Despite any popular misconception, we’re not meant to eat, sleep, scroll, repeat.

We scroll while on the bus, consuming television or even eating.

Therefore, I want to use this space to intentionally document the media I consumed each week.

Share in the comments the media you consumed this week!

Comment

Books Finished:

• A Year of Magical Thinking (By Joan Didion)

A tragically beautiful story of loss and love. It’s a story of pure emotion, evoking the beauty of being loved and of loving. It encapsulates the idea that we were made to love, to be loved, and to love. Yet, in this love, there is the pain of loss.

“Life changes in an instant. An ordinary instant.”

• Rage Becomes Her: The Power of Women’s Anger (By Soraya Chemaly)

An extremely poignant read for today’s political climate! It explores the power of women’s anger as a tool for social change. It battles the rhetoric of stigmatization and victimization placed on women by society, especially surrounding violence.

“Your anger is a gift.”

Articles:

Substack Author Jimmy Chin: The Two Great Risks of Life

https://jimmychin.substack.com/p/the-two-great-risks-of-life?r=5jatjm&utm_medium=ios

A fascinating take on the parallels between risk-averse and risk-seeking individuals, applied to his career. The message of this post can be applied to our everyday lives, career choices, and nearly everything that involves a tinge of risk.

Personally, I found Chin’s article poignant because he studied international relations, as I have, and reflected on his time searching for a job and calculating risk.

Each of us has a limit; yet it’s necessary to push past our comfort zones.

“There’s a misperception that I always knew what I wanted to do and it all magically fell into place.”

Chin explored the concept of his life without risk. This principle of “without risk” can be applied to a concept that fears us. Would we be more content with our life without the risky option, or are we just scared?

It’s a good reminder not to let our fear stop us.

The Economist:

Archive Cuba: The Origins of Revolution

https://theeconomistoffthecharts.substack.com/p/archive-cuba-the-origins-of-revolution?r=5jatjm&utm_medium=ios

Fascinating use of comparison of modern-day U.S.- Cuba relations and historical significance.

While the article only scratches the surface, it’s a reminder that political decisions have two sides and compounding cyclical effects.

Recently, my friends and I, all spanning the spectrum of our twenties, reminisced about our personal awkwardness. These “cringe eras” were characterized by little girls unapologetically embracing their identities from a young age.

Whether it was wearing oversized red glasses, a sparkly tutu to class, mismatched neon socks, or an intense fascination with construction vehicles, we knew what we liked and weren’t concerned with aesthetics. Frankly, we didn’t even comprehend the concept of aesthetics as children.

Now, children, especially young girls, are afraid to be judged for being “cringe.”

Society and social media have conditioned little girls to believe that they’re better with makeup, a crush, or a new outfit. This is all a lie!

Life is not curated! Why are we teaching children, especially young girls, to believe that their lives are only worthwhile if they conform to the mainstream?

There’s a cultural shift driven by excessive exposure to digital culture, presenting a polished and manicured life.

This shift has led to the emerging belief that the younger generation is bypassing the awkward phases, once considered a rite of passage.

Personally, when I was between the ages of 10 and 14, I wore mismatched clothes, had braces whose colors changed frequently, had acne, and had haircut flops.

It’s easy to scroll through social media, even as someone in their twenties, and think, “Wow, I didn’t look like that at twelve.”

But how messed up is it to compare ourselves to young children?

Why is it normal for little kids, especially girls, to grow up too quickly?

Filters, Photoshop, surgeries, rejuvenating creams and serums, the latest trending brands, diets, dyes, scrubs, and so on are all marketed as the elixir of youth.

The irony is that youth are being prevented from experiencing their own youth while it’s used as a marketing tactic for the rest of society.

The innocence of our childhoods and the inherent awkwardness that once accompanied it are now being replaced by aesthetics and the stereotypes that come with them.

Labels like “fisherman core,” “coastal grandma,” “dark academia,” “cottage-core,” “coquette,” “preppy,” “old-money,” or “goth” are now seen as lifestyle subcultures to strive for rather than just fashion choices.

Instead of being content with drugstore makeup, these aesthetic archetypes are seen as requirements of the status quo.

The “Sephora child” phenomenon is normalized as young children are pressured to conform to these ever-changing aesthetics.

Consider the double standard: pre-pubescent children buying anti-aging serums and makeup to appear older are seen as normal, while youth-rejuvenating procedures are popularized for adults.

