“What kind of fuckery is this?”

Trump has just been elected the 47th president of the United States of America, in what is arguably the biggest win for the Republicans at all levels of the government since the eighties. When I started writing this article, the title quote I had chosen was Alastair John Campbell’s more sobre comment about Donald Trump:

“He’s normalised the abnormal in so many ways”
^{– Alastair John Campbell on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”}

“Morning Joe” on MSNBC, November 4th

But since yesterday morning, the only title that seems appropriate anymore is a line from an Amy Winehouse song – albeit taken out of context:

“What kind of fuckery is this?”
^{– Amy Winehouse’s “Me and Mr. Jones”}

What kind of fuckery indeed?! What just happened?

News Sources

I am not American, and I don’t live in the States, but I have strong ties with that vast and beautiful country. For months, I followed the presidential race very closely, absorbing information from all kinds of progressive, liberal, and centrist podcasts and news sources. Especially satirical shows, which helped me to avoid sinking into cynicism many times. I agree with David Hogg, a sharp gun-control activist who, when asked how he managed to remain inspired over time, replied:

“Truly, it’s things like The Daily Show. (…) There’s so much negativity and vitriol in the media constantly, it’s hard to watch. And when it feels like you’re constantly being told the world is on fire, but you still need to be informed, watching things like The Daily Show (…) and John Oliver (…) gave me a completely different perspective on how hilariously corrupt a lot of these different state legislatures and politicians are, but how it doesn’t have to be that way.”
^{– David Hogg interviewed by Michael Kosta on The Daily Show}

David Hogg interviewed by Michael Kosta on “The Daily Show”, October 24th

Most Europeans are well aware that the US presidential election results will impact the whole world. And despite the US foreign policy being very low on most American people’s priorities, our whole system is decidedly globalised and interconnected. Thus, seeing the MAGA crowd’s complete lack of empathy for anyone other than Trump supporters is worrying, even for Europeans. It reminds me of Gustave Gilbert’s quote, as he observed high-ranking Nazi leaders during the Nuremberg trials, echoing Hannah Arendt‘s sentiment:

“I was searching for the nature of evil. I think I’ve come close to defining it: a lack of empathy. It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants. A genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow man. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.”
^– ^{G. M. Gilbert}

A Woman of Power

On the other side of the spectrum, there is Kamala Harris who, when she became the new presidential candidate, brought a breath of fresh air. There was a sudden sense of hope, joy, and community in her campaign. She clearly stood for what I hope are the values of the future: empathy, inclusion, dialogue, constructive collaboration. There was, of course, room for improvement and aspects of her plan that could be questioned. I also understood that many did not agree with all her views, but I did hope a majority of voters would go for a sane, solid, smart alternative to the endlessly vulgar, disrespectful, dangerous Trump. But they didn’t.

This deeply disappointing election seems to show that too many men are still feeling threatened by women in positions of power. What I see is that in the West, we judge the Iranian Islamic regime and other profoundly chauvinist governments, thinking they are far-removed from us. We convince ourselves that our Human Rights can’t be taken away from us. But we forget about the rights Iranian women used to have mere decades ago, until the rise to power of the Ayatollah Khomeini – whose discourse was eerily similar to that of Trump. Already misogynist comments are flooding social media in post-election America. It has become one of Trump’s trademarks to belittle and objectify women. I assume this projects strength, in the same way as rape or wife battering might, for some of the men who struggle to find their place in our evolving social patterns.

Chris Hayes discusses how the election result emboldened misogynists

And despite it all, many people in the States preferred to vote for THAT man than for A woman – lest Kamala’s hormones get the better of her!

A Flawed System

Another conclusion I’ve reached is that our unchallenged socio-economic system is reaching its limits. Ever since the US lost its sole major opponent with the fall of the Soviet Union in the nineties, an unhinged capitalism based on infinite growth has taken over the world, as has Big Tech. Thirty years ago, American former Secretary of Labour Robert Reich very accurately predicted in a speech:

“We are on the way to becoming a two-tiered society, composed of a few winners and a larger group of Americans left behind, whose anger and whose disillusionment is easily manipulated. Once unbottled, mass resentments can poison the very fabric of society, the moral integrity of a society. Replacing ambition with envy, replacing tolerance with hate. Today, the targets of that rage are immigrants, and welfare mothers, and government officials, and gays, and an ill-defined counterculture. But as the middle class continues to erode, who will be the targets tomorrow?”
_{– Speech by Robert Reich, 1994}

Robert Reich and Heather Loft discussed this on “Coffee Klatch” on 27 April 2024 – LINK HERE

This is something that we have been observing in Europe as well, albeit to a lesser extent for now. I believe that our strong social model and trade unions are still helping to protect “our tired and our poor,” more than in the United States – despite what is written on the Statue of Liberty’s plaque.

But in Europe, too, we have grown increasingly tired of an economic and political system which favours the rich, shrinks the middle class, and disregards the poor. Since 2008, we have seen our governments bail out banks, that went on to give out huge bonuses to their top management. We have seen the American model of employment, chewing up and spitting out its workers, slowly replace our system of long-term hires. There is a steep increase in mental health issues, and working people are finding it hard to make ends meet. Here, too, the population is growing tired of the establishment. We see multinationals being allowed to dictate the rules, without being held accountable for their decisions or the damage they cause.

But in the States, there are fewer guardrails. Where I used to be annoyed with European directives and regulations, seemingly making us less competitive or agile, I now see America’s lack of regulations as its Achilles heel. The Musks, Bezoses, Gateses, and Murdochs are the ones calling the shots, regardless of who’s in power. However, the extent to which the government works in their favour still varies. And here, it is so wrong to assume that, because Trump doesn’t play by any rules and says what he wants, he is a straight shooter who will defend the people’s interests. On the contrary, he is an ideal puppet for the big corporations, in a way that Kamala would not have been.

And it was naive of the Republicans to think they could control Trump, just as Hindenburg and his government thought they could control that “ridiculous people pleaser” called Hitler. Like Hitler in Germany, Trump has become a master at reinforcing many American people’s belief that their situation is disastrous and that only he can save them. He makes it sound as though all the cities in the US are Batman’s Gotham City, where all is dark and scary, and where outlaws and corrupt individuals rule the place. In this scenario, Trump would see himself as Batman. Except that Trump is actually the Joker disguised as Batman. JD Vance is his Robin and Musk is The Penguin. With JD Robin by his side, Trump-The Joker will create chaos so that he can save the day, while stuffing Elon Penguin’s pockets with money stolen from the people.

A New Hitler

But they are not comic book characters. And “harmless little Adolf” was not so harmless after all. The comparison between these two men is perfectly founded. And many steps in Hitler’s rise to power sound very familiar after these elections:

“The Great Depression brought the German economy to a halt and further polarized German politics. Hitler and the Nazis began to exploit the crisis and loudly criticized the ruling government. (…) The groundwork for the Nazi dictatorship was laid when the Reichstag was set on fire in February 1933.”

^{– “Adolf Hitler”s Rise to Power” on Wikipedia}

Just like Hitler, Trump remains extremely popular, no matter what he does, no matter how offensive, dictatorial, or truly insane he sounds. Like in 1930s Germany with Hitler, Trump’s personality cult is solid and lasting. It has been built over decades, from his time as a cameo celebrity in “Home Alone 2” to a TV personality with “The Apprentice.” People have become used to him. They have gone from laughing at his direct and crude remarks to revering him for them.

Hitler’s cult of personality was built on two elements: his talent as an inspiring speaker, and the propaganda techniques developed by his Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. As is mentioned in the documentary about Nazi propaganda below:

“To summarise the basic principles of Nazi propaganda, they would be simplicity, repetition and emotional appeal.”

^{– Prof. Randall Bytwerk} ^{in “Designing Despotism: Hitler’s Propaganda and the Rise of Nazi Power”}

Documentary: “Designing Despotism: Hitler’s Propaganda and the Rise of Nazi Power”

This is exactly what Trump does: he repeats a simple message that appeals to the masses’ emotions. He is saying to the people: “You are in danger, the situation is terrible, and I will make everything great again for you by getting rid of the bad people who are poisoning our good society!”

During my studies, I wrote several essays on Nazi propaganda. Being half German, I needed to understand how a nation that had given birth to divine music, literature, fine arts, and such advanced science and philosophy, could lose all sense of humanity. (I already addressed my aversion to nationalism in my post “No flag, no country! You can’t have one.”)

What I discovered through my research is that, with over a decade of constant propaganda, supported by an objectively terrible situation, the Nazis managed to convince Germans that Hitler was going to make everything better. But they did it gradually and consistently. As Goebbels said:

“Propaganda (…) must prepare the way (…) for practical actions. It must follow these actions step by step, never losing sight of them. In a manner of speaking, it provides the background music. Such propaganda in the end miraculously makes the unpopular popular, enabling even a government’s most difficult decisions to secure the resolute support of the people. A government that uses it properly can do what is necessary without running the risk of losing the masses.”

^{– Joseph Goebbels speech at a 1934 Rally in Nuremberg}

And that is what Trump has done. He has made the unpopular popular. The unthinkable acceptable. Whether or not they like it, all media outlets have contributed to Trump becoming a household name and figure. Even by ridiculing him, liberal media have contributed to dimming the shocking effect of everything he says, despite their best intentions.

During Nazism, the propaganda messages were constantly repeated across many media, and thus steadily seeped into the German people’s lives – until they completely accepted them. Many of these messages were similar to MAGA’s: “women exist to breed, men must project strength, children’s activities must be in line with the regime’s values, nontraditional sexualities are perverted, cities are centres of debauchery and crime, rural life equates to healthy communities, our opponents seek to destroy us. When we are in power everyone will have jobs.” The only point where the two discourses differ is in their target of racism: in one case it was Jews and Roma, in the other it is immigrants. But the discourse is the same.

