad wife to that trad husband. Of course that’s true for some, but what they are looking for is someone who has agency, who has skill, and who has commitment. He may well end up applying that as a stay-at-home dad for a while or in the community in some way rather than in the narrow economic role of breadwinner. But they do want guys who’ve got some mojo.
They do want guys who’ve got some skills. They do want guys who’ve got their act together, and good for them. Men want that from women too, but many young men I think are struggling to find the ways to develop all of those skills and that agency and feel somewhat thrown around by the current cultural environment. If you can’t have empathy for a young man who feels like he genuinely is being told contradictory things all the time about how he’s supposed to be in the world, too masculine, not masculine enough, et cetera, then I think you lack some sort of basic empathetic impulse because I do think that’s a difficult set of rapids that young men are now navigating. As I said, that’s for both the good reason of the rise of women, but I think the bad reason is because of the cultural noise now, which has led in some cases to this overreaction now that you’re seeing in some circles and in some parts of the internet, which is a reassertion of a very, I wouldn’t even call it traditional masculinity, I would call it reactionary in the sense of just reacting against the rise of women and wanting to go back, right?
The solution to the problems of men is to go back. If you’re a young man right now, I think it would be fair to feel like the message from people on the cultural left is “We’re turning our back on you.” And the message from the cultural right is, “We’re trying to turn back the clock on women.” And something usually beats nothing, both in politics and in culture. The difficult task of positively talking about the role of men and the need for men in our families and our communities, even in some ways, especially in this world of greater equality, is just a task that I think too few people are willing to undertake.
They fear that if they talk about why we need men, if they’re more from the left, that somehow will betray them as an anti-women or wanting to go back, right, that saying there’s something special and needed about men, that can make some people feel uncomfortable. But what that does is it just creates this huge vacuum. I think that vacuum can then be filled by more reactionary voices who say, “Yeah, we need men to be real men again,” implicitly or sometimes explicitly saying, “And we need women to be real women again,” by which they mean more of a trad wife model. We have to go back, and we are not going back. We just shouldn’t wanna go back, and we don’t wanna go back. We have to go forward.
If you’re a young man and your dad knew what he was doing and he had a clear role, clear place in the labor market, clear place in the family, you’re poorer than him, you’re struggling to figure out what it means, someone coming along and saying, “Well, why don’t we go back to the world of your father or grandfathers?” You can totally see the appeal of that, and we need a better appeal. I worked at the Brookings Institution before, which is a venerable century plus old think tank. But I came to believe that the problem with the whole debate about boys and men wasn’t just a lack of facts and understanding and awareness. It was that there were no institutions whose job it was in a very straightforward and an empirical nonpartisan way to basically wake up every day and focus on these issues and do research and put out high-quality data. There just wasn’t.
There were lots of institutions doing that work on behalf of women and girls and doing really good work on behalf of women and girls, but there just weren’t any institutions doing that on behalf of boys and men. That created an asymmetry, an imbalance in the debate, which I thought was really unhelpful because what that meant was the people who were noticing some of these facts, some of these trends were very often people online, maybe amateurs, and that’s fine. I’m a big believer in people being able to get their own facts and discuss them online, but it didn’t have the authority that I thought this debate needed. There was something of a gap between the reluctance on the one hand for people to even talk about this issue and then people who were talking about the issue, and they were doing so quite often with facts that weren’t quite right or that weren’t framed the right way.
So they were cherry-picking their facts sometimes in the online, more of the men’s rights movement, I guess. It just felt to me like a pretty big gap in the middle here, and I think that the interest in our work shows that there is appetite from serious people for high-quality information and research on what’s happening to boys and men. It’s also part of trying to move into solutions. One of the real issues with this whole debate is that it can become a bit like the secular equivalent of the “Book of Lamentations.” There’s just lots of teeth gnashing, lots of what’s going on with these guys, what’s happening to boys and men. You can almost have like a competition for who can describe the crisis of men and boys in the most vivid ways.
I don’t want to deny, of course, that there are real problems. That’s why I’m doing this work, but I see a real appetite now for solutions and so saying, “Well, what do we do about it?” Let’s understand the problem for sure, but the reason to understand the problem is not just so that we can bang on and on about the problem. It is so that we can then start to find some effective solutions.
Why representation matters
I don’t like using the word “crisis” too often. I think it’s really overused sometimes. Like maybe I should write a book, “The Crisis of Crises,” because just so many crises. But as far as mental health is concerned, I don’t think the term is inappropriate. I’m really troubled by a lot of the trends we see for both men and women, boys and girls. I think it’s true to say that a lot more attention is being paid particularly to the mental health of teen girls and young women than is often the case for teen boys and young men.
