There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Mrs_deWinter

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Good tips in the comments - although in my experience sometimes it just doesn’t work. I’ve got 3 litter boxes for one cat, they are accessible to him, private, and clean. He still poops on the floor when I’m not at home (or asleep).

Animals can have behavioral issues just like people.

Mrs_deWinter ,

No I’m sorry I don’t get it, what’s the plan here? Shoot at the cops? Threaten the racists with a gun? There must be a better answer to systemic racism than suicide by cop. A blank card with the words “not talking without lawyer present” would probably be a more sensible choice - against cops, not against mountain lions.

Mrs_deWinter ,

https://feddit.de/pictrs/image/62b11fa4-c11c-4025-aa67-8ce7bc8cb90e.jpeg

Mrs_deWinter ,

Psychologically that would be a desaster. People would wear themselves out in an instant, and in 6 months top we’d have a world population suffering from clinical depression.

Mrs_deWinter ,

“Meaningful”, as in, “even if I alone do it this will somehow stop climate change”? Not possible, very obviously.

Meaningful as in “if everyone would adapt that mindset we’d be half way to the solution” - there are many, many options. Vegan diet, fuck cars, use public transport, buy local, vote green (or the closest approximation available), support sustainable companies, less consumerism in general, change your electricity provider, get politically involved, social activism, convince your friends and family…

Pick and chose as many as you want and can and you start becoming part of the solution.

Mrs_deWinter ,

And what would it take to stop those corporations? Individual actions. Be it voting in an election or with your wallet, it’s our society that continues to not only allows those corporations to exist but to grant them every right to do so. The only alternative to a social rethinking would be the violent overthrow of capitalism and an authoritan installation of some alternative. And nobody could seriously want that.

Mrs_deWinter ,

You cannot overthrow capitalism without social rethinking. I mean, you could force people at gunpoint if that sounds like a good plan to you, only then we’d have a capitalisic people that has been told to have every right to overconsume (by people like you, in this thread) for decades.

When you absolve people of their individual responsibility the only way out of capitalism will be by force. Not against corporations, but against the people.

Mrs_deWinter ,

But how do we get those regulations if not, in last consequence, by individual action? Personal responsibility specifically includes the need to vote and get socially and politically involved. We can’t just sit around and tell people to wait if and when the right regulations come along. We together are the people who have to fight for them.

Mrs_deWinter ,

I just checked and: Its actually from france, coming from an opponent of the revolution and is dated 1811.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Obviously we need to be critical about our own history, but with this line of thinking we literally couldn’t condemn anything.

“Slavery? Genocide? Mass rapes? Authoritarian persecution? Oh well, that happened here as well at some point so I guess it’s okay.”

Mrs_deWinter ,

You could totally work with your inner child on that basis. Obviously don’t have to. But just imagining this little version of you and the hardship they had to endure, thinking about what they would have needed from an adult, and imagining yourself being that adult for your imaginative younger self - that would be very much in line with the idea of the technique.

Mrs_deWinter ,

:(

Mrs_deWinter ,

There are cases where psychiatric admission is the right call though. Sometimes it’s literally life saving. Depression isn’t static - it goes up and down, goes loud, goes silent. When you’re deep in a life crisis, when you’re feeling like you’re losing your fucking mind and are actually about to kill yourself those are the places to go to get you over those critical days or weeks to recalibrate and reconsider. I’ve personally spoken to many patients who were completely releived afterwards and glad that there was such a place for them. If the alternative is a lost life, psychiatry is a valid attempt to get better, even if it doesn’t work for everyone.

Of course it’s an even better route to get there by admitting oneself - I just believe the likelihood of that happening depends a lot on how afraid people are of psychiatric clinics. And they do vary of course. I personally still would go though. Before I end my life I guess there wouldn’t be anything to lose anyway.

Mrs_deWinter ,

This may depend on the country but I as a therapist ask everyone anyway. And I’ve experienced many, many people over the years being afraid of speaking up. It’s always a moment of relief when it’s out there and they realize I’m not freaking out over it.

