Okay I have read all the comments here. I am from NUJS, and can tell for certainity that GNLU has surpassed NUJS 2 years back in all aspects. Just that the students of my Uni are not being able to digest this fact and ACCEPT it. Go for GNLU, it is soon going to be amongst the Top-3 NLUs

Wait for the 2036 Olympics, cupcake. Ahmedabad will become a first-world city and GNLU will be more sought after than even NLSIU. In any case, Mumbai and Bengaluru are unliveable now. The infrastructure is just terrible and slum dwellers have taken over the city, especially Mumbai.

Have any of you watched the recent Tarun Nangia Mohit Saraf interview? It has so many awe inspiring moments - let's share the parts that moved us, and together get inspired! - https://tinyurl.com/bdfucn39

I’m sorry you have no arguments left but your condescension. Please point to a story on reduxx that is False. I’ve explained why reduxx was created - it’s so these crimes which were previously reported as womens crimes or not reported at all - and their victims - see some light of day. You keep telling me not to read it- it is upsetting to read - but that doesn’t make it untrue.

It’s ridiculous to claim this is the same as floridaman or the same as incel stuff. Floridaman exists because of a law in Florida the sunshine act that unsealed court records and allowed people to report on petty stuff. I don’t think rape and sexual harassment and pedophilia are petty.

Do you really think women who are victims of rape and assault and stalking and being videoed in restrooms and children who are victims of sexual assault are in the same category as men who are upset because they’re not getting sex they think they’re owed by women ? You think those two things are equivalent ?

There’s no talking to someone whose immediate reaction to seeing all of those cases is not “ omg that’s horrible” and is instead “ ew why are bigots reporting these cases ?”

This isn’t about one off cases that don’t form a pattern. Females rarely commit sex crimes. Like 98% of the time it’s males. There are studies to show that male pattern criminality doesn’t vanish after a man transitions to woman. Like 50-60% of the “trans women “ in prison in the Uk are there because of sexual offences. The comparable rate for cis men is 20-30%.

You keep arguing that it doesn’t happen, or that if it does happen it must be too rare, if it isn’t too rare then it’s irrelevant, and if it isn’t irrelevant it must be because women are bigots and brainwashed and crazy. You’ve closed your mind off to the fact that maybe you might have been sold an ideology that does harm.

You literally have someone on this thread comparing heterosexuality (and by implication homosexuality) to only dating within caste and how “sexually shunned” groups might be right in their thinking even if they should have been more polite.

Only one side has produced facts in this discussion. Your side has only chided and scolded and shamed and censored. Where are facts disproving a single thing I’ve said ? When presented with evidence absolutely none of you have seriously considered it without dismissing it as being too crazy and stemming from resentful.

You keep saying I’m comparing harm when the other side hasn’t proven any harm at all - only asserted it in some mealy mouthed way. Besides you would be hard pressed to find cases of terfs assaulting or being violent toward trans people. Because violence is a male thing. Think about that. There is more hatred online from trans activists toward terfs who only mostly argue that sex is real, than towards men who actually beat up and murder trans people. What is the argument ? Men targeting another group of men should mean women have to stop speaking truth and mollify and validate and self erase ?

There’s no point to tallying up harm ? There’s no point to knowing who was hurt and by whom and when ? Why ? Cause it makes your worldview and your convictions difficult to maintain ? Can you imagine saying that about any other group except women ? Can you imagine saying that about victims of caste atrocities or communalism or naziism? It’s only because theyre women you think we should all shut up about it because it’s impolite.

You congratulate women for being polite and kind as if that is what they were made to do. You think resentment is bad because it’s unearned. There are values more important than politeness and good feelings. Values like truth, like reason, like honesty, integrity, standing up for those weaker than you, courage, defiance. What a sad world where women only get to be polite- they don’t get to be any of those other things without being shamed.

This might be condescending - but stop trying to have the last word when you know you’ve lost. You’ve done nothing in this thread except scold and police women who dare to dissent from your orthodoxy. Take some time and go look in the mirror - consider why you want to play that role in the first place.

At the risk of being condescending, please don't read stuff like reduxx. Any bot or incel activist could literally start a website carrying nothing but Baby Reindeer female stalker news stories (and scraping the US press alone there'll be enough crazy Florida people daily alone to make this easy) and if you read this for a month it might make anyone think women are crazy and victims of female stalkers are everywhere. Or do so about Florida Man (who is obviously provably crazy) https://floridaman.com/

IMHO that's part of the problem with this debate - the media and echochambers in this can be so one-sided and motivated to stir outrage and get clicks or online clout about their cause they actually hinder reasoned debate.

And comparing and tallying up of harms gets us nowhere helpful.

Thanks both sides for, at least in part, your apparent efforts in trying to keep keep the tone of this conversation civil and mostly semi-polite and factual though. It is appreciated.

Just because they’re a minority or “oppressed” doesn’t make it valid. Incels think they’re owed women because they’re “sexually shunned”. Women don’t owe it to anyone to make them feel better by letting them use their bodies as a validation machine.

If trans lesbians are women they can date themselves - why do they need actual old school lesbians to date and have sex with their male bodies for validation? If trans men are men - is that why no means no is hard for them to understand ? Why do they think it’s the job of straight women to repress their sexuality to affirm trans mens masculinity ?