Great Again

As in a dictatorship, Trump’s followers behave like cult members. After all, Trump promised them that he would make America great again. But let’s not forget that before him, Hitler had promised to make Germany great again… and Milosevic to make Serbia great again, Putin to make Russia great again, to name but these. I am waiting for the next French leader who will want France to regain its Napoleonic borders, the British leader who will want to regain one-third of the world, or a new Mussolini who will promise to reclaim the Holy Roman Empire. Trump’s plan may not include geographic expansion, but it does involve joining the world’s other ruling bullies, also known as dictators. Like Hitler and Stalin 90 years ago, they are all quite similar in their views and goals.

What Now?

What I fear now is that, if there isn’t sufficient pushback from the Democratic half of the country, the damage caused by Trump will reach our shores, too. Ukrainians will feel its effects in the very near future for sure. As will Palestinian civilians. And the American people who voted for Trump will feel it too, which he will blame on the immigrants. As for our planet, I dread the magnitude of the ecological damage we can expect under Trump.

But we must move forward! And we should look to young and bold leaders like David Hogg to mobilise masses for good, and to independent media to continue voicing their opinions. Political commentator David Pakman is warning his listeners not to give up the good fight. On seeing independent media lose thousands of subscribers after Trump’s victory, he says:

“Our instinct is the opposite of what the Right does. And we will get crushed if this is the way we respond to a defeat. The Right wants us not to exist. The Right wants to decimate independent progressive media.”
^{– David Pakman on “The David Pakman Show”}

“The David Pakman Show”, 6 November 2024

As for me, I will continue to follow these media channels, write, help NGOs work toward a positive change for humanity and the planet. I will go on raising my child with values that are the opposite of Trump’s – and hope that Europe will not follow in the United States’ footsteps.

Remember

This time around, we must remember the horrors of the twentieth century. We can’t plead ignorance. We must think how it could all turn out if we don’t pay attention to those “ridiculous” leaders who make us laugh. Trump will be worse this time around, so the American people who didn’t vote for him will have to be twice as strong as before.

And we Europeans, rather than following the same path, should be there to support the democratic opposition – just as the US helped us save our democracies against Nazism.

I will end this reflection with parts of a text written by Rebecca Solnit the day after the elections:

How to hope even now

“They want you to feel powerless and to surrender and to let them trample everything and you are not going to let them. You are not giving up, and neither am I. The fact that we cannot save everything does not mean we cannot save anything and everything we can save is worth saving. (…)

There is no alternative to persevering, and that does not require you to feel good.”

^{– Rebecca Solnit on The.Ink}

(Title quote taken from Amy Winehouse’s “Me and Mr. Jones”)

“Diversity must be preserved, so that it can bear fruit for the common good”

For an article we recently wrote about diversity in Brussels, my collaborators and I asked people of various backgrounds what word they most associate with “diversity”. These are some of their responses: the world, respect, colours, openness, equality, togetherness, multiculturalism, discovery, richness.

What is Diversity?
To me, diversity means everything – or, in a strictly human context, everyone. This includes all the existing human diversity of gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic and cultural background, experience, interest, age, ability or disability, sexual preference, political view, character trait, type of intelligence, sensitivity, and the list goes on.

The meanings attributed to the word ‘diversity’ are as varied as diversity itself. Surprisingly, many now have a negative undertone. In the wake of the opening ceremony for the Olympic Games in Paris, and of Vice President Kamala Harris becoming the US presidential candidate for the Democrats, I hear the term diversity being used to signify, among other things, non-Caucasians, “unwanted” immigrants, members of the LGBTQIA+ community, women, disabled individuals. There is also the recurring derogatory expression “DEI hire”, used to imply the lowering of standards to include members of underrepresented groups – thereby ignoring their hard-earned achievements or qualifications.

I don’t understand how, in democratic countries, diversity could come to be a denigrating term. In the United States, the very people who cite George Washington as a national hero are disregarding his vision for the country:

“I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.”

― George Washington

Since “liberality” means “the quality of being open to new ideas and free from prejudice”, it is obvious that many Republicans have moved away from this ideal. This growing tendency has been spreading across Europe as well, although on “the old continent” the messages of hate and fear towards the representation of diversity are almost exclusively carried by acknowledged far-right groups and movements – as yet.

The 2024 Summer Olympics Opening Ceremony
While watching the Paris Olympics opening ceremony in its entirety, I anticipated that most conservatives would be shocked by some of it. Nevertheless, all I could see in it was the celebration of the French Republic’s ideals: those of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity – to which they finally added Sorority in this very ceremony!

Excerpts from the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony

I saw the celebration of a diversity which has existed in France for centuries, but had never been shown so publicly. The ensuing public outcry across conservative media outlets and social media worldwide completely missed the point being made. They failed to see the admirable and forward-looking valorisation of beliefs, people and historical facts that have made France what it is today. Some of these were the infamous beheaded queen Marie-Antoinette, Gallo-Roman goddess of the Seine Sequana, a polyamorous trio reminiscent of the well-known (and oh! So French) “ménage à trois”, Malian-born French singer Aya Nakamura, joined by the French Republican Guard and the Army Choir to pay tribute to French-Armenian singer Charles Aznavour.

The four-hour-long ceremony highlighted innumerable successes, and overwhelming artistry and diversity. Throughout it all, the message of love and inclusion was omnipresent. But with a quick search on Google, almost all you can read about this impressive show now are messages of indignation and anger, focussing on a very brief and vastly misinterpreted segment. This is indeed what certain popular media and social media have been doing for decades, taking segments out of their context, giving them an erroneous interpretation, and crying out for violence. We are not far off from angry mobs of the past, armed with torches and pitchforks, getting ready for a witch-hunt or lynching.

Kamala Harris
Similar messaging could be heard all over right-wing media regarding Kamala Harris, when Joe Biden decided to step down as a presidential candidate in favour of his VP. One of the most shocking reactions came from Trump’s former Deputy Assistant Sebastian Gorka, in an interview on conservative British news channel GB News. He described Harris as:

“This woman, this disaster, whose only qualification is having a vagina and the right skin colour.”

― Sebastian Gorka

Jon Stewart (The Daily Show) shows clips of reactions in American right-wing media about Harris as the new Democratic presidential nominee.

Such level of uneducated crudeness still manages to surprise me. What people like Gorka claim diversity implies has nothing to do with what diversity really is. Rather than fuming, I decided to reflect on what that word means, what it represents, and why it is so scary for many.

Diversity is a definite fact on this planet. It is not new. It is not the dream of a “woke, leftist, liberal, progressive culture”. It is a reality. The definition of diversity is:

“The condition or an instance of having or being composed of differing elements or qualities.”

― Merriam-Webster

Diversity has always been here, and it has ensured our survival, whether in the form of biodiversity or human diversity. However, there have always been people trying to erase part of this diversity. Interestingly, the groups of people who have sought to annihilate cultural diversity often overlapped with those who sought to destroy or subdue species in the natural world.

Destroying Diversity
Last year, I visited an exhibit at the Paris Gallery of Evolution to rediscover some of the most noteworthy extinct animals in augmented reality. This experience made me reflect on the many similarities between those who have been destroying biodiversity, on one hand, and colonisers, Nazis, or any other genocidal group or regime, on the other. The latter include all who have sought to eliminate an ethnic group, or so-called “race”, throughout recorded History. It is interesting to note that, just as genocides have been denied by right-wing groups, the emblematic dodo’s extinction in the 17^th century was not recognised until two centuries later, partly for religious reasons. Perhaps it is no coincidence that one of the first steps towards building up hate in a population against another is to dehumanise any scapegoated group, and compare them to animals.

A safeguard against extinction
From a genetic standpoint, diversity is fundamental to the health and resilience of all living beings on this planet. A population with high genetic diversity is better equipped to handle challenges. In the face of diseases, genetic variations in individuals are key to providing resistance. Therefore, genetic diversity safeguards against extinction by ensuring a variety of traits and characteristics.

It is clear to me that the same could be said for any diversity. As the Danish ad below showed very clearly, we are diverse well beyond our appearances. We are all part of a multitude of groups. Thus, only highlighting one categorisation provides an incomplete image.

TV2 Denmark advertisement showing many ways to group people instead of the obvious ones (e.g., gender, ethnicity).

Since we have now nearly all been given a voice on social media, I do not see why all the existing human diversity shouldn’t be reflected and protected in popular culture as well. And yet, among the people using these very channels, asserting their right to a voice, more and more want to silence all who do not agree with them. They each want to ensure their own narrative is the only one that remains, thus erasing any diversity of opinions, if not cultures, preferences, backgrounds of any sort.

The Danger of a Single Story
A few years ago, I attended a video conference given by Nusrat Durrani on the importance of nurturing and growing diverse stories and narratives in audiovisual content. He shared his dream of a world in which the stories we read, hear, and see, would reflect all groups, cultures and experiences from a variety of perspectives. Another admirable and charismatic figure who spoke about the danger of a single story is Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. This awe-inspiring author eloquently explains that creating a single story is:

“(to) show the people as one thing, and only one thing, over and over again – and that is what they become. (…) The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story.”

― Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s TED talk about the danger of a single story.

