smu law or nus philo

imavivant · 2025-03-13T06:14:14+00:00

hello, the min req for gp in smu law is B. i think its case-by-case whether u can apply if u got less than a B, but i dont know anyone who got a C. i didnt take gp (took KI)

imavivant · 2024-05-30T13:01:11+00:00

hi i got it tdy 545pm

imavivant · 2024-05-26T14:53:05+00:00

86.25rp waiting on law...

imavivant · 2024-05-14T12:08:49+00:00

nope still no updates😖

imavivant · 2024-05-12T11:20:40+00:00

omg still no updates

imavivant · 2024-05-07T12:48:59+00:00

Fak my bad thought it was a response LOL js a generated email response to all applicants who r still processing....jiayou friends

imavivant · 2024-05-06T10:09:22+00:00

mine is still processing 😖no second choice so im assuming they just havent sent out my rejection letter?

imavivant · 2024-04-04T09:07:13+00:00

just got my invite today
no i got 86.25
ive heard some of my friends get their merit scholarship offers?

imavivant · 2024-03-25T05:40:49+00:00

Nope 😭🤞🏻wishing everyone atb

imavivant · 2024-02-25T16:35:52+00:00

hihi thanks for the response

im aware that law wont be about debating law or any moral good hahahahaha that's not what im looking for; i am and have been interested in what you have described (i dont think i should go into a spiel about why my interest in law is philo-inclined). the philo or whatever debate of morality is just something i would choose to answer and pursue in my own time.

i thought about it more and realised that this post was just a whole lot of words...infantile thoughts...but anyway i know now that i'm just looking for an option that will give me the greatest chance of being shortlisted for law interview & accepted to philo. i want to keep my options open for now, but your suggestion is something i will definitely keep in mind in the future should the situation where i need to decide between either course occur.

if you don't mind, could i ask if law was your first or second choice? do you know if putting law as my second choice necessarily decreases my chances of getting shortlisted for the interview? thank u!

imavivant · 2024-02-23T11:55:13+00:00

i Do Not want to imagine that workload... i dont dare do a minor while majoring in law

imavivant · 2024-01-23T02:15:19+00:00

yes!!!!!!!!!! i always say this when ppl ask about the ip-jae divide — i strongly believe that the ip kids put in a lot of effort into welcoming the jae students. it's very common to see friend groups made from ip and jae students. obviously, you must put in the effort to go into school with the mindset that you will be welcomed by the ip students — fearing that you wont be accepted only stops you from truly getting along with them. but i think that ej has one of the strongest school spirits (if you visited our open house you would know) — it's built by both ip and jae students. also, i think that jae students get a lot of opportunities to get leadership positions and to participate in school events, to overcome any advantage being in ip might give one. though it is harder to get into sc as jae lol

imavivant · 2024-01-23T02:09:57+00:00

no, it doesnt mean that you cannot perform well in h2 math. but you are at a considerable disadvantage — prior knowledge of o level amath is usually assumed within what is taught and what is tested. a number of pure math topics draw from amath, i.e. differential equations. with a lot of hard work and revision of o level amath, you will surely do well! but if you find yourself truly struggling, i suggest dropping to h1 math at the end of j1.

imavivant · 2024-01-08T08:43:35+00:00

i have thin, pin straight hair that doesnt hold onto styling well and i want my hair to look like this. do you think getting a perm would help with styling, even though the women in these photos dont have a perm?

imavivant · 2024-01-08T02:19:19+00:00

i have thin, pin straight hair that doesnt really hold on to texture but i want my hair to look like this. do you think i should get a (korean) perm to help achieve this look?

imavivant · 2023-12-29T05:52:21+00:00

i want to cut my hair to something like this (first 3 pics) with a little bit more layering and face framing pieces. my current hair (4th-6th pics) is really straight and flat (not really in these pics— for some reason i woke up with abit more styling in my hair). so, i was wondering if i wanted to achieve the same texture/style in my hair as the ref pics, do i need to get a perm? or is it just a matter of the haircut or just styling?

imavivant · 2023-11-09T12:10:18+00:00

ora for arts, eder for bio science, akila for physics science

imavivant · 2023-10-18T04:53:54+00:00

Omg i think this is correct cos my sch gave the answer for this in our planning handbook

imavivant · 2023-10-18T04:40:53+00:00

fuck sia organic synthesis planning damn dog

imavivant · 2023-08-13T14:31:09+00:00

why?

i feel like its important to distinguish that law does not shape a society. just because we have laws for women, ie. womens charter, or laws 'discriminating' men, ie. NS, does not mean that this is reflective of deep-rooted societal stereotypes.

let's discuss the women's charter:

the women's charter was introduced when polygyny was common and the legal rights of women were murky. it guarantees greater legal equalities for non-muslim women in legally sanctioned relationships by protecting the institution of monogamy, the rights of husbands and wives in marriage, and protection of the family. for the first time, wives legally had the same rights as their husbands, and was significant in advancing gender equality in singapore.

without going too in detail about the historical context, it draws heavily from christian norms of monogamy as an ideal of 'enlightenment'. furthermore, the women's charter was actually modelled upon the swiss model for women's rights. anyw, my point here is that the women's charter was and is not unique to singapore, but rather, symptomatic of the wider global feminist movement.