In any situation in life if you feel yourself aligning with people who would argue that wants to control female sexuality in this way- you should reconsider your worldview.

The idea that it’s womens job to bring about a revolution by changing who they date or hook up with or marry, and that they are incumbent to do so on behalf of your pet causes is misogynistic- it denies female liberation. None of these people are asking men to change their sexuality or their dating preferences. None of these people are calling men bigots for dating who they date. They only go after women because these new ideas are very much like old ideas that tried to control female sexuality. Women are not a public resource to be distributed and redistributed according to current thinking.

I really worry that young women don’t have the backbone to resist this and are instead so keen to please others and appear virtuous that they don’t stand up for themselves and their freedoms. Female socialisation is a dangerous thing. Even now you think it’s more important to be kind and understanding to other people than to be kind and understanding to yourselves or other women.

Ambedkar didn’t believe in forcing Brahmin girls to feel guilty about who they married. He believed in liberating all women to marry outside their caste by changing laws that punished exogamous marriages. He understood womens preferences were not because they were evil bigots. That they had a right to those preferences because it was their body- and sought to change those preferences by changing society in how it constrains women. That’s a very different stance than that idiot on twitter telling upper caste women they owe him sex and dates while barely masking his own misogyny.

It’s not the same thing.- one is a sexuality. In any case women shouldn’t be obligated to date anyone they don’t want to for any reason. Whether that’s people outside their caste or people inside their caste or males or females. Sexuality is a thing and it’s incredibly homophobic and misogynistic to think that it can be changed by guilt and manipulation. And if anything womens liberation is the goal of the feminist movement.

It’s not kind to erase yourself and your own experiences or to pour all your sympathy into people who do not care for you. Women do not exist to be therapists and to provide absolution to people who do not like them.

Freedom has to mean freedom for women - straight and gay to choose for themselves without coercion who they love.

The right wing sees women as private property and the left sees them as public property. We are neither. We’re fully human.

Kapil Sibal - 1066

Pradeep Rai - 689

Adish Aggarwala - 283

Lots behind these stats. The BJP could have fielded a strong candidate like Meenakshi Lekhi or Pinky Anand and they could have got the girl vote as well. Adish Aggarwala is not respected even by BJP supporters. Some BJP supporters voted for other candidates instead, leading to vote cutting.

Terrible strategising by the BJP IMO.

The other question is what Sibal will do now? He will use it to the hilt to do pro-Congress politics.

While a nominally legal topic, please do not take the trollbait and continue unnecessarily with this thread, there's been enough words spilled over this here: https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/357360-can-we-have-an-open-respectful-conversation-about-the-concept-of-being-non-binary

Have the willingness to learn and the right attitude towards work i.e. take ownership. Ask questions, even the stupid ones. As you (rightly) said, a lot of kids are in the same boat as you. Lack of knowledge can be excused, provided that you demonstrate that you can learn and get better.

Oh, how noble of you to steer clear of defending The Wire while simultaneously jumping to its defense. Your dedication to "tone and quality of discourse" is truly inspiring—especially when it conveniently dodges the core issue. You accuse me of dog whistles, but let’s be honest: labeling any critique as "provocation" is just a fancy way of silencing dissent. It's fascinating how calling out blatant bias is now considered "trolling" in your book. Maybe, just maybe, the real issue here isn't my tone but the uncomfortable truth that your so-called "independent" media isn’t as independent as it claims. But hey, if pointing that out counts as a culture war, then sign me up. Because at the end of the day, demanding accountability and calling out hypocrisy isn't trolling—it's the very essence of a healthy debate. So, let’s drop the pretense and face facts: if you want to foster genuine discourse, start by acknowledging the elephant in the room instead of hand-waving it away with accusations of provocation. Now, wouldn’t that be a refreshing change?

It's neither for me nor this thread to defend the Wire, and that's not what the moderation or criticism of you is about. It's about the tone and quality of discourse. You could have phrased all your points in a non trollish manner. Instead you sought to make it about culture wars with dog whistles and provocation, which implies you were not interested in a debate about the media ecosystem but just practising selective outrage yourself, which you ironically accused 'the other side' of.

Should editors of legal news portals write openly political pieces like this? The editors of Bar & Bench never do so and Kian never did so when LI was a news site. Only Sanya Talwar of LawBeat does so. Now LiveLaw and LawBeat are in the same category, sorry to say.

https://www.livelaw.in/articles/importance-of-kapil-sibals-win-as-scba-president-supreme-court-bar-association-258145

Is it possible to transition from general corporate law to competition law after 2-3 years, or to work in both areas simultaneously in Indian Tier 1 firms? Does the experience in general corporate law benefit an individual in the longer run, or is it advisable to start directly in competition law (or any other niche practice area)? I am interested in competition law but do not want to limit myself to a niche practice area at the beginning of my career. I have also read that some competition lawyers do not have much in-house opportunities later on.

Hi, so basically i have doubts regarding internships that first year students do during a sum of 4 months of internship breaks.

Like I'm sure law firms don't take students from first year. So what are the other options considering 1 month goes towards the ngo work (as per bar council)...so 3 months remain.
I'm going into a t1 NLU and 2nd generation lawyer, if that is of any help in answering my query.