I have been repeating that same message for decades. As a Roma Rights creative advocate, whenever I organised events about various Romani cultures, history, and current struggles, I ensured they were represented by Roma who were as diverse in appearance as in their experiences. This approach aimed to expand the audience’s perception of those they called “Gypsies.” The admirable Romani filmmaker and activist Katalin Bársony made the short film below, using this very duality of clichés and a broader reality, to portray European Romani women’s complex identities. The far-right, on the other hand, has been blinkering people to show only a very small segment of any population they attack, and equating this small segment to the whole vast group.

Short film made by Katalin Barsony for the “I’m a European Roma Woman” campaign

A Loss of Privileges
A possible explanation of why this has caught on is that a small percentage of the world’s population, who were born with certain privileges, fear losing them. Even acknowledging these privileges seems to be a problem. As a White lower middle class middle-aged woman, I can understand the fear of losing the relative comfort I have been used to. Although I am far from being rich, and have had to endure my fair share of exclusion due to my gender, socioeconomic background, or even ethnic origin, I am well aware that my life has been much easier than it would have been in the same situation had I been of African, Middle Eastern, Latin American or Asian descent.

While most people around me are better off financially, I still enjoy many privileges, most of which I’ve had to work hard for. And although I live with a certain fear of losing these privileges, it is not because of people of any particular ethnic or religious background. Any fear of losing my privileges is tied to the economic crises we have experienced, as well as the free market economy and speculation, and the people who control these. Therefore, I do not understand White people’s fear of losing their privileges by the mere fact of recognising the past sufferings and ongoing unfair, unjust, and racist treatment of people of colour.

We need Diversity
Finally, just as preserving biodiversity is absolutely essential for our survival as a species, I believe that diversity of thought is essential to a healthy evolution of the human race. Simon Sinek clearly explains why a diversity of perspectives challenges and motivates us to be better, whether in the workplace or at home.

“You need the diversity and inclusion to see opportunity or see (…) gaps, because we all have different perspectives, different upbringings. Not better or worse, but different. (…) We all have our own unconscious biases and we all have our own blinders, but together we have a broad view.”

― Simon Sinek

Simon Sinek speaking about diversity and inclusion, and why it is necessary.

In spite of the rise of far-right groups spreading a discourse of intolerance, fear, and hatred, I remain hopeful. The fact that such an opening ceremony was possible for the Olympic Games in Paris, is already a giant step forward for our joint humanity. It highlighted the beauty of diversity, and the importance of including people of all cultures and sexualities, but also the often disregarded elderly and people with disabilities. I am also hopeful for the upcoming presidential elections in the United States, despite all the warnings that if Kamala Harris is elected, a schism will happen within the country.

When I hear how young people around me speak of gender, multiculturalism, disabilities, I am very hopeful indeed. I believe that, faced with the real threat of autocracy, the people who believe not just in equality, but in equity, will continue to push our societies forward towards a more just world.

As Ruth Bader Ginsburg remarked on the value of diversity:

“We will all profit from a more diverse, inclusive society, understanding, accommodating, even celebrating our differences, while pulling together for the common good.”

― Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Speech given at the Paris Institute of Political Studies graduation ceremony, 2009)

(Title quote by Jacques Delors, politician and architect of the united Europe we know today)

“To thine own self be true”

As one year has drawn to a close and another begins, I am looking back on my overall experience of the past twelve months, while contemplating what the coming year might bring.

In this time of transition, mainly what I see and feel around me is a general wariness. Some believe it is related to our growing anxiety linked with the ongoing wars that affect us, either directly or indirectly. Others feel that it is tied to the escalating dehumanisation of our society, in correlation with the fast expansion of AI and our post-COVID isolation (see my post about mental health issues and fear). The obvious impact of ever-rising prices on a shrinking middle class is certainly also part of the equation. However, even if we cannot necessarily influence these global issues, what we can do is change certain aspects of our lives.

Thus, in the spirit of Anne Shirley in the children’s classic “Anne of Green Gables”, I want to step into the new year thinking:

“Tomorrow is always fresh, with no mistakes in it.”
“Anne of Green Gables” by Lucy Maud Montgomery

This last year has decidedly taught me that it is never too late to change course. I have recently come to yet another fork in my road, where I need to choose between two paths, both of which offer advantages and disadvantages. In simpler terms, one provides creative freedom at the cost of financial stability, while the other offers the opposite.

With this in mind, I remembered Polonius’ popular words to Laertes, in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”:

“This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.”
“Hamlet” by William Shakespeare

But what does it mean to be true to yourself? There are many aspects to each personality and sides to the prism of who you are. So, which “Self” are you meant to be true to?

Excerpt from the teen comedy “Clueless” (1995), showing how present this Hamlet quote is in popular culture

Both paths stretching out before me are in line with equally valid sides of my Self. One is my rational and reasonable “left-brained” side. It listens to my need to provide my child and myself with a stable existence, which is by no means to be undervalued. By doing jobs that I had some interest in, but no passion for, I have been able to pay the rent and spend quality time with my daughter. And then, there is the “right-brained” path, which is aligned with my irrevocably creative nature. Despite all my past efforts to function without it, my creativity has proven to be a resilient creature which will not be silenced. But unlike in Hollywood films, the path of passion never miraculously provided financial stability just because I dared to quit a paying job to follow my dream.

Top 10 Movies That Make You Want to Quit Your Job

This duality within me has repeatedly swung me back and forth between jobs for money and jobs for the soul. And now, this pendulum has swung again towards my creativity. Although creativity is often mentioned in the corporate world, in my experience it is seldom seen as a desirable quality in employees. It is, after all, somewhat of an untamed beast, in direct opposition to the culture that has shaped the West and been enforced by colonisers – past and present. Creativity does not care about hierarchy or the establishment.

And as of recently, the “creative beast” which had restlessly been awaiting her time to be set free once more, has resurfaced in my life. Suddenly, doors that had been closed are opening onto new horizons. And just like that, a short story I wrote with no expectations, based on the lives of both my grandmothers, was published (order “A Story of Two Europes” here). I was then selected to participate in a programme for writers-directors with budding projects, organised by mediarte. During those few days of open and honest interaction with a dozen young filmmakers, I found that I was among “my tribe” again. We were not there to earn money nor promote ourselves, but to learn how to best feed and nurture the projects we so care about.

_{Poster for the mediarte programme I attended (left)}_{& mediarte magazine (feat. actress Priscilla Adade on the cover) (right)}

During this programme, one of the trainers emphasised the importance of living by our values and seeking joy in our daily work. The term “joy” stood out for us all. Perhaps it is because in our society, we are so focused on being happy that we forget about joy. And while happiness is vague and vast, joy is an identifiable emotion that can be ignited in many situations. Moreover, the pursuit of happiness can be weighed down by expectations about it. We all know people who thought they would be happy once they found a partner, got a lucrative job, had a child, only to find that achieving this goal did not live up to their vision. Joy, on the other hand, can readily be found in smaller undertakings and successes. As French philosopher Frédéric Lenoir writes:

“More intense and deeper than pleasure, more concrete than happiness, joy is the manifestation of our vital power.”
“The Power of Joy” by Frédéric Lenoir

I have often been in situations where I traded in joy for a paycheque, and have found that this inevitably creates a crater in the soul. It leads to needing psychological crutches to support you, such as buying material goods, turning to that “wine o’clock” big glass of Chardonnay, eating more than you should, just to make up for what you are denying yourself. After all, everything comes at a price.

Lately, another experience challenged my perception of the choices I’ve made, and the ones I want to make going forward. My childhood hero, the beautiful and exceptionally talented Petro Ivanovitch, passed away. This celebrated Romani (Gypsy) musician and singer was a dear friend of my family and played a significant role in my grown-up life. Our regular visits to his family’s chic Paris restaurant “Les Tziganes Ivanovitch” – always filled with the crème de la crème of Romani performers and celebrities – later led me to write and direct the musical play “Romano Drom” about the Roma people’s history and to create the Romani culture festival “Romani Yag”.

“Les Tziganes Ivanovitch”: Petro (centre) with his beloved brother Slobodan, who died in 1985 (right), and Andrei Chestopaloff (left).

Petro’s passing made me look back on my eight years of passionate and committed work to shine a light on the diverse abundance of Romani culture worldwide. Despite numerous hurdles and tests, I had managed to gain some notoriety for the work I was doing internationally to bring together Romani arts, culture, activism, and information, in order to challenge the old narratives about “Gypsies”. But over time, continuous attacks by opponents to my festival or to me tainted my enthusiasm and wore me down. Just like in the fable about The Little Red Hen, I’ve heard many stories from individuals who worked hard towards a laudable goal, all the while having to fend off envious and frustrated antagonists who only saw the results and glory, and not all the hard work that had made it possible.

At this point though, even if I often regretted having left my path with Romani Yag behind, I have become kinder to myself, and now see regret as:

“a fundamental part of how [we] learn to reason and make decisions (…) Our cognitive apparatus is designed at least in part to sustain us in the long term, rather than bomb us in the near term. We need the ability to regret our poor decisions (…) precisely so we can improve those decisions in the future.”
“The Power of Regret – How Looking Backward Moves Us forward” by Daniel H. Pink

What I have learned from this is never again to quit a path I believe in because of external pressures. And I will try not to walk this path alone. As you age, what you lose in availability and energy, you need to make up for by surrounding yourself with the right people. A middle-aged filmmaker I know recently hit the nail on the head when he said that, while you are young, energetic, and free to dedicate all your energy to just one venture, you can fight your battles alone. But as time passes and your duties multiply, it is wise to share the burden of responsibility with trusted collaborators, partners, family, friends.

Thus, at the dawn of this new year, I will choose a path that is as close to an intersection between my different authentic selves – the elusive “Ikigai“. And I encourage others to do the same if they do not experience a healthy daily dose of joy in their lives. If we can, we should strive to live in line with our core values and our intrinsic nature, despite anyone who might try to format us. For me, this entails birthing my creative projects that had been sitting on a shelf for years, untouched but never forgotten.