I’ve pretty much heard it all. Including the various ways people try to approach the subject while still unsure how I will react. And I do think that is something you could try if you’re unsure about your therapist - talk to them about your suicidal thoughts and see how they react before you confirm plans or attempts.

Chances are of course they can get quite a bit from your way of talking about it, because you’re definitely not the first person with those thoughts in front of them. The thing is - suicidal ideation is, depending on the type of disorder, quite common. If we’d admitted anyone who thought about suicide to a psych ward immediately they would be bursting at the seams and we’d get nothing done at all. So that’s not happening. As long as you can convincingly agree with your therapist on a plan forward (which could mean: Okay, I promise not to kill myself until next Tuesday) you don’t have to be admitted if you don’t want to. Which also would be an option of course. Psychiatric wards are emergency departments. They are supposed to be there for you when you’re seeing no light at all and in my experience, at least where I live and work, in fact have saved quite a few lifes.

Mrs_deWinter ,

I do think that is true. I’ve worked in a clinic through the whole pandemic, which meant mandatory tests everyday. Cought two asymptomatic infections this way. With the first one I had a very light headache - I would have thought absolutely nothing of it if it weren’t for the test. Second time I’ve got no symptoms whatsoever. I then got it again for round three and that one suuucked.

Who knows how many had it were none the wiser.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Basically, “every opinion I don’t like is a religion.”

Mrs_deWinter ,

It didn’t, at least not in the way you think. The headlines of the past few days show the aftermath of the last decades: industry contracts that were made in the last century and the political heritage of a generation of politicians who are no longer in power.

Coal is being phased out and that’s not changing. It cannot change substantially anyway; there is only so much coal in the gound. Recent political decisions moved to keep most of it there. For technological, political, economical and industry related reasons this won’t be a fast process unfortunately.

One of the roadblocks of our transition to a sustainable energy supply is how much money (and in our capitalisic society, therefore, power) the industry itself holds. Coal lobbies will work hard for you not to think about them too much. Nuclear lobbies will work hard for you to blame those pesky environmentalists. A game of distraction and blame shifting. This thread is a good example of how well it’s working.

Our resources are limited. This is true for good old planet earth as well as our societies. We only have so much money, time, and workforce to manage this transition. And as much as I’d love to wake up tomorrow to a world with PVC on every roof, a windmill on every field, and decentralised storage in every town center, this is just not realistic overnight. We’ll have to live with the fact of our limited resources and divert as much as possible of them towards such a future. (And btw, putting billions of dollars in money, time, and workforce towards a reactor that will start working in 10-30 years is not the way to do this, as much as the nuclear lobby would like you to think that.)

Mrs_deWinter , (edited )

When remembering a stressful experience it’s important not to get stuck in your thoughts.

Most people would be a bit shocked after what you’ve been through. Our brains tend to try to go over things a few times to get a grasp at what happened. Sometimes our thoughts become a movie of the stressful incident that plays on repeat in our thoughts. Try to think further. Remember how you got out of the situation, remember how you got home, remember how you had dinner, remember how you got to bed. And remember: You’re okay, you’re alright, this is all behind you, you did alright, and right now you’re safe and fine.

Try to explicitly think this a few times. At the very least, this is a much more pleasant thought to get stuck on than “fuck, I’m in danger”.

And if it helps: Either distract yourself or tell someone what happened. Both are okay. Just don’t stop at the scary part when telling the tale, always think and tell about it to the point where you were safe again.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Eh. Humans have (confidently and incorrectly) assumed such causal links for millenia. There’s thunder, so there must be a thunder god. There’s a sun in the sky, so someone must have put it there. There’s people, so someone must have build them from clay.

What we could conclude logically: There is something - so something, somehow, once began.

That’s it. It’s also kind of recursive. It’s factual, but there isn’t anything meaningful inevitably following from this.

And everything else is an assumption.

You can say “I chose to believe that this somehow was a someone.” You could decide to believe that there was a personal entity as a single cause for all that is. Someone who had somewhat of a consciousness, who willingly and deliberately created everything. You could assume that this someone was eternal and all-powerful and therefore later on or even until right now still alive/active. You could speculate about this entity being interested in creating a specific planet with a very specific ecosystem. You could ponder whether this entiry would be interested enough in one species within this ecosystem to watch, influence, and even hold something like a relationship with them.