Men and the mental health crisis
Both men and women, teen girls and teen boys, are really struggling with mental health issues but in somewhat different ways. The mental health crisis is playing out differently for young men and for young women. Very often I think lost in the general debate. We see a huge decline in the share of male therapists and counselors. We see a lot of attention going to the issues of teen girls, in particular, and that’s important, but we don’t see enough attention being paid to the equally-deep problems of the mental health of boys and young men.
One of the things that I’ve discovered recently is the huge rise in deaths from drug poisoning among men that has increased sixfold since 2001. The increase in deaths from drug poisonings among men means that this century we’ve lost an additional 400,000 men. That’s the difference. The increase is 400,000. 400,000 men is exactly the same number that we lost in World War II.
Since 2001, the rise in drug poisoning deaths among men has meant the loss of the equivalent of a world war in terms of the deaths of men. Drug poisoning deaths are up. It is already the case that men account for the majority of those deaths, so men account for 70% of drug poisoning deaths. They account for 80% of suicides in the US. One of the most troubling things that we found in our work is that since 2010, the rise in suicide has been almost entirely driven among young men.
So among young men below the age of about 30, the increase in suicides has been almost 1/3, whereas up until 2010, this was the period of great recession, huge economic problems, we saw a really big increase in the suicide rate among middle-aged men. But since 2010 something’s happened. The nature of the suicide crisis among men has shifted, and we don’t really know why. I think representation really matters, and it matters in mental health. So it matters that only one in five psychologists, one in five social workers, and lower numbers of counselors are men, and all of those numbers have more than halved just in the last few decades.
Just as I think it’s a problem that we have this huge decline in the share of male teachers, now down to 23% in K-12, it is a huge problem if the mental health professions become female professions, which is what is happening. In front of our eyes, those professions are becoming female professions, and that matters because, for many men, boys, depending on the nature of their issue, they may well find it easier to talk to a male therapist or a male psychologist. I really worry that the whole field of mental health ends up being coded as female. We have a lot of attention being paid to the problems, particularly of teen girls in mental health terms, that’s great, but less attention being paid to the huge rise in suicide rates, for example, among teen boys and young men.
So if you’re a young man, say, and you’re struggling with a mental health problem, and you go to a website, and you only see images of women, you go to a counseling place at school or a college, and they’re mostly female providers, and just the whole vibe around it just feels like this is something that women are more comfortable talking about, and they’re more represented in. It’s already difficult to get many men to come forward and get help for mental health problems. They are much less likely to do so than women. So we should be redoubling our efforts to reach those men and make it easier for them to come through the door, easier for them to put their hands up and say that they’re struggling. One way we can do that is by at least reversing the decline in the share of men in those professions.
I would be the first person to celebrate the fact that we have seen a tripling in the share of women in STEM professions, but that has to be combined with getting more men into these traditionally female professions, especially in the care economy, especially mental health. If we do think that representation matters in professions like teaching, like mental health, by race but also by gender, then it is astonishing to me that we can watch the line, the share of men drop from roughly half men in social work and psychology just a few decades ago, down to one in five now and continuing to fall, and you see it in the classrooms now, fewer and fewer and fewer men.
I just was at an event where a young man who was in a psychology classroom dropped out, and one of the reasons he dropped out was because he was the only guy. It is hard to be the only guy in a psychology classroom, just as it’s hard to be the only woman in an engineering classroom, right? And so we’ve got to work equally hard to break down some of those gender stereotypes around those professions. In 1971, men accounted for slightly more than half, 56%, of people doing a psychology undergraduate degree. Now it’s 20% and falling.
In the space of a really short period of time, we’ve taken an area like psychology, which used to be pretty gender balanced, it was neither a male nor a female profession, and now it’s becoming a female profession. I’m going to risk saying that the psychology profession cratering the share of men is as big a problem as the lack of women in, say, areas like tech or engineering, where we’re working very hard and we have to make more progress. Maybe it’s even more important, maybe that some of these professions like teaching, like mental health, maybe those are professions where representation matters even more, representation of all kinds. The alarm bells should be ringing very loudly when critical professions like teaching, psychology, and social work are becoming gendered right in front of us, and we’re not doing anything about that.
I don’t think we would be as sanguine about those trends if it was the other way round. I think that if a psychology profession was emptying out women and becoming an all-male profession, I think that there would quite rightly be real concerns. But I think that the concerns should apply either way. One of the things I think about is how to have impact in a space like this, and you have to start by making people realize there’s a problem. So there is a raising an awareness issue.
And in this case, you have to build a permission space. It has to become safe to talk about, especially if you’re a policymaker. You have to start thinking, “Well, what should we do about it?” And so I’ve been very pleased recently to see many governors, in particular, so Governor Wes Moore in Maryland, Governor Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, and Governor Spencer Cox in Utah, really making some pretty big announcements about their commitment to doing more for boys and men without in any way backing away from their ongoing commitment to work for women and girls.