(Title quote taken from Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”)

“Thoughts arrive like butterflies”

From my mid-teens to my mid-twenties, I was an unconditional Pearl Jam fan. I had all their albums, went to their concerts, knew the lyrics to all their songs by heart, and Eddie Vedder’s poster hung on my student room wall. To this day, I admire their body of work. They were the voice of the Western world’s nineties youth, addressing all the uncomfortable truths of that generation. The chorus of their song “Even Flow“, about a homeless man, begins with:

“Even flow, thoughts arrive like butterflies
He don’t know, so he chases them away.”
“Even Flow” by Eddie Vedder and Stone Gossard

“Even Flow” by Pearl Jam – lyrics here

I have often remembered this line, as my mind is regularly stormed by thoughts I want to chase away. Lately, I find that in order to stray my mind from unwanted cerebration, I’ve been listening to audio books, podcasts and series to control what populates my brain. This constant influx of content may feed my mind, but at the same time, it tires it and slowly stifles my creativity.

In the Croatian documentary film “Spomenko”, directed by my ex-husband, the exceptional and nonconformist priest, to whom it is dedicated, mentions the importance of solitude in processing all that constitutes our everyday lives.

Full documentary film “Spomenko”* by Bruno Lovrenčić and Dražen Nenadić (Croatian with English subtitles). Passage about the importance of solitude: 5’40”-7’10”.

Our minds need to breathe. They require a break from input in order to create relevant output. And yet, many people cannot handle silence. They go so far as to listen to audio content (whether guided meditations or music) while they sleep. My goal is not to criticise the tools individuals find to cope with whatever is weighing them down. Rather, I wonder if we are not overburdening the brain with never-ending flows of words, thoughts and emotions from the outside in.

Likewise, I am dubious about the overall benefits of brief daily meditations. However helpful, I wonder if they can truly suffice to let the dust of our emotions, encounters, worries and plans settle, which is necessary to try to make sense of it all. As a society, we have been moving faster and faster, and while we are trying to focus on the positive aspects of our existence, we cannot shut out the negative, like we do on our social media profiles. We must learn to live with thoughts that may eat at our brains like bugs. Perhaps we should even welcome them, since countless uneasy questions, worries, sadness or anger, have given birth to an invaluable wealth in art and philosophy over centuries.

The problem now is that, for the first time in history, we have access to an infinite source of distraction and information. This puts us in a position of constant reaction to what we hear and read, as a way to externalise the impact this influx has on us. We are on the receiving end, rather than being the instigators and creators of original thoughts. Whereas welcoming silence and solitude is more challenging in the moment, it brings with it more peace of mind in the long run. And more creativity, too.

As I look out onto the pristine Adriatic Sea, sitting on what was once my grandparents’ terrace, high above the madding crowd, I have made the decision to pause the constant input from my phone. I have taken out the faithful companion that is my notebook and am finally writing again – letting the butterflies back in to fly around my head, come what may. Time to slow down again and just be, and let be. Life is not a long quiet river.

*The view from my late grandparents’ house*

Life is not – nor can it be – a constant source of joy, excitement and gratitude, even when all is well. It is a complex multitude of layers, experiences and emotions, tainted by fears and insecurities, highlighted by joys and serenity. And it is certainly much easier to be offended, complain or be envious of others, than it is to accept what is. But acceptance is necessary at times. As is said in the Serenity Prayer, made famous through its use in AA groups and subsequently in popular culture:

“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.”
More about its source here

Acceptance is not resignation. Rather, it is about letting the dust of the daily hustle and bustle settle, letting the fog of injustice, aggression, excitement and euphoria clear up. Only when this happens can we see more clearly, and act rather than react. Swift reaction may well be essential when you are in danger, but it is usually shortsighted and can ultimately misguide you in any other context.

Quieting the voices in our heads by turning on our phones is in some ways comparable to escaping reality through drugs. And like drugs, the relief from our thoughts and emotions that we get through this content is short-lived. What awaits us at the other end is the same feeling of helplessness or the overwhelmingness of everything. This drives us to continue using our “escape-drug” to remain distracted. Detoxifying your mind by only using your phone when you actually need it may take a few days, but I am noticing the positive effects in me already.

My mind is slowing down, the jumbled puzzle pieces are slowly falling into place, allowing me to breathe and make lucid decisions. As the dust is settling, I can see the green fields with colourful butterflies again. For now, I’m just letting them fly about – until I catch one, when I’m ready.

(Title quote taken from the Pearl Jam song “Even Flow”)

*In memoriam Luka Lovrenčić, cinematographer on “Spomenko” (1978-2015)

“Tears are words that need to be written”

Lately, I have found that whichever conversation I have, or whatever I read about, the topics that come up are exactly the ones I have been writing about on this blog. Among them are isolation, screen addiction, absence of community, bullying, powerlessness, desensitisation, lack of nuance, obsession with performance, and this giant corporate monoculture that keeps on spreading. There is also the issue of the “Potemkin village“-like society we live in, where the façade of forced optimism is meant to erase all underlying injustice and imbalance.

What I draw from this is not that I am exceptionally perceptive, but rather that we are all suffering of similar aches. Some are just better than others at concealing it. Generally speaking, our mental health is damaged. In many cases, this even affects our physical health.

Some argue that having mental health issues is a luxury reserved to the wealthy. Others, in turn, consider that only the weak will be afflicted with mental health issues. But I would beg to differ with both these views. These kinds of simplistic statements remind me of one I recently heard from an elderly woman I know: she said that in her childhood, bullying did not exist among kids. Of course, one just needs to read the classics, like Jane Eyre, to know that this is not true. But what this woman’s view reveals is that bullying was not considered or treated as a concern back then. And the same can be said for mental health issues, which were not recognised until fairly recently.

A century ago, and all the centuries before that, most of the population constituted the working class, working fourteen-hour days. They certainly had mental health issues, but the option to diagnose and treat them did not exist. Still, they managed to function, but at what cost?

As mentioned in a previous post, our mental health has been affected by our gradual isolation, exacerbated by the lockdown and the resulting post-COVID social patterns. These include working from home, having food delivered rather than eating out, ordering everything instead of going to shops. Likewise, the digitalisation of every service we use has led to increased screen time, and while we all know that spending too much time watching a screen is detrimental to our mental health (as is clearly explained in this article in Time Magazine), it is very difficult to escape this trend.

Moreover, in our navel-gazing culture, our obsession with ourselves removes us from a journey towards balance. Instead, it forces us to turn inwards and dissect every part of our own behaviour and emotions, thereby further isolating us. It is a rabbit hole from which it can be challenging to resurface.

Understanding and categorising our emotions is certainly important. As we have seen, individuals who are disconnected from their emotions are likely to misidentify sadness or fear as anger. This can easily lead to outward violent behaviour or to inward eating disorders, to compensate for feelings of powerlessness, loneliness or frustration. This is why, early on in my child’s life, I started reading books to help her identify her emotions, such as the excellent “The Color Monster” by Ana Llenas.

Ana Llenas’ “The Color Monster”, read by Joshua Brooks

But identifying and labelling your emotions is only the first step. Once that is done, you still need to process them, and act or react. Physical activity is recommended, as it helps channel (self) destructive energy. And yet, I don’t believe that this is enough. Nor is listening to 5 minutes of daily affirmations on Headspace or similar apps. These habits do help, but there is no quick fix for deeper-rooted problems and a dysfunctional structure.

In my post about victimisation, I mentioned the key element of fear, as a tool of manipulation. Employers, media, heads of state knows this well, and make use of it on a daily basis to steer us in the intended direction. They have planted seeds of fear in us and have continuously nourished them, thereby slowly reducing the spectrum of our freedom and power. I don’t believe that any amount of running or meditation can resolve this issue. So I have started digging into the notion of fear.

In Michelle Obama’s recent book “The Light We Carry: Overcoming in uncertain times“, she talks about being “comfortably afraid”, which is an interesting concept.

“What does it mean to be comfortably afraid? For me, the idea is simple. It’s about learning to deal wisely with fear, finding a way to let your nerves guide you rather than stop you. It’s settling yourself in the presence of life’s inevitable zombies and monsters so that you may contend with them more rationally, and trusting your own assessment of what’s harmful and what’s not. When you live this way, you are neither fully comfortable nor fully afraid. You accept that there’s a middle zone and learn to operate inside of it, awake and aware, but not held back.”
“The Light We Carry” by Michelle Obama (2022)

Michelle Obama talks about fear, and how it narrows your perspectives, as well as isolating you from others

Fear is often seen as something we need to either overcome or avoid. We are seldom taught to live with fear and accept it as an integral part of our life experience. When we are young, we are much more inclined to challenge our fears and ourselves. But as time goes by, as we build a life for ourselves and our family, we seek security. And human security is founded on freedom from fear.

The UNDP’s Human Development Report stresses that “there have always been two major components of human security: freedom from fear and freedom from want.” These ‘two freedoms’ are often considered the ‘twin pillars’ of human security.
United Nations Development Programme – Human Development Report 1994

As security sounds comforting, we accept the ever narrower range of action that is offered to us, as long as we are promised the removal of what we have been told to fear. Each planted fear closes a door for us. Michelle Obama also mentions a parent’s fear for their child, which I understand deeply. My fear for myself was never as great as that for my child’s safety and wellbeing. As Hanya Yanagihara writes:

[The love for one’s own child] “is a singular love, because it is a love whose foundation is not physical attraction, or pleasure, or intellect, but fear. You have never known fear until you have a child, and maybe that is what tricks us into thinking that it is more magnificent, because the fear itself is more magnificent. Every day, your first thought is not “I Love him” but “How is he?””
“A Little Life” by Hanya Yanagihara (2015)

But even this fear is one that we must all learn to live with if we want our kids to grow wings.

