If I could only change one thing about physics education, it would be the phrasing of Newton's 3rd law. According to my copy of Magnificent Principia (by Colin Pask, Prometheus Books, 2013) the "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction..." phrasing is Newton's. And it's been causing confusion ever since.
To get a sense of what Newton really meant, consider the universal gravitation equation:
Notice there are two masses specified, but there is no "source" mass and no "target" mass. And there is only one force produced by this equation. Now, you can look at it as two different forces: $m_1$ attracting $m_2$ and $m_2$ attracting $m_1$. But that is misleading. It gives the impression that the forces somehow have independent existences. But they don't. They are completely, inextricably linked. So much so, that I think it makes much more sense to this of this as one attractive force between two masses.
Coulombs law follows the same format:
Again, you can think of this as two different forces. But I think the equation really hints at a single attractive force (different charge signs) or a single repulsive force (identical charge signs) between two charges.
That is what Newton meant by his third law. It's not possible for $m_1$ to attract $m_2$ without $m_1$ being caught up in the very same force of attraction between the two particles. And it's not possible for $q_1$ to attract or repel $q_2$ without $q_1$ being caught up in the very same force.
This is harder to see with contact forces. Part of the problem is that human muscles must constantly expend energy at a molecular level in order to stay contracted. So it's easy to confuse force exertion with expenditure of energy. And humans have cognition and agency. So to say, "The person pushes on the matchbox and the matchbox pushes on the person" feels wrong because the person is expending energy; the matchbox is not. The person has agency and initiates the push; the matchbox is inanimate.
To get a better feel for Newton's third law, consider yourself in a deep swimming pool where your feet are off the bottom. You're next to the wall. Now push on the wall. What happens? You push yourself away from the wall. The traditional explanation is that you push on the wall, and "the wall pushes back on you." And while that is technically true, it doesn't make intuitive sense because you know darn well that you're the one doing the pushing.
What's really happening is that you create a repulsive force between the wall and yourself. The wall is fixed to the earth and the earth is mighty big and hard to move. So the repulsive force manifests itself in you pushing yourself away from the wall.
When you "push the matchbox," you're really setting up a repulsive force between your finger and the matchbox. (At a molecular level, this is just the Coulomb repulsion, of course.) But you're much more massive than the matchbox. Your weight and the friction between your shoes and the floor essentially fix you to the floor and make you immovable. So the repulsive force manifests itself as the matchbox moving.
Finally, when dealing with forces where one mass (or one charge) is so much larger than the other (such as an apple falling towards the earth) it's very common to ignore that fact that the masses are attracting each other, and to phrase the interaction as if it were just the earth attracting the apple and nothing more. That is an oversimplification. But it's justified by the fact that the attractive force between the two masses is overwhelmingly manifested in the motion of the apple.
In fact, Newton phrased that part well in The Principia,
"The changes made by these actions are equal . . . if the bodies are
not hindered by any other impediments . . . the changes of velocities made towards common parts are reciprocally proportional to the bodies [the masses]."