What can we learn from the principles of feminism that might improve care for our patients – of any gender? How can psychiatry address its historically difficult relationship with women, and what can we, as mental health professionals, consider doing differently in our everyday work? We discuss what psychiatrists might learn from the work of feminist theorists, and what we can do as a profession to create a feminist psychiatry. This includes acknowledging and owning our troubled history, pressing for gender-sensitive mental healthcare, promoting trauma-informed care that is focused on the importance of developing collaborative therapeutic relationships and improving our ability to listen.

Modern regulatory frameworks assume that the phenomena they govern are knowable: harms can be identified, probabilities estimated and risks balanced against benefits. This article argues that this assumption becomes unstable when applied to genuinely novel technologies. Drawing on Frank Knight’s distinction between risk and uncertainty, it contends that contemporary EU digital regulation – particularly the EU AI Act, alongside the Digital Services Act and the GDPR – applies the form of risk-based analysis to domains where the necessary epistemic foundations are absent. These regimes borrow models developed for pharmaceuticals and environmental regulation and extend them to technologies whose future effects remain deeply uncertain. The article traces the historical development of risk-based regulation, examining both its virtues and structural limitations. It argues that such frameworks systematically marginalize diffuse, long-term and structural harms, while delegating assessment to regulated entities thus creating incentives for conservative self-evaluation. It then explores decision-making under deep uncertainty (DMDU) as a source of alternative regulatory approaches, including adaptive and precautionary techniques. Finally, the article argues that risk assessment is inherently political, embedding normative choices that risk-based methodologies often obscure rather than resolve.

We aimed to comprehensively assess Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infections, examining their incidence and clinical and microbiological characteristics in a tertiary hospital between 2021 and 2023. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and desirability-of-outcome ranking (DOOR). S. maltophilia incidence rose from 0.38 in 2017 to 2.66 cases/1000 patient-days in 2023, correlated with carbapenem consumption (rho = 0.90, p = 0.04). The cohort included 101 patients (median age of 61 years, IQR 43–71); 63% were male patients, 91% admitted in ICU, predominantly with lower respiratory tract infections (75%). Difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) was identified in 14% of the isolates and associated with previous trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole (TMP–SMX) use (aOR 23.15, 95% CI 3.67–145.77). Thirty-day mortality was 25% and associated with invasive mechanical ventilation (aOR 5.80, 95% CI 1.03–32.63), while appropriate definitive therapy was protective (aOR 0.01, 95% CI <0.01–0.16). Worse DOOR outcomes were associated with levofloxacin-resistant isolates (69.3%, CI 55.9%–80.9%) and inappropriate definitive treatment (81.1%, 95% CI 68.2%–90.8%). Overall, S. maltophilia has emerged as a relevant carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria, with a high frequency of DTR phenotypes associated with previous TMP–SMX exposure. Appropriate therapy and levofloxacin susceptibility were linked to better outcomes.

In Employment Division v. Smith (1990), the U.S. Supreme Court held that neutral and generally applicable laws would no longer receive strict scrutiny review. Many feared that Smith had severely truncated the protection of the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause. Three years later, however, in a controversial Santerian slaughtering case, Douglas Laycock persuaded a unanimous Supreme Court in Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah to highlight an important limitation on the Smith neutrality standard. Both “masked as well as overt” government hostility, targeting, or discrimination against religion are constitutionally “suspect,” Lukumi made clear. Recent Supreme Court free exercise cases have emphasized this limitation. Over the past decade, the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union are replaying the same story that played out in the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1980s and 1990s and have gradually weakened their religious freedom provisions into a guarantee of government neutrality alone. In their most recent cases, these pan-European high courts have upheld blatantly discriminatory regulations of Muslim and Jewish ritual slaughtering, favoring animal welfare over religious freedom. These courts need to take a lesson from Laycock’s argument in Lukumi that neutrality requires states not to take sides for or against religion and not to uphold laws that have the mere pretense of neutrality while targeting the core practices of religious minorities.

The text explores ‘Black Box Music,’ an artistic research experiment investigating human–technology relations in musical improvisation. The authors describe performances in which each musician plays an unfamiliar, complex, custom-built instrument designed by another team member. These ‘black box’ devices – ranging from AI-based systems to assemblages of analogue devices – cannot be fully understood or controlled, thus foregrounding questions of agency, sense-making, and aesthetic experience. Drawing on Actor-Network Theory, phenomenology, and philosophies of technology, the authors show how performers, instruments, and audience form a dynamic network of actants whose roles and intentions remain ambiguous. Players initially struggle to ‘read’ the instruments’ behaviour, shifting from reactive analysis toward proactive improvisation. This process blurs embodiment and alterity: the instruments alternately function as transparent extensions of the body and as quasi-autonomous others. Such ambiguity invites anthropomorphisation and even ritualised interaction, echoing historical entanglements of music, magic, and spirituality. Audience members, too, encounter indeterminate agency and must negotiate aesthetic meaning without clear attribution of sound to human or machine. The project demonstrates how complexity and unpredictability destabilise traditional notions of control, revealing improvisation as collective, participatory sense-making and highlighting the emergent, co-creative agency of both humans and technological instruments.

Automation anxiety is reshaping British game development at a moment when generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is being positioned as both creative catalyst and labour-displacing threat. Grounded in anthropology and in dialogue with social theory and memory studies, we examine how developers experience ‘life on the edge of time’ in a sector tasked with future-making amid intersecting constraints and expectations. Through ethnographic vignettes, we contend that anxiety operates as a temporal orientation, one that is fundamentally polytemporal: a condition that folds together industry memories of past technological surges, intensifies present pressures, and animates competing projections of what comes next. We show how automation anxiety exceeds individual experience to function as a collective, industry-wide condition, revealing how industry memory operates as both repetition and interpretive resource in moments of technological upheaval. By situating automation anxiety at the intersection of media rhetoric, collective memory, and technological innovation, this article advances a sociocultural account of anxiety as a polytemporal orientation capable of both constraining and catalysing possible futures.