We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
CS, aFRM or anything else?
The main thing about an IPM should be that it gives high paying management jobs, not having to immediately look for an actual MBA. It's more of an endorsement of the hard work of the students that got in, not NALSAR.
Classic case of woke LI readers wanting to have their cake and eat it too, without doing basic reading of the Sen-Bhagwati debate.
I personally think people are getting unnecessarily worried about the turnout. How do we know the people who didn't turn up to vote are not Congress voters? Why should we assume that Muslims had higher turnout? Maybe there has been a dip in Muslim voter turnout this time, as they don't see the Congress as a suitable challenger? Let's wait till at least 1 June when the exit poll data is out, instead of being swayed by armchair Twitter analysts.
HNLU has improved quite a lot in recent years. The posts mentioning its decline are close to 5-6 years old.
Mine would be Aristotle, Groitus, Austin and Dworkin.
If you are truly interested in understanding, please read Judith Butler. You can start here https://www.jstor.org/stable/3207893?origin=JSTOR-pdf&seq=3
Bear in mind that women and gay people were all called crazy and attention-seeking when they questioned being treated as sub human or abnormal. Your second explanation is the one that fits. It may be tiring to understand and adapt but it is even more tiring to live among people don't recognise your personhood.
Keep in mind Iโm not sure exactly what I wrote on my phone at a v late hour. But I think it was - thereโs really no proof at all that itโs a real thing or that social transition actually helps people with dysphoria. In many cases it might solidify a victimised identity instead of having - distress about oneโs body be a passing thing. I really worry with some of my female friends that me calling them by they/it and other neo pronouns is further harming them. They just donโt seem to be getting happier even when everyone goes along.
I also think this is one of those things where nothing you do will be enough. Itโs not enough if you say the pronouns - they really want to be seen as not belonging to their sex. I donโt think itโs possible for human beings to ignore material reality.
I think itโs fairly misogynistic to think that these people alone have discomfort with sexed bodies or sexed stereotypes. And itโs misogynistic to fight those stereotypes by carving an exception for these individuals as opposed to resisting the stereotypes for all women. When you say you shouldnโt be treated a certain way because โ Iโm not a girl โ- what youโre saying is that itโs okay to treat girls that way.
I think you should stop apologising for yourself or guilting yourself to go along. It took me a long long time. I read every non binary book I could find watched every tv show with non binary representation and I still could not tell you that it makes sense.
You should take your doubt and scepticism seriously - donโt be afraid to have a heretical thought.
Although they doubled their revenue compared to last year, profit is only 6 cr
Is this good performance or bad performance?
I joined as a fresher, A0. She would issue paychecks personally, make several highly qualified lawyers play useless team-building games, and would critique on how our conduct, writing style and mannerisms should be - when she was not a lawyer herself.
No one questioned her means and ways. Most of the seniors would try and impress her, laugh on her not-so-funny jokes and be in her good books.
So lucky to have found my way out of there!
For example, would the view of Cyril Shroff in Mumbai be different to the views of Jyoti Sagar in Delhi? Or Nishith Desai in Mumbai versus Pravin Anand in Delhi? And would their employer hold the same view as them?
Also, do election results impact law firms at all? Do certain law firms get rewarded with govt work? Or is it business as usual irrespective of who wins?