A bit far fetched, but sure. You wouldn’t be the first one to assume all these from a simple “There is a cake”.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Always use the travel lock.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Age of consent in Germany is a staggered system. With 14 you’re able to consent under specific conditions (them being there’s no exploitative element to the relationship), but still could file charge against the older person if they’re over 16. With 16 the first rule still applies; from 18 on you’re able to consent, period.

So for example when I was 14 I had a boyfriend, also 14, and neither of us committed any crime under this ruling. The law acknowledges that teenagers are allowed to have relationships with each other while putting every borderline case through a case-by-case hearing at court.

It’s actually a really good idea, so it kinda is a fun fact.

Mrs_deWinter ,

You can do that at 14 actually.

Mrs_deWinter ,

How I feel does not make reality real.

Nice Freudian slip you’ve got there. How you feel, indeed, does not make your reality real. You keep claiming it’s a scientific fact while rambling about something no professional in the field would ever agree on.

At one point you’ve learned about one aspect of measuring (purely physical) development - the tanner scale - and decided to forever discard everything else. Keep rest assured this is not how the world or science actually works.

Mrs_deWinter , (edited )

After I got diagnosed with some weight related shit, I turned my entire life upside down, am at a much healthier 150 lbs (68ish kg), and feel so much better, both physically and mentally.

Something disillusioning from the field of psychotherapy research: Our best, most interdisciplinary, low-threshold therapeutic strategies allow people to, on average, lose and hold the loss of up to 7-10% of the weight they’ve started with. Which isn’t even enough to get most people out of the obesity range. What you’ve been through is exceptional. By far most people will never manage to lose that much, not even with professional help.

To put it this way: If we look at obesity like a mental disorder it’s one of the hardest to overcome, harder than depression or anxiety.

I get why so many people share your opinion on this, I just feel like it’s missing context. Because sure, physiologically its possible for a depressed person to “just go out more” or an anxious person to “just stop breathing so fast” or an overweight person to “just eat less and move more”, but this is such an oversimplified way to look at how humans work and why they do what they do that is simply stops being correct. Every now and then you’ll meet someone who managed to do all this just like that, but for the vast majority it’s an unrealistic and unfair thing to ask.

Obesity is a chronic disorder and will continue to be until we get better treatments.

Mrs_deWinter ,

You’re stupid for what you’re doing. Physical harm isn’t the only form of serious damage we can do to each other and this should be apparent for everyone having lived this life for more than 5 minutes. You can absolutely destroy a life without even touching a person, and by the nature of society being a common agreement on how we want to live together you absolutely shouldn’t be free to do so.

Mrs_deWinter ,

At the end of the war literal children were being drafted. Are you seriously arguing that we should kill a 13 year old because he got a threatening letter and followed it’s instructions?

Mrs_deWinter ,

The Tanner scale measures sexual development. Nothing else. It has nothing to do with general maturity, it just measures if the external sexual characteristics have come in.

Mrs_deWinter ,

It has been thoroughly debunked.

It has not. Greetings, a psychologist.

Mrs_deWinter ,

But fake meats don’t hurt anyone at all, not even indirectly. With your other examples one could argue that it’s desensitizing to the real thing. But eating seitan instead of meat is a conscious decision that probably even reinforces how unethical it was to begin with to kill an animal for this.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Care for some actual science? You’re making some extraordinary claims with very simplistic statements relating an interdisciplinary, highly complex field of research. There is not one single point in development when maturity is reached, there are different, simultaneous processes involving different aspects of development and maturity.

Searching for Signatures of Brain Maturity: What Are We Searching For?