Today, so many people live in comfortable situations, that they are inclined to sacrifice their intangible wealth (such as freedom of thought or community) in order to keep their material one. The more they have, the less they dare. It is no coincidence that the people who built the American Dream had little or nothing to lose. Today, I do not believe that we can reach the same heights because we have too much to lose.

This is not to suggest that we should suffer and endure poverty as our ancestors did, just so we can build a new worthwhile dream. Rather, I wonder if the path back to mental health could be one where we accept fear as our daily companion. Perhaps master manipulators might then lose some of their hold on us, and we might venture to seek untrodden paths.

This could begin with small steps, such as sharing knowledge and ideas, without being obsessed with patents and trademarks. For me, that step was simply writing this blog. Through “Midlife Reflection“, I began sharing my emotions and failures publicly, writing words to replace the tears I was shedding – just as in this post’s title quote by Paulo Coelho.

If you can find the source of your tears, I believe you can find a way to turn them into words or actions that, in turn, might help others. And this could be your path towards mental health, balance and “comfortable fearfulness”.

(Title: Quote by Paulo Coelho)

“A time when decency has lost its hold on the public imagination”

I recently watched the first season of “The Diplomat“, which I thoroughly enjoyed. In it, one line caught my attention: David Gyasi‘s character, Austin Dennison, says to Keri Russell‘s Kate Wyler: “Perhaps you’re just a decent person in a time when decency has lost its hold on the public imagination.” I completely agree with this statement. This is not to say that people are less decent or kind than before. It’s rather that decency is generally no longer valued or exemplified the way it used to be.

Although quotes about kindness have become popular, it is not encouraged in practice. We would like to believe that being kind is better than being successful, but we know that in our society, success is more important. Perhaps it is so because, contrary to kindness, success is measurable. Thus, kindness is rarely valued, and it is mostly perceived as naivety or weakness.

Morality and etiquette, too, are outdated, as they are associated with a formerly oppressive and rigid system. But it seems the pendulum has, once again, swung too far in the opposite direction, and we have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. In our struggles against an overly hierarchical and stifled society, in favour of an equally exaggeratedly individualist one (as I mentioned in my previous post on current individualism), we have exchanged what was beneficial in our old codes of conduct for personal freedom and success as absolute priorities. Helping others requires energy and time that, according to today’s set of values, you should be spending bettering yourself or being kind to yourself.

In the corporate world, this is particularly noticeable. Regardless of the principles preached in giant tech and entertainment companies, where “brilliant jerks” are supposedly not welcome, the reality is that the said jerks and toxic managers are celebrated, as long as they bring measurable results and exceed KPIs. In this new world, employees are encouraged to act as though they care, but without actually getting involved. The unwritten rule is that your colleagues are supposed to ask you how you’re doing, and you’re expected to reply: “Great! Amazing! Awesome!” But no one is meant to be sincere, or to truly listen. What I have seen is that in the corporate sphere, helping people in need is done by donating money to a charity, and then patting yourself on the back for being such a decent human being. That way, you don’t have to get your hands dirty, and whatever you give is tax-deductible.

All of this differs greatly from the decency that was once taught, albeit as part of a broader set of restrictive rules. The forced “respect for elders”, which I am against as an absolute principle, did however ensure that young people helped the elderly who needed it. The fear of God, however constrictive, did come with rules that demanded charitable actions. I find there is a lack of nuance, which prevents us from perpetuating what was best in our old sets of rules, and combining it with our recently found freedoms. It seems everything has to be one or the other, black or white, good or bad. Perhaps the digitalisation of our planet, built on binary coding, is pushing us to view everything through a binary lens.

When Simon Sinek talked about performance versus trust, he clearly explained why companies should rather seek trustworthy employees, rather than simply high-performing ones. As he says:

“What we end up doing is promoting or bonusing toxicity in our business.”
Simon Sinek (“Trust vs performance)

This is because valuing numbers over human qualities is deeply ingrained in the corporate identity. While our colleagues may give us mugs with inspiring phrases about kindness and empathy, we are taught to avoid what requires energy if there is no guaranteed selfish profit. And though none of this is new, what shocks me today is the massive gap between what we say and what we do. Or rather what we are told and what is expected of us. Indeed, what is shown in ads or company culture is consistently at the opposite of what is actually being rewarded in these environments.

We speak and hear of authenticity, of empathy, of thinking outside the box. And yet, even though companies are now much more tolerant regarding employees’ appearance, if one looks past the diverse hairstyles, tattoos, piercings or other – all of which should express actual individuality (not individualism) – what remains are people who are formatted, similarly to past generations. They have just replaced one set of goals for another, and decency or kindness are not among them.

When I think of these values, I remember an eye-opening awareness campaign on Quebecois television about homelessness. In this ad, a young man was addressing the viewer, saying: “I’m a magician. Watch me, and you will see how I make myself invisible!” Meanwhile, the camera was zooming out, revealing him as homeless. He was greeting the passersby and they were all ignoring him. To me, being decent goes beyond simple propriety. It means having moral standards, having a sense of responsibility towards others. This includes homeless people whom, at the very least, we can establish eye contact with, because this is the most basic and simple way to acknowledge another’s existence. It requires a moment of attention and it means seeing something that we don’t always want to see. But it is one of many tiny, yet significant, steps we can take towards decency and kindness.

*What we are posting is not necessarily what we truly aspire to… (Image by Yuriz on Canva)*

Thankfully, in our own communities of friends and family, we can choose whom to be around, based on shared fundamental values. As individuals, we are usually drawn either to success and wealth, or to kindness and respect. The first is exclusive, while the second is inclusive. Over the decades, I have always chosen the latter.

Some years ago, a friend of mine repeated a quote she had read:

“When I was young, I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people.”
Abraham Joshua Heschel

Despite having always been drawn to artists and brilliant minds myself, not all of whom showed exemplary values or conduct, I have found that Rabbi Heschel‘s quote has become true for me over the years. I am still impressed by great minds and moved by dazzling artists, just as others are drawn to power, money and success. But success, intellect and talent alike, tell us nothing about a person’s kindness, humanity or generosity. In my forties, I find that I am first and foremost drawn to, and admirative of, people who practice kindness, show respect, demonstrate decency. Having such people around you is indeed a wealth that money cannot buy – even if their values are outdated in today’s public imagination.

(Title: taken from S01:E8 of “The Diplomat”, created by Debora Cahn)

“You fought me when I was strong, you despised me when I was weak”

This is a translated line from the 1975 French song “A witch like the others” (“Une sorcière comme les autres”). When I first heard this song, it was this beautiful and deeply sensitive interpretation by wonderful singer, actor and playwright Nathalie Doummar, whom I was lucky enough to know and direct in my debut play “Romano Drom“, and by the equally moving Laëtitia Isambert.

“Une sorcière comme les autres” (written by Anne Sylvestre, sung by Nathalie Doummar and Laëtitia Isambert)

Many things have changed for women since these lyrics were written (you will find them at the end of this text), but a lot of what Anne Sylvestre wrote still applies. Women are still judged, judging themselves and each other, based on archetypes, on what has been projected onto them over centuries.

After watching the brilliant Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie‘s Ted Talk, I recently read her essay “We should all be feminists“, which presented a view of feminism that I am in complete accordance with. In it, she writes:

“I have chosen to no longer be apologetic for my femaleness and my femininity. And I want to be respected in all of my femaleness because I deserve to be.”
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie “We should all be feminists” (4th Estate, 2014)

But when I look around me, I am rather disappointed with what is passed off as feminism or asserting your femininity today. Contrary to Ngozi Adichie, who exudes strength, intelligence, wit and femininity, many of the successful women I see are rather like Sheryl Sandberg than Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche’s TED Talk on why we should all be feminists

When Sheryl Sandberg‘s “Lean in“ came out, it spoke to me, probably because I come from a generation and a continent where we, as women, were still mostly taught that expressing yourself with vigour was incompatible with being feminine. So, being encouraged to “lean in”, speak up and be heard was something I much needed to hear. (You can see her Ted Talk here.) But Sandberg’s message was presenting one type of successful female leadership that I could not recognise myself in. It was somewhat in line with what I had seen in my peers at university in England, back in the days of the Spice Girls. Back then, English female students were often called “ladettes“, and many took pride in this. They saw this as a positive step up from our mothers’ generation, which had had to fight for the right to be heard. The so-called “ladettes” felt that mimicking what I saw as the worst traditionally masculine traits, while wearing short skirts and high heels, was a sign of assertive femininity.

I see Sheryl Sandberg’s model of womanhood as a continuation of this trend. And nowadays I see many more Sheryls than Chimamandas at higher levels of the corporate ladder. When we hear the wishfully empowering, albeit solely self-serving, “You can have it all,” I always wonder at whose expense. Where the Women’s Lib movement dreamed of female solidarity, of women helping each other, this is still quite rare. Especially on the way up the ladder. Like many groups that have been victimised and undervalued, rather than helping each other up, many women push each other down as they try to gain their spot among the gods on Mount Olympus.

Bill Burr makes this point about women competing against each other and seeking men’s approval in this clip,
taken from his show “Bill Burr Live at Red Rocks”

Whether in the personal or the professional sphere, women have a tendency to behave as if there were a limited number of seats for us at the VIP table. This would explain why they continue to scratch each other’s eyes out, rather than unite. And in situations where both a man and a woman are responsible for some form of misbehaviour, if another woman is asked to point the finger, she will likely do so at the woman, rather than the man. I don’t know if this comes from a deep-seated lingering fear of men or from simple force of habit, attacking the perceived weakest opponent. Either way, when a husband cheats, his wife usually goes after the other woman. Likewise, when a man and a woman make mistakes at work, female bosses tend to be harder on their own sex.

My personal experience has been that my male bosses rarely felt threatened by me. Perhaps this was due to the implicit assumption that they were superior – but perhaps not. On the other hand, almost all my female bosses (fortunately with a few notable exceptions!) wanted me to be submissive, and felt threatened as soon as they saw any potential for growth in me, even though I had no wish to take their place. And through various discussions with friends, but also through films we see, I know that I am not an isolated case. After the fairy tales of my childhood (filled with evil stepmothers feeling threatened by their stepdaughters) the first time I saw this dynamic between women portrayed in a movie was in the 1980s “Working Girl“. As I’ve done my fair share of gigs as an assistant over the years, I often remembered this film and realised how little removed it was from the truth.

“Working Girl” trailer (1988)

Contrary to 50 years ago, when a woman speaks her mind outside of extremely conservative circles, it is often women, not men, who comment negatively on her. And this happens as soon as girls hit puberty and start looking like women. Almost overnight, they are perceived as competitors and threats by other women.

And yet, most of my friends are women – but none of them behave like this towards other women. They are as diverse as can be, in terms of personality, appearance or culture. But they all have this in common: they are supportive of each other. They are not against men, nor are they against other women. Most of them are devoted mothers, they care about their work, those who have partners love them. And none of them treat each other as rivals. None rejoices in the others’ misfortunes. I’ve identified the common trait that allows them to be different from the women I described above, and that is actual emotional strength, coupled with strength of character. They are deeply strong women.

*Segment of Tijana Djapovic’s painting “Unfinished stories”* (c) Tijana Djapovic

As strong, empathetic, sensitive women, they do not need to prove their strength by using force, intimidation or manipulation. They do not need to crush others to empower themselves. I have noticed that the only times I’ve been jealous or envious of others has been when I felt weak, unhappy or dissatisfied with myself. So, it turns out that the type of women we often see portrayed in movies as successful, are actually weak. The stereotype of a thriving woman is only after a prestigious job and a diamond ring. She is all about winning, and betrays anyone on her path to reach her goal.

Again, I return to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. In her, I see a new model of women who are strong and charismatic, while being empathetic and supportive. Women who love women without hating men, and who love men without fearing women. When I see my own daughter playing with her girlfriends, I observe how they comfort each other when they are sad, praise each other selflessly, help each other when they are down. Seeing this, I hope that the rising generation of girls will neither be fearful like mine, nor aggressive like the one that followed. Hopefully, these girls will find a golden middle, where there is room for all women – and for men, too.

(Title: Lyrics from “Une sorcière comme les autres” by Anne Sylvestre, 1975.
See translated lyrics below.)

“A Witch Like The Others“

Please

Be like the down

Be like the goose feather

Of yesteryears’ pillows;

I would like

To not be a porter,

Please make yourselves lighter

For I can no longer move;

I have carried you alive

I have carried you as children,

God! How heavy you were

With the weight of your love;

I carried you again

At the hour of your death,

I brought you flowers

Broke down my heart for you;

While you were playing soldiers

I was guarding the house,

With my prayers

I wore down your prison bars;

While you were dying under the bombs

I was searching for you, screaming,

Now I am like a tomb

Filled with all the sadness;

It is only I

It is she or I,

She who speaks or she who keeps quiet

She who cries or she who is merry

It is Joan of Arc or Margot

The Daughter of waves or of streams;

And it is my heart

Or it is theirs,

It is the sister or the stranger,

She who never came

She who came too late,

The daughter of dreams or of chance;

And she is my mother

Or yours,

A witch like the others;

You must

Be like the stream

Like the clear water of the pond

That reflects and waits;

Please

Look at me, I am real,

I implore you, do not invent me

You have so often done it already;

You have loved me as a servant

Have wanted me ignorant,

When I was strong you fought me

When I was weak you despised me;

You have loved me as a whore

Covered in satin,

You have made me into a statue

And always I kept quiet;

When I was old and too ugly

You threw me away with the scraps

You denied me your help

When I no longer served you;

When I was beautiful and submissive

You worshipped me on bended knees,

Here I am as a church

With all the shame underneath;

It is only I

It is she or I,

She who loves or loves not

She who reigns or struggles

It is Josephine or La Dupont

The girl of pearl or of cotton;

And it is my heart

Or theirs,

She who waits at the port

She who stands at the war memorial

She who dances and dies from it

The street girl or the flower girl;

And it is my mother

Or yours,

A witch like the others;

Please

Be as I have dreamed you for so long

Free and strong like the wind;

Free as I am, you see

‘Learn’ me, don’t be afraid

For I know you by heart;

I was the one who waits

But I can walk ahead,

I was the log and the fire

I can be the blaze as well;

I was the goddess mother

But I was only dust

I was the ground under your feet

And I didn’t know it;

But one day the earth opens up

And the volcano has had enough,

The ground breaks and uncovers

Unknown riches inside;

In turn, the sea winds

With unused violence,

Here I am like a wave

You will not be drowned;

It is only I

It is she or I,

And she is the ancestor or the child

She who gives in or defends herself

She is Gabrielle or Eva

Daughter of love or of battle;

And it is my heart

Or theirs,

She who is in her spring

She whom no one expects

It is the ugly one or the beautiful one

The girl of fog or of clear skies;

And it is my mother

Or yours,

A witch

Like the others;

Please, please

Make yourselves lighter

For I can no longer move

https://lyricstranslate.com
Anne Sylvestre, Find the original lyrics in French here

“The 21st Century is all about individualism and freedom”

“Freedom” is a term we hear and use profusely, and it has an a priori positive connotation. The term “individualism”, on the other hand, is more loaded. In Lech Wałęsa’s quote above, he refers to individualism in the positive sense, and in opposition to the harsh measures with which communist rulers suppressed all individual initiatives behind the iron curtain. But this quote reminded me of a recent discussion I had with friends about how isolated and disconnected we feel in most western societies. Even though the standards of living are decidedly higher in the West, we felt that in many ways, the quality of life is higher in the east or the south, and that this was mainly due to the element of community. Regardless of our individual personalities, we all need a community, and when it is absent, we seek it wherever we can find it – even if it is an unhealthy one (e.g. cults, a toxic workplace environment, fanatic religious or extreme political groups).

*Taken from the piece “She Painting” by Tijana Djapovic (c)*

In our supposedly more evolved societies, we rely on the System to take care of our sick, our poor, our elderly. This relatively well-functioning System has unburdened the individual, and has thus allowed us to focus on looking after ourselves – “Looking after Number One”. As I already mentioned in my previous post about the self-help industry, I have noticed a growing trend encouraging us to look within, rather than around us, for solutions to problems and for comfort. I am not entirely opposed to this, as I am introspective by nature and I believe in changing yourself to change a situation’s outcome – or at least your perception of it. But whereas I like the (somewhat overused) quote “Be the change you want to see in the world,” because it inspires taking action and responsibility, it seems to reflect too much of what we now strive for. It is solely focused on individual action and it lacks an addendum, such as the motto: “Unity is strength“.

We are no longer encouraged to unite, to take care of each other. There are countless articles about the mental health crisis, and we are looking to AI to solve this issue (as is explained in this article of the New Yorker), rather than dealing with the root cause of the problem. Instead of focusing on the role played by infoxication, by anxiety-inducing media, or by inequalities, we individualise the problem and isolate the persons suffering. A dismemberment of our communities, which came with industrialisation, also played a significant part in this. Our nuclear families struggle to provide the support system our kids would need to feel that they are not alone. Meanwhile, the parents are dealing with their mental health issues as they try to be the best version of themselves, both at work and at home. This is still especially the case for mothers, who are expected to be successful at work, while being caring and responsible moms, loving wives, and looking like they did in their twenties. Our family structure no longer teaches our young about all of life’s seasons, as they did when households were shared by multiple generations, as in the village I mentioned in my post about interconnectedness.

Going back to the title quote, what we have gained through the individualisation of our societies is indeed much freedom. But there are many kinds of freedom, and they all come at a price. In her short book “Freedom“, Margaret Atwood writes:

“We’re always talking about it, this ‘freedom’. But what do we mean by it? ‘There is more than one kind of freedom (…) Freedom to and freedom from. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are being given freedom from.’ (…) The robin redbreast is safer in the cage: it won’t get eaten by cats or smash into windows. It will have lots to eat. But it will also not be able to fly wherever it likes.”
“Freedom” by Margaret Atwood (Penguin Books, 2018)

Over the last century, we have gained the freedom to study and do the job we want, to live alone or with whomever we want, to dress and speak as we want, go where we want, do what we want. But as we well know, what we want is not always what we need or what is best for us. Living as part of a community requires compromise and limitations to our individual freedom. But in return, it gives us support and solidarity.

Isolation is on the rise, and for people who, like myself, need to communicate, we are more and more dependent on mobile devices to keep these connections alive. As Michael McIntyre reminds us in his stand-up comedy ‘Big Show’, “it wasn’t so long ago (…) we used to not have mobile phones.” He goes on to parody how it would have been if we had, then, been unwilling to leave our house without a phone, maps, photo albums, music records, encyclopaedia, boardgames, as is the case today.