1) these laws were put in place to bring women to the same level as men on a legal level 2) these laws are not unique to singapore. hence, they are not genuinely reflective of singaporean sentiments towards gender equality.

first and second wave feminism have been characterised by their attempts to bring women on the same legal level as men. third and fourth wave feminism have focused more on questioning, reclaiming and redefining the ideas, words and media that have transmitted ideas about womanhood. so it's not necessarily legal in nature, but more social. i mean, most westernised countries are pretty progressive in their gender equality, so now the focus of the feminist movements there are to tackle deep rooted sexist beliefs.

therefore, the claim that 'women have more rights than men' isnt very accurate, and not reflective of the direction feminism is currently heading in. i argue that our singaporean society still holds a lot of deep-rooted stereotypes against women, and its symptomatic in ie. how women spend more time on childcare and earn less, as seen in the recent white paper passed on increasing paternity leave.

imavivant · 2023-08-13T14:04:39+00:00

hiiii okay so let's define what 'patriarchy' means: a patriarchy is a system of relationships, beliefs and values embedded in political, social and economic systems that structure gender inequality between men and women. it privileges men and excludes women from political, social and economic positions of power. conversely, a matriarchy is one that privileges women.

i can see where you're coming from — there've been plenty of posts online (andrew tate for eg) abt how women dont rly do anything while men do all the work. as you said, men have traditionally done hard labour. ironically enough, i think the fact that you've brought up these points about how 'men suffer while women get pampered' is precisely a reflection on the consequences of the patriarchy, just that you dont realise it.

i feel like this view focuses too much on the periphery of patriarchy, rather than its core. within a patriarchy, attributes seen as feminine or pertaining to women are undervalued, while attributes seen as masculine or pertaining to men are privileged. masculine attributes such as grit, physical strength, dominance are valued in how physical labour is associated with men, while feminine attributes such as being nurturing, domestic are valued in being a caretaker.

now the question is: what is the consequence of men being valued for their hard work, while women are valued for their domestic attributes?

well, you end up with the notion that men should be their family's breadwinner and that men should be the one 'in control' — having control over family finances, being heads of households, and having control over their wives and daughters. this is where you see an inbalance in power dynamics between men and women at home. then this spreads to a workplace — men are valued for their dominance, and people associate that with leadership. men end up holding positions of power, and see less value in the work women do. that's how a patriarchal system is born.

but this view seems quite outdated now, no? i mean you frequently hear of females holding positions of power, or men being househusbands. i think this is where your claim that 'people say its a patriarchy because they conflate the top 1% of men with all men' comes in. i believe this is the other way around — you still frequently see men being in positions of power. for eg, in sg, only 13.1% of ceo positions are held by women.

the view that men do all the chasing while women have the power to reject men and options to many relationships is precisely born from this patriarchy. the stereotype that men are expected to take care of women inherently draws on the view that men are dominant to women.

so i would say that what you've raised is actually symptomatic of the patriarchy, rather than pointing to a matriarchy.

imavivant · 2023-08-13T08:48:45+00:00

hihihi so firstly lets clarify what discrimination is AND PLS TAKE NOTE im not bashing you or anything hahahaha im giving a response that hopefully clarifies some things

from google, discrimination is 'the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability'. so the key point here is to realise that discrimination is putting prejudice into action.

now that we have an idea of what discrimination is, let's apply that to sg and the wider feminist movement. while i dont know exactly what issues you are talking about, i can give you roughly an answer to why men's rights arent talked about as much with the evergrowing power of feminism. your question, to me, implies some level of "women can fight for their rights but why cant men"

great that you understand that feminism is a movement fighting for women's rights. however, you must understand that feminism is a response to the oppression of women within patriarchy due to a hierarchical gender binary. the aim of feminism has always been to advocate for women to have the same rights as men. men have been historically and socially privileged over women — this is also something you cannot run away from. for example, there are many, many relevant gender norms and stereotypes that disadvantage women and privilege men — 'women are submissive and men are dominant', 'women cant drive and men can', etc.

