After handing in the [insert expletif] memorandum in 3 hours shy of the deadline, Zixian and I went to watch Atonement, my stab at a semblance of a normal life since the day we were given the memorandum assignment. I swear, without LAWR, the food tastes better, the sky looks bluer, the roses smell sweeter… *revels in heaven* And the upside is, they wouldn’t dare give us another assignment next week, because of Chinese New Year.
At least… I hope they don’t.
More on Atonement coming up.
“You should be able to finish in 8 hours”.
8 hours, my foot… To paraphrase Sawyer, “[They] lied, brother.” [say that with a Southern accent]
I don’t know anyone who was able to do the SLS take-home exam under 12 hours, much less 8 hours. Most of my friends, including me, stayed up all night to finish it and then went directly to school all bleary-eyed to hand in, and then came back home and collapsed on the bed.
I still prefer take-home exams, despite the no-sleep marathon. Cramming volumes of facts into my head and then writing until my hand breaks, while shivering in a cold exam hall is not my most favourite hobby.
The Dean just sent us all an email over the 377A issue. Since it is marked Confidential, I am not privileged to post it here: but the gist of it is that the law school will not discriminate (in terms of assessment) against queer students and/or those who spoke up about the issue even if it contradicts the position of certain professors.
It is nice to have an official position on that, and lay certain fears to rest. Let’s see whether it can actually be implemented.
FYI for those who got the same email and have been wondering: I am NOT that anonymous female undergraduate. I prefer civilised discourse, not hate-mail and insults. And I’ve got better things to do.
- Bad food on campus
- No hostel on campus
- Have to walk up the hill every morning
- Did I mention LAWR?
- The smell of the canteen food makes me want to puke
- She Who Shall Not Be Named
- The disciple of She Who Shall Not Be Named
- LAWR is sucking up my life
- I feel like I am not cut out to be a lawyer because of LAWR
- All the cute girls are boring
- All the cute guys are gay or attached
- Legal Research sucks.
- One of the few branches I am interested in, litigation, is the one that is the most painful and LAWR-like.
- My other branch of interest, Human Rights, is probably going to be taught by She Who Shall Not Be Named
- Contract law sucks
- There are no cute gay girls on campus [J, you are my friend and you are confused. You don't count]
And only one reason why I should stay: I can’t imagine doing anything else.
There is only word to describe the presentation: AWFUL.
I swear the tutors have fun torturing us and firing us questions that they know we don’t have answers to.
Seriously, was I supposed to think about the interest rate? This is law, not finance.
It is 8 pm on a Sunday evening, and I am still in school. The library is closed, and the canteen was never open. I am sprawled along a carpetted corridor in LKY School of Public Policy, munching on the pizza my tutorial group ordered and desperately trying to put together a rule for tomorrow’s LAWR presentation.
The main thing you learn in LAWR is cite, cite, cite. What you think doesn’t matter – what matters is what judges, who are long dead and buried, thought 50 years ago. Whatever you say, if you dont have authority, then it is worthless, even if it is absolutely brilliant. After combing 50 000 books in the library for cases, usually found in footnotes and annotations, you start to get in the habit of looking for the citations for anything that is said.
Recently I received a chain-email from my mother [mum... no one forwards chain-mail anymore. Get with the times.], claiming to be the latest news out of John Hopkins about cancer research. The email was fairly sensible, telling us that cancer cells are not fully destroyed by chemotherapy/radiation [really? no shit, sherlocks], we must eat more fruits and vegetables etc. But I discarded without much thought, for its one single crime of never citing a source. From John Hopkins, you say? Surely there are research papers to back up this “latest news”.
If this goes on, I might end up asking my girlfriend to cite her sources when she says I love you.
LAWR is taking over my life.
Right now, I hate Law. I wish I could spend at least one day not thinking about Law, or more accurately, LAWR. Have been coming back to school almost every day of the week, like some kind of loser – and I am not the only one. Doesn’t help that my TG doesn’t have a clear cause of action, and the presentation is less than a week away.
Damn en-bloc sales. Why couldn’t I have gotten the pregnant woman case instead?
What have they got to do with each other? Well, when a bunch of graduate law students from North India troop into the undergraduate student lounge and start playing pool, those two phrases are able to appear in the same sentence. And trust me, the only thing funnier than hearing them banter rapidly in Hindi is watching Russell Peters.
These were actually nice Indian guys… almost every other Indian dude I meet pervs at me, or hits on me. Or is just so bloody annoying that I can’t wait to get away from him. I haven’t had many good experiences with them in the past, so I have my reservations in interacting with Indian guys in general. These were nice and respectful ones, and gamely allowed me to play pool with them. They are even nicer than the dudes from the Gangs of Law School who hang out in the undergrad lounge [yes, the ones who
sabotaged nominated me for class vice-chair].
P.S. Yes, for those who are checking the date, I DID go back to school on a Saturday. So shoot me.
I have been seeing this poster around the campus lately: it is advertising this talk on “Intelligent Design”, or rather as it says, “Christian Perspective of Evolution”. It purports to explain away Evolution as a scientific theory, replacing it with the only thing that could possibly make sense… Intelligent Design.
It makes me really ashamed to have such an event on campus, really. Intelligent Design is not science. It is at the best, a pseudo-science. The only things backing up Intelligent Design are speculations, theological arguments and “Evolution doesn’t cut it” logic.
Intelligent Design is essentially Genesis repackaged – it is an extremely Christian ideology, and only Christians have been fighting to teach this theory to our kids. They still can’t seem to accept that we have descended from monkeys, it seems. I know there are Christian readers of this blog, and you probably do believe in Genesis – which is your choice. But why are your people trying to force this theology down the throats of everyone, even non-Christians? If you don’t believe in Evolution, then take it to the church. Let the priests talk all they want about how the Lord made the world in 6 days. Stop trying to masquerade it as a credible scientific theory.
What is ironic is that in the poster, the learned speaker is trying to convince us that Evolution is simply a scientific postulation, and does not have enough evidence to back it up. If that is the case, Intelligent Design has much less proof than Evolution. It may or may not be true – I personally believe in evolution, but I do acknowledge it is not completely scientifically proven. But it is the most credible, most well-researched one around. The fact that we can’t conclusively prove Evolution is an indicator of our own short lifespans, not the invalidity of the theory. We haven’t been here long enough, been researching this long enough to prove it either way – but it makes sense. The only reason people have been systematically opposing this has nothing to do with science – and has got everything to do with religion.
I am not going to bother systematically rebutting Intelligent Design as a theory, because that’s for more informed people to do. But I have this to say – if you insist that evolution and intelligent design be taught side by side, I insist that you teach every other genesis-like theory in the world as well, from every religion. I am not the only to come to this conclusion, as the satirical The Flying Spaghetti Monster was formulated on similar grounds.
I’ve really had enough of Christian chauvinism. For a change, do consider people from other faiths.
No, not referring to Singapore politics. Something of far less import: the elections for the class committee for our faculty, ie, electing the people who will be saddled with a lot of work and no conceivable reward, and the people who will be tasked with organising freshman orientation next year. A task, in my opinion, that should be left to people with no life and no love.
Given how my batch has been reacting with complete apathy to everything, you would have thought that the seniors would have figured out that they weren’t going to get any volunteers for this post. Or maybe they could have figured it out when half the class emptied out when they were asked to stay for the elections.
Eventually the people came back for the next lecture, and the election process turned into an exercise in mass sabotage. Many unwilling people got elected [my name was called by a few jokers, but I determinedly went down and erased it from the board], and I shudder to think of the fate of the freshies next year.
If last year’s committe was elected in a similar fashion, that would explain why our orientation this year was abysmally bad, and hence has led to the extreme apathy in our batch. There is no sense of belonging, no sense of community in order for people to want to do something. Vicious cycle, it would seem.
Addendum: I’ve been informed that the election for FOCC is a separate matter. But my initial observation stands… if this is how they elect people in general, then how reliable is it?