Taken from Michael McIntyre’s “Big Show”

We are dependent on our mobile devices for everything, including communication. Thus, we each walk through life as in a bubble, constantly in touch with our online community, but away from the persons standing next to us. And though some might argue that this critical view of our new reality is generational, I have been hearing similar echoes from young people. The twenty-something British blogger Charly Cox wrote a collection of poetry exclusively on her phone, “Validate me: A life of code-dependency“. In it, she explores how a life lived online liberates us whilst messing us up. In it, she shares her experience of becoming estranged from others and even, at times, from herself. Cox writes about longing for old-fashioned encounters, as opposed to meeting via apps, and about about becoming so used to being identified as her online persona, that she feels like a fraud when looking at her own reflection in the mirror.

I am not against all aspects of the digitalisation of our world. I am grateful for all the apps that allow me to be in touch with family and friends abroad on a regular basis. This used to be extremely expensive, and therefore rare, in my childhood days of landlines. Having video chats allows my daughter and my nephew, growing up in different countries, to have a close relationship. But the great lie we tell ourselves is that this is good enough. Having friends and family around, socialising cross-generationally, being surrounded by people to rely on when facing big or small crises, is worth much more than we think. And our era of over-interconnectedness online does go with a growing sense of isolation offline.

*Even when together, we are each in a bubble (image taken from Canva)*

I remember the countless conversations I used to have with strangers in cafés or bars, because we weren’t glued to our mobile phones. Some were less interesting than others, but the feeling of loneliness described by young Charly Cox wasn’t there. And every once in a while, I would meet very interesting people that way, too. Today, when sitting by myself in a café, if I’m not writing in my notebook or reading a book, I, too, take out my phone to send messages to loved ones or read some article online. We convince ourselves that exchanged messages via Whatsapp make us feel like we’re with our friends and family. But the emotional component is not the same as a face-to-face conversation, even with a complete stranger. And although this tendency has spread to south-eastern regions of Europe, the sense of community is still stronger there than it is here, in the West.

In James Cameron’s “Titanic”, the first-class passengers were caricatured as cold and unemotional, in contrast to the spontaneous, fun-loving, warm-hearted third-class travellers. Our current reality reminds me of this, in that north-western wealthier countries appear to have traded in solidarity, community and warmth for financial stability, security and individual freedom. When weighing the pros and cons of potentially moving to a south-eastern European country, I cannot say with certainty that one of these two models is better than the other. I don’t know which of these I would rather raise my child in. There is much to be said for security (or even the illusion thereof), opportunities for a career, living in a functional system. But kids, who are still so closely connected to their emotions, dream of a big family and a community to be a part of, and I do believe that such a community can be an antidote for many a mental health issue, for children and adults alike.

“Titanic” party scene in the Third Class

For now, I remain where I am, because we have built a small community around us, made up of kids from my daughter’s school and their parents, who have become friends over time. We all manage to gather outside for ice cream and drinks on sunny Fridays, as our way to say “TGIF!”, while we chat and our kids play – and only rarely do we take out our phones. But for most of my friends, who are foreigners and live in other neighbourhoods, it has been hard to make and keep friends here. We are all busy in our homes, working (remotely), taking care of our kids, communicating with our loved ones abroad, exercising when we can, and then collapsing in front of a movie. And most of these activities involve screens which, by definition, are flat. Hence, we spend most of our time pretending that a flat surface can fulfil needs in a similar way to the three-dimensional universe we see on it. But our bodies and minds are slowly telling us otherwise, and so it is time to look for a new way forward, because going backwards is not an option.

(Title quote by Lech Wałęsa)

“Don’t be afraid to give up the good to go for the great”

Why settle for “good” when you could have “great”? Why lead a “good enough” life when you could have an “amazing” one? Instead of being “just you”, should you not strive to be “the best you can be”?

Just as the fear of missing out (FOMO) is built on the presumption that something fantastic and unmissable is going on, and you’re missing it, we are often brought to believe that we should lead extraordinary lives. Every day. In this decidedly consumerist culture, we are taught that it is our duty to ourselves to reach our highest potential and squeeze every last drop of this thing called life. And while I was an early fan of motivational quotes way back in my student days, in my forties I find these slogans that are used to inspire often end up having the opposite effect in the long run.

For about a decade now, the number of quotes people wear on their tote bags, shirts, caps, or even on their skin, has exploded. With these taglines, we either want to remind ourselves how great we could be or should feel, or we want to display how we wish others to perceive us. I see the good in this mass self-motivation and daily reminder to be grateful. Sometimes, these little sentences do inspire action or make us dream big. But I also see the hidden devil in them. I’ve seen how company cultures have turned these generic quotes into company mottos. The resulting atmosphere is one of “forced happiness”, where I found smiling masks covering unshed tears of frustration and the unspoken denunciation of injustice. A “dictatorship of happiness” is still a dictatorship, and thus leaves little room for individuality or diversity, despite what is advertised.

(Motivational quotes found on Canva)

“Make the most of every day”, “Believe in yourself, and anything is possible”, “Be all that you can be”* – these are good goals to have, in theory. But life is not theoretical, nor are we robots that can utilise time and each beating of our hearts to make sure we never skip a single beat. In the past, I’ve tried to implement the rules and guidelines shared in some self-improvement books or talks. Sometimes I succeeded, sometimes I didn’t. But over time, I found that I was growing tired of them. Endeavouring to constantly be happy, to perform, to be the “best version” of myself at all times felt unnatural.

(The comedic “de-motivational” life coach Self-Help Singh says: “Not every bad day can become a good day.”)

Real life means that, even though I do try to appreciate every moment I share with the people I love, sometimes they get on my nerves. And whereas I value financial stability, I sometimes want to be unreasonable and enjoy the present moment with a bottle of champagne or an impromptu weekend in London. Sometimes, life is just life. Sometimes, putting some projects back on the shelf doesn’t mean you’ve given up on all your dreams. And even when you want to appreciate life completely, you will have off days. As a friend of mine, who lived through the war in Bosnia, once told me: even when you’ve stepped over dead bodies and thought you’d never have a normal life again, when you finally do, you still get upset about something as frivolous as a girl you like not calling you back.

We are only human. And that’s OK. We are allowed to be tired, upset, sad or any of those emotions deemed “negative”. And we must also allow ourselves to want to just curl up under a blanket and watch movies. Which is why, where there once was a calendar with motivational quotes on my wall, there is now a calendar by the brilliant and hilarious Rosie Made A Thing, who celebrates the absurdity of modern life.

Some of Rosie’s humorous creations (www.rosiemadeathing.co.uk)

Another woman who has addressed the beautiful and terrible absurdity of life is Kate Bowler. I came across her Ted Talk on how battling stage 4 cancer impacted her belief system. Her talk stood out because there was no big inspirational quote at the end of it, no universal lesson about living life to the fullest. So I bought her book “Good enough, 40ish devotionals for a life of imperfection“. In it, she covers an incredibly broad spectrum of situations in our everyday lives that cannot be solved with a single sentence. She talks about mourning our future selves (the ones we dreamed we’d become, but didn’t), about doing things for no reason whatsoever (because not everything has to be productive to be worthwhile), and much more. Her wisdom and the non-judgmental way in which she embraces the diverse nature of humanity is both comforting and inspiring.

Kate Bowler’s Ted Talk “‘Everything happens for a reason’ – and other lies I’ve loved”

Bowler talks about the hyper-instrumentalisation prevalent in our cultures, in which everything has to have a purpose. Laughing in the face of life’s absurdity is also about acceptance. Accepting that there is no guaranteed reward for good deeds, nor is there necessarily everlasting happiness if you “just love yourself enough”. As time goes by, what I see in the self-help industry’s constant production of the new “Secret” is a search for simple answers to complex questions. We want to take shortcuts to reach our goals. But happiness is not a destination you can reach and settle into. Life is unpredictable. Manifesting your dream life, dream job, dream partner, child or planet will not necessarily make them real. Therefore, some of your efforts or focus not paying off are not signs of your shortcomings. They are signs of life being just what it is.

The greatest quality I see in the personal growth, positive-thinking trend is that it allowed us to take back some of the power we had reserved for God or fate. Whether or not there is a God, humans should hold some of the power and responsibility for their own wellbeing. However, like the superlatives flooding the American (English) language today, having replaced “good enough” with “totally amazing”, the former ambition of having SOME power is now the belief that we can have ALL of it. This excludes the many factors in life that are wholly beyond our control.

*The slogan on the supermarket bag reads “Act today to have a better life tomorrow”. Photo of a homeless Romani woman taken by Eric Roset (c)*

Likewise, the individualisation of our societies implies that all problems should be solved by the individual. And this means that we alone are at fault if we are not sublimely happy or incredibly successful. While the concept of “self-help” was born out of workers unions’ efforts to empower the workers (as is explained in the video posted below), it is doing the exact opposite today. It is taking societal problems (wage gaps, systemic racism, gender inequalities, mass pollution) and convincing us that we should fix these at an individual level. After all, if Oprah made it to stardom and wealth, there is no limit to what each of us can do… or is there?

A critical view of the self-help industry and facts about its origins

Hence, as growing numbers of people wear motivational quotes as fashion items, ever fewer take to the streets to protest against social and economic failures of the system we live in. Not just because we have lost faith in the effectiveness of these measures today, but also because we are convinced that we must change what we can by our lonesome. As for the rest, we can share our frustration on social media to combat the feeling of powerlessness in the face of ever-present injustice.