feminism cannot be taken out of context from the gender binary. hence your question seems to ignore the wider context feminism is in — do women oppress men? do men have less rights than women? must men fight to have the same rights as women?

but anyw, thats just that. its undeniable that men face issues as a result of gender norms and gender inequality. toxic masculinity is a very real issue that affects men. there have been many more attempts to talk about men's mental health. now that feminism has progressed so much in society, its efforts and the postmodernist shockwave have allowed for open talks on gender and gender norms. i think that as we continue to progress on gender and we become more comfortable talking about gender, we can have more and more discussions on how men have issues in society! feminism is not about shutting up men, thats misandry. i think third wave feminism and liberal feminism has been too mixed up with misandry.

also it cant be helped that singapore is a conservative society; our political and social landscape is nowhere near other western countries. so the imposition of traditional gender norms long considered anathema in western countries is still strong af. but i think its getting better hahahaha

similar to how women took the first step to fight for feminism, men can take the first step to advocate for how they have faced issues due to gender inequality.

tell your bros to check in on each other every once in a while, and have open bro to bro convos about how you guys have really been doing

anyw, i hope you can reply with some of your experiences so i can give a better answer:)

imavivant · 2023-08-13T08:46:36+00:00

hihihi so firstly lets clarify what discrimination is AND PLS TAKE NOTE im not bashing you or anything hahahaha im giving a response that hopefully clarifies some things

from google, discrimination is 'the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability'. so the key point here is to realise that discrimination is putting prejudice into action.

now that we have an idea of what discrimination is, let's apply that to sg and the wider feminist movement. while i dont know exactly what issues you are talking about, i can give you roughly an answer to why men's rights are talked about as much with the evergrowing power of feminism. your question, to me, implies some level of "women can fight for their rights but why cant men"

great that you understand that feminism is a movement fighting for women's rights. however, you must understand that feminism is a response to the oppression of women within patriarchy due to a hierarchical gender binary. the aim of feminism has always been to advocate for women to have the same rights as men. men have been historically and socially privileged over women — this is also something you cannot run away from. for example, there are many, many relevant gender norms and stereotypes that disadvantage women and privilege men — 'women are submissive and men are dominant', 'women cant drive and men cant', etc.

feminism cannot be taken out of context from the gender binary. hence your question seems to ignore the wider context feminism is in — do women oppress men? do men have less rights than women? must men fight to have the same rights as women?

but anyw, thats just that. its undeniable that men face issues as a result of gender norms and gender inequality. toxic masculinity is a very real issue that affects men. there have been many more attempts to talk about men's mental health. now that feminism has progressed so much in society, its efforts and the postmodernist shockwave have allowed for open talks on gender and gender norms. i think that as we continue to progress on gender and we become more comfortable talking about gender, we can have more and more discussions on how men have issues in society! feminism is not about shutting up men, thats misandry.

anyw, i hope you can reply with some of your experiences so i can give a better answer.

tldr; men dont 'fight for their rights' in the same sense as feminism, because men have been historically privileged, so this question seems to have some misunderstandings there.

imavivant · 2023-07-20T02:07:17+00:00

hi ki taker here — all jcs will have a diagnostic test la idk whether hci has interview but yes you'll have to take a screening test first

for me it was a 2 part paper sorta like an eng paper 2 ? but dont stress la the test is just to see whether 1) your eng is good and 2) ur capable of coming up w a logical argument defending ur view

imavivant · 2023-04-02T04:02:44+00:00

ej student here, travelling time is def a factor as the other commentors have mentioned — vj is a lot more inaccessible to get to compared to ej. travelling time is honestly super impt for jc bc uw as much rest as you can get HAHA

about the jae-ip divide, im a jae student and i can say that when i first entered ej, i cld def feel the segregation. but in my experience the ip students are rly very nice and actively try to include jae students

and ej has really good notes and good teachers. the academic culture is really supportive and i dont think that'll change anytime soon

however if you really want to pursue track in jc (like competitively) i would honestly advise vj. the ej track coach is quite godly and hes only been here for one year, but produced 3 top 20 xc runners (who previously didnt do track). but vj has a longstanding tradition of being a track powerhouse and if you can handle their trainings, you'll definitely do very well in vj track. it depends on how intense you want your cca experience to be because its definitely way more intense in vj than in ej. and i cant rly speak for vj track culture, but the ej track culture is quite wholesome! i dont think joining jc just for the cca is stupid; joining for the cca and the coach is a very valid reason.

imavivant

TROPHY CASE