The ability to age should be celebrated. A gift. A remembrance of past reasons to smile, and the spectrum of emotions we get to experience each day.

Oftentimes, women’s rights are separated from the rhetoric of foreign policy news. However, the reality is that women’s rights, unlike those of men, are dependent on the region in which they were born. 

Violence against women should never be a trend. 

Yet we live in a world where prominent male voices are given more value than their female counterparts. 

We live in a world where violence against women is so prevalent that the events become blurred. 

How is it that society has become desensitized to violence against women? 

This violence is not isolated to a part of the world or a minority of women. 

To name a few of the ongoing harrowing acts of violence against women: 

In the United States, a woman was gang raped at Cornell University, while the seven boys' “punishment” was an essay. 

As defined by UNICEF, gender-based violence ‘reaches every corner of the globe.’ However, legal frameworks fail to provide a universal definition of rape. 

In Afghanistan, as of August 2026, under Taliban rule, over 2.5 million girls were denied the right to education and banned from educational facilities barring sixth grade. 

As of 2024, over 250 million women experienced female genital mutilation (FGM), with the largest percentage occurring in Africa. FGM is the removal/ damage to female genital organs for non-medically necessary purposes. 

Meanwhile, the killing of women, also known as femicide, is a global problem, prominent in the Americas and the Caribbean. Femicide denotes the killing of women based on their gender.

Across the globe, there is contention surrounding the dialogue about sexual and reproductive health and their ensuing rights. 

The economic disparity between women and men is partially rooted in unaddressed unpaid labour and an implementation gap in equal opportunity laws. According to the 2026 World Economic Forum Global Gender Parity Report, there is currently no economy with full gender parity. 

In Palestine, one in four female-headed households receives no humanitarian aid in comparison to nearly half of all male-headed ones. The weaponization of resources has disproportionate effects on women. 

To a reader, these may seem like mere jarring facts, but the harsh reality is these are women’s lives, not numbers. The anger attached to these events becomes short-lived, but the effects on these women are long-lasting. 

While these women differ in geographical positioning, they were all failed by a system alleging to protect them. 

This is not nearly an exhaustive list of the violence against women in recent years, and doesn’t account for the thousands of stories that have yet to be told or were silenced. 

The anger that follows the events should be directed towards these systems. 

Regardless of the type of violence or its geographic setting, it should be addressed systemically rather than placed on the women. 

They are deemed victims for simply living.  

Rather than address the lack of a consent-based definition of rape, or teaching men to respect women, globally women are taught they are “too much.” 

Society has enforced a rhetoric aimed at teaching women how to avoid violence in all its forms, rather than address it systemically. 

However, as of 2026, fourteen nations adopted Feminist Foreign Policies (FFPs). FFPs are state policies that prioritize peace, gender equality, and environmental integrity. 

Similar to the lack of a universal definition of rape, there is no standard definition of FFPs or a blueprint for policy development, which often contradicts decisions about the military-trade nexus. 

Therefore, to address the global violence against women, policymakers need to prioritize and streamline a definition of an FFP. 

We, collectively as a society, are not angry enough. 

How is that these terms are regularly implemented when referencing food culture, yet fall short of their zealous nature when referring to technology?

Personally, I think it’s related to FOMO—the fear of missing out.

The global average of daily screen time is 6 hours and 37 minutes. However, for individuals in the spectrum of their twenties this average can go up to 8 hours per day. That is a full working day on our phones!

Your jaw is probably on the floor thinking well that’s crazy, but mine is better. I was guilty of this too.

Yet, every week I feel my heart sink when the screen time announcement is released. It sinks like my phone is releasing the names for who is entering the Hunger Games and it was unknown information.

We’re all surprised when we’re told the numbers, but can’t seem to adopt the same rigorous methodology of “cleansing,” “detoxing” or simply reducing our screen time.

FOMO is driving high screen time in a perpetual loop fostering anxiety making it an ongoing cycle.

It’s partially caused by consistent monitoring, compulsive scrolling, and comparison.

According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), the correlation between FOMO and screen time leads to sleep disturbances, procrastination, and increased stress and anxiety levels.

It begs a question, do we continuously fail at our digital “detox” because of the emotional compulsion and immediate dopamine attached to scrolling?

Instead of compulsively scrolling or passively being on our screens without a reason other than to scroll, we should switch to analog activities.