(…) For the current discussion, the key point is that there is no single progression that encompasses functional maturation. Neural activity intensifies and reduces, varies quantitatively and qualitatively, in linear and nonlinear ways that are both linked to—and independent of—behavioral differences across development. Each of these patterns reflects developmental progress, but the wide range of ‘‘journeys’’ prohibits a simple definition of what emerging brain functional maturity looks like. (…)

Cognitive and affective development in adolescence

(…) As reviewed in the accompanying article by Paus [5] there is growing evidence that maturational brain processes are continuing well through adolescence. Even relatively simple structural measures, such as the ratio of whiteto-gray matter in the brain, demonstrate large-scale changes into the late teen-age years [6–8]. The impact of this continued maturation on emotional, intellectual and behavioral development has yet to be thoroughly studied, but there is considerable evidence that the second decade of life is a period of great activity with respect to changes in brain structure and function, especially in regions and systems associated with response inhibition, the calibration of risk and reward, and emotion regulation. Contrary to earlier beliefs about brain maturation in adolescence, this activity is not limited to the early adolescent period, nor is it invariably linked to processes of pubertal maturation (Figure 1). (…)

Behavioral and Neural Pathways Supporting the Development of Prosocial and Risk-Taking Behavior Across Adolescence

(…) Consistent with prior work showing that risk-taking behavior increases and peaks during adolescence (Gullone et al., 2000; Steinberg, 2007), we found that rebelliousness similarly increases from early adolescence to late adolescence before declining into adulthood. Research on the development of prosocial behavior however is mixed (for an overview, see Do et al., 2017). We observed a quadratic effect of age on a broad measure of prosocial behavior, peaking in mid-to-late adolescence, suggesting that, like rebelliousness, prosocial development follows a nonlinear age pattern that converges during late adolescence, although future studies should test if different age patterns are observed for different domains within prosocial behavior (such as helping and donating behavior). Our findings converge on the hypothesis that the development of rebellious and prosocial tendencies peak during late adolescence relative to earlier or later ages (Do et al., 2017), thus highlighting late adolescence as both a window of vulnerability and opportunity (…)

Mrs_deWinter ,

has convinced people that everyone under 25 is a retard

But this follows from none of those papers. You have simply no clue what you’re talking about.

I’m absolutely in favor of letting young adults live their lives and participate in society. Give them the right to vote, let their voices be heard. Give them the opportunities they need and want. You’re arguing against a strawman if you think I am against any of those. But your original claim is simply false. There are differences between people with 20 and 40, and a much bigger difference between 16 and 40. That doesn’t mean we should infantilize 16 year olds, but in certain aspects treating them the same will simply be unfair to the teenager. We have juvenile laws for a reason. And the recommendation to wait with smoking until the early 20s isn’t simply meant to annoy young people either.

If you’d stop looking at this from your over emotional point of view and read up on some actual research for a few minutes you could see that everything else you’ve implied has nothing to do with the topic.

If actual scientists however are nothing but “some morons” for you, you’re simply incorrigible and ever conversation with you over this is pointless.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Well, and if you’re not trying to imply that we are at peak cognitive ability at the age of 13 (and I at least hope you don’t believe that) this should be hint number one for you that the way you think maturity works is probably wrong.

It also shows me that you didn’t even read the short excerpts I provided for you. Here, again:

Searching for Signatures of Brain Maturity: What Are We Searching For?

(…) For the current discussion, the key point is that there is no single progression that encompasses functional maturation. Neural activity intensifies and reduces, varies quantitatively and qualitatively, in linear and nonlinear ways that are both linked to—and independent of—behavioral differences across development. Each of these patterns reflects developmental progress, but the wide range of ‘‘journeys’’ prohibits a simple definition of what emerging brain functional maturity looks like. (…)

Or another quote from that paper:

(…) Measures of widespread brain connectivity shift in complex ways from childhood to adulthood, characterized by reductions in local connections and rises in distributed connections. These connectivity-based shifts are thought to reflect a brain that is becoming more efficient in its in-network communication and more integrated in its cross-network communication (…)

Since you seem confident in your grasp of the topic I guess those two should answer your question.

Mrs_deWinter ,

*says that teenagers are adults, claims scientific facts with no source whatsoever

You have veered off into totally irrelevant nonsense about neural pathways.

Lol.

We get adult brains along with our adult bodies during puberty. That is scientific fact.

Ha, good one. Your alternative science doesn’t quite fit the actual scientific papers I quoted for you earlier. Weird, right?