Still, a lot of good can come out of this personal growth trend. As always, it is all a matter of dosage, perspective and expectations. As individuals, where we feel there is a need for improvement, we should indeed try to change what we believe we can – with the knowledge that we will sometimes succeed and sometimes not. On the other hand, in order to identify which of our problems are part if a wider societal problem, we should remain informed of what goes on around us, communicate with others, remain connected beyond social media. In this manner, we will soon find that there are harmful side effects to the system we’ve been living in for decades, which cannot be solved merely at an individual level. We can each do our part to recycle, shop local, fair-trade and organic, do our best to preserve a healthy work-life balance, take care of ourselves and our families. However, all our efforts will not suffice to prevent industrial pollution, the extreme inequalities between the Northern and Southern hemisphere, nor the rapid polarisation of our societies. There, I believe that we must join collective movements that will have a significant political and economic impact. There are thousands of such budding collective initiatives, and some will come to grow and become influential over time.

I do believe that change is coming. It is as slow as it has always been, but it is coming. I also see some of my peers questioning the self-help movement and its consequences on mental health and collective action.

A first step in the right direction may be to accept that not everything is as we dreamed it would be, but that it’s not any less worthy. Another might be to start thinking of realistic solutions for our societal problems, and use those supposed “universal laws of attraction” – or perhaps more rationally just our personal network – to build a critical mass towards an improvement of the system we live in. For the benefit of the greatest number this time, not just for our individual selves, nor only for the ones at the top.

* (“Be all that you can be” is also the US Army’s slogan)

(Title: Quote by John D. Rockefeller)

“Dripping Water hollows out Stone”

The quote “Dripping water hollows out stone, not through force but through persistence” is often used to inspire consistent action for change. However, it can be seen from another angle, namely the slow and consistent process of victimisation.

We have probably all, at one point or another in our lives, been victimised, and we may also have victimised someone ourselves. For my part, I was bullied by classmates at school, then later by my boyfriend and then again by my boss. And yet, I am by no means subdued, submissive or any of the common stereotypes about bullied individuals. On the contrary, I have always had a strong personality, I am outspoken and extroverted, communicative and enthusiastic. But none of us are ever just one thing. And so, while I flourish in a welcoming environment, I shrivel in the face of aggression.

Like most victims of bullying, I only blamed myself at first. I then went on to solely blame my bully, pulling myself out of the equation. Finally, I realised that both parties play a role in this power game. The fault, I believe, still lies solely with the bully, even if they are often themselves former victims of bullying. Nonetheless, bullying rests on dynamics between two or more people, who all play a part in it. Blaming the tormentor will not help the sufferer in the long run, but I think that understanding the dynamics which turn self-confident adults into self-doubting children can be helpful. The question is: how does one person take away the power from another without the use of force or threat thereof?

If bullying is a power game, manipulation is its motor, and whether it happens at the level of the individual or the group, it can only be effective when it is slow and gradual. No wife beater ever attacked their partner at their first encounter, nor did Nazi leadership expose its true goals to the masses as they initially ran for election. Like propaganda, any manipulation functions as a poison you slowly and unwittingly ingest every day. Before you realise it, your sense of self has shifted or crumbled. The impact of verbal and psychological abuse is indeed like dripping water on stone: the constant repetition of a message over time impacts our perception and also self-perception. This slow process is illustrated in one of my favourite films, George Cukor’s classic “Gaslight”, in which Joseph Cotton’s character Brian Cameron reveals to Ingrid Bergman’s Paula Alquist at the end:

“You’re slowly and systematically being driven out of your mind.”

_{– “Gaslight” (Dir. George Cukor, Screenplay by John Van Druten, Walter Reisch, John L. Balderston ; Based on, “Gas Light” 1938 play by Patrick Hamilton)}

This scene shows an already self-doubting and weakened Paula (Ingrid Bergman)
blatantly manipulated by her husband, Gregory (Charles Boyer) in Cukor’s 1944 “Gaslight”.

The film is based on a play that inspired the term “gaslighting“, used to refer to a specific type of manipulation where the manipulator is trying to get someone else to question their own reality, memory or perceptions. Thus, day after day, the bullies insidiously isolate their victim, question their worth while feigning, or even believing, they care about the victim’s welfare. More often than not, the bullies feel they are justified in their actions. When they don’t see themselves as victims, they believe they are helping their victims become tougher. Whether male or female, bullies generally mistake toughness for strength, which is still common in the workplace, at school, and in the personal sphere. A bullied child is often simply branded as “too sensitive”, and a bullied adult is commonly advised to seek therapy for him-/herself, rather than being encouraged to flee or stand up to their bully.

As a great believer in the premise that we always have a choice in life, I am baffled by this feeling of powerlessness that comes with being bullied. Like Jean-Paul Sartre, I like to believe we always have a choice as to how to act, or even whether to act. Even when the outcome is inevitable, even when death is staring us in the face, we can still choose how we reach our final destination. As Jimmy Cliff sang in the 1970s Jamaican movie “The harder they come”:

“I’d rather be a free man in my grave, than living as a puppet or a slave.”

_{– “The Harder They Come” (Lyrics by Jimmy Cliff)}

Jimmy Cliff’s song from the film “The Harder They Come” (dir. Perry Henzell, 1972)

How come, then, do so few victims of bullying stand up to their bullies or flee? This question was raised in a very different context by István Szabó and Israel Horovitz in the 1999 historical drama “Sunshine” about a Jewish Hungarian family. In one scene, Ivan Sors (Sonnenschein), having survived a labour camp, shares with his uncle Gustav that he and 2000 other inmates watched his father slowly be killed, but could do nothing to stop it. To this, Gustav indignantly asks: “How could 13 guards hold back 2000 people?”

Perhaps this question had something to do with the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, which proved that resistance to the Nazis by Jewish communities did happen, albeit unsuccessfully. One of the few survivors of this uprising, Marek Edelman, said:

“It was a defensive action. We fought simply not to allow the Germans alone to pick the time and place of our deaths.”

_{– Marek Edelman}

The real question is why this was so exceptional. How come entire populations were rendered powerless, in much the same way a bullied individual feels? The very same people would not have behaved the same way a mere decade earlier, so what is it that chips away at our defences until we are helpless?

I looked at several psychology studies to better understand how masses could be turned into either ruthless killers or helpless victims. The famous Milgram Experiment on obedience to authority figures showed that a majority of people would obey authority figures, even when instructed to perform acts conflicting with their own conscience. As we see in our everyday lives, when the burden of responsibility is lifted from the individual, most can be manipulated to abandon their values, morality, and even humanity. Thus, one element of response to how victims are left unshielded by their bullies or offenders is the uncontested rule of authority.

I found another element in the Stanford Prison Experiment, which simulated a prison environment, where the participants were divided into guards and prisoners. After six days, the experiment was cut short due to the increasingly brutal psychological abuse of the “prisoners” by the “guards”. This experiment illustrates how being granted power with little or no accountability awakens a propensity to harm others. On the other end of the power balance, when stripped of their rights and individuality, most people will be rendered powerless and submissive, even if they would not be so under different circumstances.

Trailer of “The Stanford Prison Experiment” (dir. Kyle Patrick Alvarez, 2015), based on the actual experiment

And then, of course, there is fear, this very powerful instrument in the victim-bully dynamics. Totalitarian leaders, authoritarian bosses, the media, as well as domestic abusers, all have this in common: they use fear to mould and subjugate. But while gaslighting an individual requires isolating the victim to achieve this goal, large-scale indoctrination requires the opposite, namely the individual’s inclination to conform to a collectivity. The Asch Conformity Experiments showed that a majority of people will at least partially conform to the group, even against their own beliefs or better judgment. In view of this, should we not ask ourselves how many of us would dare to speak up in a room full of people we disagree with?

I’ve been trying to understand these dynamics for decades, and this quest for answers has helped me. Still, some questions have remained unanswered for me. Although I have very little respect for the silent conformist majority that, like sheep, goes along with anything a loud-mouthed leader says, I can see why this flock of followers act the way they do. They are afraid to go against the flow and be ostracised. Although I despise this cowardice, I can understand it. But those I still cannot understand are the bullies themselves. As most of them have been bullied before becoming bullies, I do not comprehend how they can inflict the pain they have known on others. And yet, many are those who thoughtlessly repeat the patterns they recognise, mistaking ruling by fear for character strength.

Fortunately, just as grass can grow through concrete, there are former victims of bullying who will tap into their own emotions to connect with other victims, to empathise and even empower them. Growing up, I have seen former victims of bullying or discrimination choose this path which, in turn, inspired me to do the same.

Being excluded by my class bully and her minions at school led me to identify with discriminated communities. This motivated me to found a non-profit organisation and a festival dedicated to Romani cultures and history, informing a broader audience of the exclusion and racism faced by Roma worldwide. Being shut out as a foreigner drove me to chair the International Students Committee at University in the UK, to help create a supportive community. Being bullied also forced me to question how I raise my daughter, which inspired me to write a children’s book about bullying in primary school.

Cover of the children's book "Leona, My new school" by Ljuba Radman and Tijana Djapovic.
(All rights reserved) — *Cover of the children’s book I wrote about Leona, who gets bullied at school*.
*Text and story: Ljuba Radman, illustrations: Tijana Djapovic (c)*

Though my childhood scars did not prevent me from being bullied later on in life, they have helped me develop empathy with others and become an advocate for inclusion and equity. Likewise, this experience has taught me to truly value human kindness for the great treasure that it is.

Oversimplifying the vast issue of victimisation would be a mistake, since these human interactions are extremely complex. Regardless of our best intentions, we all carry the weight of our past, which can taint our behaviour and the way we communicate with each other. But I do think we need to strive to remain critical and introspective, while developing honest communication channels, so that we can continue to grow, both through nurture and pain.

(Title: Quote by Ovid)