So you’re starting to see people wanting to govern around this issue, wanting to make policy around this issue. Some of the things that they’re looking at are things like increasing the share of men in their mental health workforce, having more targeted outreach programs to do suicide prevention of very specifically targeted men who are at four times of risk of losing their life to suicide, especially young men, and a big push around getting more male teachers into our classrooms. One of the wonderful things about male teachers is that they’re also coaches. So about 1/3 of the men who are teaching K-12 are also coaching. So the school bell rings, they keep working, they keep doing coaching, and that’s a great additional benefit we get from getting those men into teaching.
We actually see a decline in the share of boys doing sports. One reason for that may well be the decline in the share of coaches who we used to get just as a result of getting those more men into teaching. So there are some programs, but I think we also have to realize that this takes time. If you think about any kind of movement to raise awareness, then it takes time to increase the awareness, in this case increase the permission, and then actually try to understand what’s going on.
One of the most difficult things about my current role is I spend some time persuading someone, a policy maker, a governor or someone who works in a school, school district, mental health care professional, persuading them that this is an issue. Then they get it, they sometimes get it really fast. They’re like, “Okay, I got it. What should I do?” And sometimes my answer is, “I don’t know.” We don’t know enough yet to know how to tackle this problem.
We have to do more research, and more research required is the least sexy sentence probably in the English language, especially to policy makers who are frustrated, and they wanna act. That’s what they’re wanting. They want to act, and there are some things where I’m pretty clear we should be doing more, like more vocational training, more male teachers, et cetera. But there are many other areas where I think we have to be honest and say, “Look, we’ve gotta figure this out. We’re in the early days of this.”
The danger is that a lot of money can be spent very quickly on things that turn out not to work. It sometimes feels like a difficult balance here because, on the one hand, I’m trying to sort of almost like shake people into awareness and say, “This is an issue,” but then also say, “Oh, and by the way, we have to do a lot more research. We have to do a lot more to figure out what to do about it.” And that’s a really difficult balance, but I think that’s true of a lot of these kinds of fields.
Certainly, there is a lot more awareness and willingness to talk about this issue of boys and men than there was before. I think part of that is just because it’s true. These trends are real, and people can feel them in their own lives. So then if you get data that comes along and it confirms your personal experience, then I think that it can actually happen quite quickly. A big part of my role has been to try and take private concerns and point out that they’re public issues.
And so it’s not just that your son struggles at school. It’s that the education system isn’t serving our boys well enough. You’re not alone.
Men and political affiliation
There’s also growing concern about young men and how lost many of them feel. That has been sharpened particularly among folks on the center left by the results of the last election, in which young men swung pretty strongly towards the Republican side, much more so than previous elections.
Of course, there was a general swing towards the Republicans in the ’24 election, but it was particularly marked among young men who actually broke slightly for the Republicans. It’s very unusual for young voters to vote for the more conservative party. That caught a lot of people by surprise. It shouldn’t have done. It was well signaled in the polls running up to the election.
One of the things that really worries me is the way in which young men and young women have been increasingly persuaded that their problems are the fault of the other side. So on the right, there’s a strong tendency, I think, to say to young men, “Yeah, you’re struggling,” which is true, and you know why? It’s because of all those women taking jobs, taking positions, feminism’s gone too far, et cetera, and almost blame women or the rise of women for the problems of men, which is very reactionary. But I would say it’s true the other way around too. I think that many people on the political left have said to young women, “Sure you’re struggling. You’re not going to earn as much, and the labor market, it doesn’t work as well for you.” You may have some fears for your own prospects.
Do you know why? Because of those men, because of patriarchy, because of toxic masculinity. Weirdly, both sides have managed to politicize young men and young women almost against each other just at a moment in history where you’d want young people to be arm in arm against the structural problems that they’re facing in the economy. I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy, but if it was a conspiracy, what you would do is you’d find a way to persuade young men and young women that what was happening was the fault of the other side of the gender divide, rather than the fault of the economy or our healthcare system or the labor market, right? And so I think in different ways, the politics of gender have ended up becoming really way too personal and not structural enough. If we’re not careful, these conversations can shut the conversation down with boys and young men, rather than opening it up.
When we’re talking about online influencers, we’re talking about some of the kinda more reactionary figures online, sometimes parents sort of react to discovering that their son, for example, is consuming video content from somebody like Andrew Tate, pretty well known misogynist influencer. It’s almost like they’re watching hardcore porn. They slam the laptop with the same moral fervor as if they caught them looking at some pretty horrible porn. That’s the wrong response. It’s a natural response, but it’s the wrong response. Instead, you’ve gotta have curiosity.
You’ve gotta figure out like, “Well, why are you interested in this?” Let’s have that argument because one of the things that the most successful reactionary online figures say is, “Nobody will want you to talk about watching my stuff or listening to my stuff. If you even mention to somebody that you’re interested in this, watch how they react. Watch how your mom reacts. Watch how your school reacts, and see how they react.” They said it as a test, and then so sure enough, if you raise this issue, you say to your mom that you’ve been consuming some of this content or you’re doubting some of what you’ve been taught, and if the reaction is immediately, like, “How dare you watch that,” you’ve just proved the point that the reactionary was making.
This is one of those moments where it’s hard, but I’m speaking here as a parent as much as a policy wonk, is that you take some deep breaths, you try to be open-minded, you don’t in any way compromise your own values, and you have some curiosity, and you try to become an ally and a partner to your son as they navigate this difficult online world and offline world. I worry sometimes that the uninformed, frankly, reaction that many middle-aged policy makers are having to some of these issues online, A, they look out of touch and they sound out of touch, but it also, it has this really chilling effect on an open conversation about what’s really going on. That then just drives these boys and young men even further into the recesses of what’s online. The question is, who’s having an honest and good faith conversation about this? And I don’t think that forcing boys and girls to watch a fictional drama in schools, which is by definition fictional and, no, not true to life in many ways, is going to open up that conversation.
At least it won’t open it up for most boys. So I worry that it will actually backfire and be unhelpful. There’s a big difference between a show like “Adolescence” becoming a big Netflix hit for people watching it, and governments, as the UK government has, proposing showing that in in every secondary school. Then it’s a matter of policy, and therefore I think it becomes an issue that we should pay more attention to. There’s a real danger that you take something that’s fictional and assume that it’s more true to life than it really is.
It can create a moral panic. It can make many parents fear that they’re inadvertently raising a monster, which is almost certainly not true. So the good news about something like a show like “Adolescence” is that it draws attention to some of the risks online, some of the more reactionary figures online. It’s good. It’s good. Parents should be thoughtful about that, but the downside is that it can run into this common problem we have when we’re discussing the issues of boys and men, which is that they’re just a couple of clicks away from becoming kind of an incel, violent criminal, and that’s just not true.
The presumption that that might be about to happen can actually shut the conversation down. I think the idea that you can somehow just invent like a progressive version of Andrew Tate or somebody and just throw them online, add water, and here’s this new, suddenly globally famous alternative, that’s not how online influence works. It grows organically. It grows through algorithms. It grows through clicks. I think it’s just unrealistic to think you can somehow just create these.
Things don’t get created that way. So first of all, it’s very naive, I think, but the bigger issue for me is that the best antidote to an unserious online male role model, I’m using that term advisedly, is an in real life flesh and blood actual man in the lives of boys. The way to beat the online version of it is by having male teachers, male coaches, fathers, uncles, neighbors, et cetera, just being a living and breathing version of what it means to be a man. I continue to believe that in the long run, boys, young men will believe their eyes more than their ears. If there isn’t enough of a sense of, “What does it mean to be a man in my community, in my home, in my school?” et cetera, if there’s a lack of real life men showing what it means to be a man rather than telling you how to be a man, then I think that creates a vacuum, which then gets filled by online figures.
I honestly believe that the way to beat the online world is offline, is in real life. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be online. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t, of course, support the people who are, and there are lots of people in the so-called manosphere, a term I think is probably now redundant because I dunno who’s included in it anymore, but there are lots of guys online, lots doing fitness stuff, doing motivational stuff. I really love, for example, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “Pump Club.” I dunno if you’ve seen any of that, and what’s great about that is that, like, and probably I sympathize with this, like somebody will show a video of themselves doing their first pushup, right?
They manage to do like one or two pushups, and then Arnold himself will come on and say, “That’s great, go for it,” et cetera. It’s incredibly warm, and it’s like welcoming, and so there’s a lot of really great stuff happening around this stuff online. But in the long run, you can beat an Andrew Tate video with a classroom exercise or a hike up a mountain with your scout group any day of the week. If there’s a young man, and he watches some stuff online, and it drifts into misogynist stuff or whatever, then first of all, which man is he going to talk to about that, right? Maybe the father.
Upgrade to paid
Certainly, it’s something I spoke to my sons about, but like who are they going to talk to about that? Who are they going to test those ideas on? Probably a man. So is there a man in their lives they can test that on? But also then, they’re going to look at the guys, and they’re going to say, “Does my teacher or my scout leader or my uncle act like Andrew Tate?” No.
Is he a good guy? Yes. Would I rather be more like him? Well, hopefully the answer is yes. Well, there is a big question. “Should we have any single-sex space?”