But okay, I think now I understand the reason why you can’t understand the concept of maturity. Quite obvious, now that I think about it.

Have a nice day!

Mrs_deWinter ,

It would be equally valid to claim that pubic hair, or menstruation, or any other adult trait is the only one that matters.

This is exactly what you’re proposing by claiming that the Tanner Scale is the only determinant. Like really, exactly this. It’s beautiful how you’re debunking yourself.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Do you know how many factors are considered when calculating the Tanner Scale?

Do you?

  1. Male genital size
  2. Female breast size
  3. Pubic hair

That’s it.

Mrs_deWinter ,

But what good would it have done? Those boys were victims themselves.

Mrs_deWinter ,

I read the whole thread and didn’t see a single argument about what good would have come from that. I think you’re looking at this from a very removed point of view that lets you forget the actual individuals involved. I’m German. Let me introduce you to my grandparents and let’s see how they would’ve fared under your proposed processing:

  • Grandpa A was drafted at the end of the war, he was 13. He didn’t want to be there and plotted a “genius” plan with his two buddies two lie to his general about a super important mission from the general next town and run off. He probably only survived that because his general wasn’t in the mood to shoot him on the spot.
  • Grandma B wasn’t drafted obviously, she worked in (basically) social services while WWII because she actually was a supporter of the Nazi party and felt like that’s how she could do her part. She didn’t commit any atrocities, probably simply because as a woman she never got anywhere close to the front.
  • Grandpa C was a party member. He didn’t want to join at first – we still own a news paper page where he (and a few others) were openly shamed for refusing to join party and front. After his brother, who had turned down an SS position, was transferred to an extra risky combat unit as cannon fodder and died on his second day, he caved. I can only assume that, as a soldier, he actively participated in the fighting. He tried to disobey where easily possible, but he didn’t desert. When his general told him to “take care” of a woman he abused, he brought her away from the front, pointed her to the nearest town and told her to flee.
  • Grandma D didn’t do any of that, but she was proudly engaged to a Hitler Youth leader (who thankfully died, so she met my grandpa after the war). While WWII she absolutely was a Nazi, but she didn’t actively do anything that would mark her as such. She got into a personal crisis after the war when she stopped lying to herself about this horrible system she had supported. Until the day she died she was convinced she would go to hell.

Killing every active supporter, as you suggested, would have both my grandpas executed, although they both condemned what was happening and, limited by their sparce abilities to do so, tried to disobey. My grandmas would’ve ironically been spared, even though they were (when it comes to their attitude) more Nazis than my grandpas. Neither of the four were Nazis at later points in their life, I’d like to add. And the generation after them would have never existed - an anti-nationalistic, anti-patriotic, highly political, highly critical and socially active family, influenced by traumatized men and rueful women.

So it would have achieved nothing. I’d argue the world would be even worse if that would have been humanity’s answer to WWII back then.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Or maybe you’re just misunderstanding what veganism is abiut in the first place.

Some people (mostly non-vegans) seem to believe it’s about blindly and thoughtlessly abstaining from animals products. That’s how veganism might look like from the outside but it’s not actually what it’s about at it’s core. That would be to avoid all unnecessary suffering. Vegans are for example aware that the farming of plants does indeed cause animal deaths. But we can’t avoid those without starving. So it’s not unnecessary. And still vegan.

Within the same logic if someone, for whatever reason, would need meat to survive he could consume it still within the same ethical framework. And theoretically that could be vegan. The thing is: For 99.9% of people it’s BS that they need meat. So obviously in the vast majority of cases it wouldn’t be vegan, just a hypocrite lying to themselves.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Did you seriously look at the FAQ of the vegan society, picked something that confirmed your preestablished opinion, and ignored the sentence right before it?

Here, let me show the whole quote:

What does it mean to be vegan?

