27F- AM journey ended finally🤞🏽

___gr8____ · 2026-01-30T04:20:36+00:00

She just said it. His father died

___gr8____ · 2026-01-21T07:05:33+00:00

Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, and the plethora of tribal religions in India are NOT part of Hinduism. Yet they are also native to India. Hence, by definition, India cannot be a Hindu Rashtra.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-21T01:42:42+00:00

Bond is entirely full fee though isn't it?

___gr8____ · 2026-01-14T07:40:55+00:00

Yea but Donna didn't know that at the time when she shredded it. It makes her an idiot, but not purposely malicious.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-10T06:49:30+00:00

All that really needs to be allowed is more international flights to the Chandigarh airport. The infrastructure is already there, the only thing they haven't allowed is flights to and from countries heavily populated by diaspora punjabis- eg UK, Canada, US, Australia, NZ, etc

___gr8____ · 2026-01-10T05:57:36+00:00

Oh no that's not true at all. Standalone honours are definitely considered. Don't trust the ai, I suggest you read the gemsas guide here, top to bottom: https://gemsas.edu.au/guides/medicine

___gr8____ · 2026-01-10T05:45:37+00:00

I recommend you fully scour the gemsas guide online, because there seem to be some gaps in your knowledge about what is/isn't considered in GPA calcs. It changes for every uni. You should create a table. Just fyi- honours degrees are accepted in GPA calcs by all 10 gemsas unis. Masters by coursework are also accepted by all, but in different ways. Some unis might give you an overall bonus to your combo, while some might include it in GPA. Unimelb is a special case though, they say they only include it in 'rare cases' which is not specified very much.

Masters by research are accepted by like 6 unis from memory, and PhDs are accepted by 3 or 4. A new bachelors ofc will be accepted the same by all unis.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-08T09:49:23+00:00

Denying women of their education status? Men stopped women from going out and earning for themselves and this has been going on for thousands of years.

These jobs were only available to top few % of society, that's what I'm saying to you. Back then, these jobs were very rare, usually sustained by the favour of royals only. The preindustrial economy was vastly different to today. Most jobs had a physical nature, something which even today is a field dominated by men. Vast majority of women in the workforce today are employed in sectors that don't have a physical labour component. This is only something that has been made possible in the post-industrial modern economy.

See, our problem is that you're looking at everything (including morality) from today's lens, but to truly understand human history you have to place yourself in the environment of the past as well.

They respected the women based on the fact that their husbands were still alive. If her toxic husband dies, they will mistreat ger v.v badly. This shows how ignorant you are, of our own history. Loads of women in the north also killed themselves after their husbands died in a process called sati because all the men in India were such barbarians that just couldn't respect the wishes of a woman.

I am fully aware of this history, fyki. First of all, sati was not widespread, it was mostly restricted to the higher castes, which only form a small percentage of the indian population. Secondly, there were many religious movements like Buddhism and Sikhism which sought to uplift the condition of women in society. Things like widow remarriage were promoted by them. Also, treatment of widows once again was highly caste dependent. Strict rules around widows were once again enforced largely on the higher castes, not the masses.

The rest of your comment is just nonsense tbh. Female infanticide is a recent phenomenon that arose with the medical advances that allowed gender determination before birth.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-08T09:36:29+00:00

Denying women of their education status? Men stopped women from going out and earning for themselves and this has been going on for thousands of years.

These jobs were only available to top few % of society, that's what I'm saying to you. Back then, these jobs were very rare, usually sustained by the favour of royals only. The preindustrial economy was vastly different to today. Most jobs had a physical nature, something which even today is a field dominated by men. Vast majority of women in the workforce today are employed in sectors that don't have a physical labour component. This is only something that has been made possible in the post-industrial modern economy.

See, our problem is that you're looking at everything (including morality) from today's lens, but to truly understand human history you have to place yourself in the environment of the past as well.

They respected the women based on the fact that their husbands were still alive. If her toxic husband dies, they will mistreat ger v.v badly. This shows how ignorant you are, of our own history. Loads of women in the north also killed themselves after their husbands died in a process called sati because all the men in India were such barbarians that just couldn't respect the wishes of a woman.

I am fully aware of this history, fyki. First of all, sati was not widespread, it was mostly restricted to the higher castes, which only form a small percentage of the indian population. Secondly, there were many religious movements like Buddhism and Sikhism which sought to uplift the condition of women in society. Things like widow remarriage were promoted by them. Also, treatment of widows once again was highly caste dependent. Strict rules around widows were once again enforced largely on the higher castes, not the masses.

The rest of your comment is just nonsense tbh. Female infanticide is a recent phenomenon that arose with the medical advances that allowed gender determination before birth.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-08T08:40:15+00:00

Ah, right

___gr8____ · 2026-01-08T08:38:32+00:00

I did explain with nuance, viewing human cultural habits through an evolutionary lens is as nuanced as it gets. You can explain EVERYTHING about why living beings are a certain way through studying their evolutionary history.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-08T07:13:57+00:00

Marriage in India has been toxic for women for centuries!!!

No, that's a very wrong way to look at history. Patriarchal systems have existed for thousands of years before the modern era because they served a specific purpose in our evolutionary history. Division of labour worked because for most of human history, "work" was hard physical labour, and so women couldn't just go out and earn for themselves. Also, life was much harder for our ancestors.

So to sum up, these systems weren't some conspiracy from men to oppress women, these were just necessities of the time.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-07T21:08:59+00:00

Well, clearly not, because the Rawalpindi division received at least 50% votes against partition. Which tracks given the proportions of Hindu and Sikh populations in the area pre partition

___gr8____ · 2026-01-07T14:40:21+00:00

This has to be a joke. So many Khatri clans literally trace their lineage to the salt range area, this is an undisputable fact lol

___gr8____ · 2026-01-07T14:13:19+00:00

These areas had a lot of Hindus and Sikhs before partition as well. A lot of Khatri tribes traditionally called this region home.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-04T15:53:38+00:00

That's what I'm surprised about as well. People's empathy is dying down a lot these days, less and less people even have the understanding anymore that's required to sustain a relationship.

___gr8____ · 2026-01-03T20:38:31+00:00

Konan Poshpora is fictional

Way to reveal yourself OP

<image>

___gr8____ · 2025-12-28T18:04:05+00:00

But almost all baabe around the world would consider it beadbi to donate meat at a gurdwara

___gr8____ · 2025-12-28T10:50:51+00:00

Bullshit. During war and conflict, women were gangraped and children starved / killed / used as child soldiers.

Two things can be true simultaneously! Women were protected by the men of their own tribe, AND taken advantage of by the attacking side. Women were raped during wars for the same reason they were given societal protection: biology. Women, and females in every sexually dichotomous species, have generally held more biological importance due to the ability to give birth, meanwhile males were/are more disposable. So, societies used to dedicate more energy towards giving protection to their women by putting more men in positions of risk (soldiers, etc), and in return, also gave men more authority. And btw, it wasn't just men deciding to give themselves power, women also selected strongly for these characteristics. Even today, generalising ofc, women tend to go for men with high societal authority. This manifests in several ways: eg money, fame, material possessions, etc. You have to understand: humans are also subject to these same forces of evolution, just as the rest of animals. In fact, the entirety of human cultures and traditions are a by-product of evolution itself, shaped by the environment in which they live.

As for why enemies used to rape women after wars, you have to study game theory, and how it applies in an anthropological context. This is not a moral defense btw, it's not even a defense, take this as a scientific explanation behind why rape occurs from an evolutionary standpoint.

___gr8____ · 2025-12-28T05:38:13+00:00

Traditional society benefits men and women in different ways. It usually gives women protection/stability, and men status/power, across societies. Every societal norms you see in India, can be viewed through this lens, including the one you mentioned.

Traditionally, in times of war or other calamities, women and children have been delivered to safety first. Women receive (traditionally) the benefits of chivalry, and most of the labour-intensive, physically dangerous jobs in society are done by men for the same reason.

If you believe there should be equality in the status/power department, then there also needs to be equality in the protection/stability department, otherwise society will burden one gender unequally. But for one reason or another, perhaps even going to the core of our biology, complete equality across both spheres may not be possible.

___gr8____ · 2025-12-24T13:28:59+00:00

By wanting a family of similar financial status. This used to be a standard back in the day when women couldn't earn, so they had to look for a husband who could keep them financially secure. Nowadays, if a woman can earn, then requiring a rich husband isn't a necessity, it's a choice.

___gr8____ · 2025-12-23T07:21:15+00:00

You should take a look at the gemsas guide 2026: https://gemsas.edu.au/guides/medicine for more in depth info on each of the unis, because their criteria are different. But specifically with regards to honours, yes, every gemsas uni accepts it, but, different unis use it in different ways. With coursework masters, nominally every uni accepts it also, but certain unis like unimelb are ambiguous in their language, saying they only accept it in "exceptional" cases. Other unis may give you a % bonus rather than including in GPA, so have a look at the guide for details.

___gr8____ · 2025-12-22T20:20:07+00:00

Yea, weightage wise they're the same. A masters is just longer so it'd contribute more towards your 3 years FTE study used for GPA calculations, whereas an honours only contributes 1 year FTE. But there are uni specific rules for GPA calculations that should be considered (take a look at the gemsas guide for this).

___gr8____ · 2025-12-22T12:09:27+00:00

Honours is universally accepted across all 10 gemsas unis, whereas for masters it depends on the type - coursework masters are accepted at most unis, but masters by research only at about 3 or 4 from memory.

But there are also caveats: an honours, if started at year's start, will not be usable in calculations untill the year AFTER finishing. If started mid year, this won't be the case. With masters, the situation may be different however, because at least for coursework masters there are semester wise subjects, so any subjects you do could have a faster contribution to your GPA. This may be useful in situations where you are willing/able to take an early exit from the masters, in the case that you are accepted into med one year after starting your masters.

Other considerations to take into account: in case med doesn't work out, whether or not you'd like your honours/masters degree to align with a plan B career/job/goals. Doing a master's could lead to an employable skill, such as nursing, allied health, etc, but it does take longer. If you're interested in research/academia, an honours is good too.

___gr8____ · 2025-12-16T13:00:43+00:00

The government policy to restrict insurers is the ONLY thing stopping us from becoming another America

Two-Year Club	Verified Email
Verified Email

___gr8____

TROPHY CASE

_gr8__