Next time you travel or in a long queue ask yourself if the only thing you brought to keep yourself occupied was a device. The answer is probably unintentionally yes.

The FOMO behind the scrolling is perceived and is attached to the idea that someone else is doing, going, getting, wearing, etc something better.

Yet, it’s all curated.

So instead of letting our FOMO dictate our skyrocketing levels of screen-time and the ensuing negative effects, lets call a friend, read a book, do a physical puzzle, knit, crochet, embroidery, needlepoint, sew, play an instrument, amongst many others.

We’re stronger than our own FOMO.

Menstruation is something that affects all women, but not all women are affected the same. Why? Socioeconomic factors affect the ability to access feminine products.

Period poverty refers to an insufficient access to not only menstrual products, but education and sanitation facilities.

Period poverty is more than just insufficient access. This insufficient access has long-term negative repercussions on women’s health and education. According to UN Women, “In many countries, girls fall so far behind in schoolwork that they drop out of school entirely.”

For instance, in Gambia, it’s common for girls to skip school the week of their period every month due to insufficient access to sanitary facilities and products. In the United Kingdom, an estimated two million girls between the ages of fourteen and twenty-one miss school due to their period (UN Women, 2024).

Skipping school due to insufficient access to period products should never be normalized. The United Nations estimated that girls are missing out on over a month of learning annually due to menstruation, which places them at an academic disadvantage.

The tampon tax (also known as the pink tax) – a sales tax levied on menstrual products – can be a hindrance to equitable access to products. Once cannot advocate in the Menstrual Movement without fighting for affordable and accessible products that are untaxed and readily available in public spaces.

Period poverty is a global and systemic crisis. As of 2023, an estimated 500 million individuals were affected by period poverty.

Oftentimes period poverty is either not thought about, or is seen as only a problem in underdeveloped regions, but it is not the case. “In 2019, an online national survey revealed that around 20% of U.S. teens ages 13 to 19 reported trouble accessing or affording period products when needed.” This percentage rose to 23% by 2021 due to the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.

While period poverty transcends geographical boundaries, its effects are not equalized especially amongst Black and Brown communities who menstruate. Due to racism and socioeconomic disparities, it’s given less attention.

A Georgetown University (GU) study found, the disproportionate effects of climate change are also relevant to period poverty. Extreme weather events and natural disasters which are increasing due to climate change can exacerbate poverty; it disrupts access to menstrual products, clean water and sanitation facilities.

Protection of the environment and our natural resources is inextricably related to the protection of women’s rights and equitable access to menstrual products. The GU study found, “An estimated 12 billion disposable hygiene products are utilized annually, which contributes to plastic pollution and waste.”

There should be global equitable access to menstrual products that are chemical free. In 2022, a study found that 48% of sanitary pads, 22% of tampons and 65% of period underwear contain PFASs.

“PFASs are long- lasting manufactured chemicals that scientific studies have linked to causing harmful health effects.

Despite the readily available chemicals present in consumer products, advertised as durable, or stain resistant, they should not be present in menstrual products. The negative side effects caused by PFASs exposure could interfere with the endocrine system and hormone homeostasis. PFASs are ultimately endocrine system disruptors since they affect the disruption of sex hormones.

Science has proven there are high levels of chemicals in period products and data has shown the negative externalities of a lack of menstrual products. Why has legislation not changed?

The FDA regulates tampons as a ‘medical device,’ but doesn’t require brands to list product ingredients. There are no federal regulation bans from the essential products. However, states such as New York and California have developed their own regulations including bans on PFASs.

Menstruation affects all women, therefore we all should be fighting for equitable and safe products. “A period should be a sentence, not a girl’s education,” the ultimate goal of The Pad Project.

The Pad Project’s goal is for all menstruators to attend school while also providing reproductive health and rights education. “The Pad Project aims to implement washable pad programs, and run menstrual hygiene management programs workshops globally. (The Pad Project). You can donate here to aid the Pad Project in their mission of eliminating period poverty inequality and promoting female education.

Meanwhile, Period.org, advocates for systemic policy and legislation change in the Menstrual Movement. All women should voice their opinions on the access to menstrual products and the allocated chemical exposure. Their mission is, “Menstrual health is a matter of human rights”

Menstruation affects all women, in order for there to be equitable access, the progress needs to be federally protected.