A vegan lifestyle involves living a life that is more compassionate towards animals and the environment. The precise definition of veganism is:

“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude – as far as is possible and practicable – all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”

You just have a very superficial view of veganism. Just ask yourself this: Why abstain from animals products? What is the intention of a vegan lifestyle? You’ve claimed that a nuanced application would have “made a religion”, but the opposite is true. It would be a religion if we’d blindly apply a rule of conduct without any considerations. Which we don’t, as you will see all over the vegan society’s website. Just check what they write about animal products in medication. They are absolutely clear how a vegan lifestyle should work: “As far as is possible and practicable.” An important principle that practically every single vegan out there knows and lives by.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Back on reddit I was active in a psychology sub with a “no self help questions” rule. This was in place because the mods said we have no way of any kind of quality control relating the answers you might get. This is the internet, and some jerk will probably feel empowered giving harmful advice or straight up advocating pro suicide to be extra edgy. There was, however, an automod providing actual self help hotlines and websites from basically all around the world. While I tend to agree that Lemmy wouldn’t be my platform of choice when it comes to actual mortal danger (like in the case of severe suicidal ideation) I feel like we could benefit from something like that over here.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Meine Stimme kriegt das Technologie-Thema.

Klar, Vögel wären süß und Natur hübsch. Aber haben wir mehr Vögel oder schönere Natur als sonst wo auf der Welt? Für mich steht Europa am ehesten für eine unglaubliche Vielfalt und Fortschrittlichkeit der Ideen. Das repräsentiert zu sehen würde mir richtig gut gefallen.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Was ich bei all diesen Videoschnipseln (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube Shorts) einfach nicht begreife: Wieso kein Lautstärke-Button? Warum zum Teufel wird das Produkt besser mit weniger Einstellungsmöglichkeiten?

Ich bin einfach immer irgendwie genervt von diesen Formaten. Also schau ich sie nicht. Youtuber die nur noch Shorts machen werden eben deabboniert oder konsequent ausgeblendet, und Seiten ohne longform Videos nutze ich nicht.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Ich hatte ein ganze Zeit lang eine Extension, die Shorts automatisch ausgeblendet hat. Dann haben sich die Datenschutzeinstellungen der Erweiterung geändert und sie wollte plötzlich “alle Daten auf allen Websites lesen und ändern”, und da war ich dann raus.

Natürlich ist es super, dass es diese Add-Ons gibt, mit denen man die Verschlimmbesserungen der Websites korrigieren kann, aber lieber wäre mir einfach wenn die Funktion nicht so dämlich implementiert wäre - weil ich dann nämlich nicht ganz so sehr das Gefühl hätte, dass YouTube einfach seine User verarscht.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Und genau das ist ja irgendwie das Problem an third-party Lösungen: Wäre YouTube nicht so benutzerunfreundlich müsste man gar nicht erst sein Vertrauen und potentiell vollständige Kontrolle über sämtliche Websitendaten den Entwicklern einer anderen Software schenken.

Kann schon sein, dass die Berechtigungen notwendig sind, aber ohne mich technisch super gut damit auszukennen fühlt sich das für mich ziemlich unkalkulierbar an. Vor der Änderung dieser Berechtigungen hats nämlich auch funktioniert.

X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, has threatened to sue a group of independent researchers whose research documented an increase in hate speech on the site since it was purchased (apnews.com)

Twitter is threatening legal action against the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a nonprofit that researches hate speech and content moderation on social media platforms....

Mrs_deWinter ,

Not to mention how it starts with

“We write in response to the ridiculous letter you sent our clients on behalf of X Corp.”

They are not taking any BS. I love it.

Mrs_deWinter ,

Personally I think that if they really believe they have a message to the Muslim priests that they should then go to the Muslim priests in the middle east and burn the books, instead of hiding behind “freedom of speech” in a safe country.

The message is “this is allowed here, and it will stay that way”. There would be no message doing it in a country without free speech, only violence.

I’m not saying I like that they did it, but I definitely want to live in a society where it’s allowed to do so. There is no place in a modern society for relics. If people want to worship a book that’s their private decision and should be without consequence for the rest of society.

Mrs_deWinter ,

If people want to fight a book that’s their private decision and should be without consequence for the rest of the society.

It is. That’s why it isn’t prosecuted. The government doesn’t care if you eat, burn, or bury a Bible. As it should be.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •