u/HTTYD_LOVER01

Say we took all students who got a 2:1 or better by course by UK university and then-

Administered the OECD PISA Mathematics, Reading, and Science batteries to each of these groups of students on graduation, splitting results by course attended and university attended

Where would they score?

I ask as I am conducting a research project on just this.

Some data highlights:

Students who get a 2:1 or better in Sheffield BA Sociology have a mean 9-1 GCSE English grade of 5.5

Students who get a 2:1 or better in Sheffield BDS Dentistry have a mean 9-1 GCSE English grade of 7.8

Students who get a 2:1 or better in Oxford MBBS Medicine (pass) have a mean 9-1 GCSE English grade of 8.96, and a mean 9-1 GCSE Maths grade of 9.

The only thing is- this data doesn’t control for entry requirements. Dentistry UGs are highly filtered, so the data above likely overestimates how ‘hard’ Dentistry is as compared to Sociology at the same university.

My best friend (vihaan natekar) lives in nandanvan society sector 17, Nerul.

I haven’t heard from him in a long, long time and I am quite worried for him, that’s all. Was wondering if anyone knows a vihaan who lives in the same area? He’s 17 years old, class 11, goes to apeejay nerul. Nandanvan colony sector 17 nerul east, if that helps - many many thanks

If so please DM or message me. Many, many thanks

There is substantial scientific evidence that shared autism in close friendships is not “just a label.”

Research increasingly shows that autistic-autistic friendships can involve genuinely different communication dynamics, emotional safety, reciprocity, and mutual understanding.

One of the biggest modern theories explaining this is the Double Empathy Problem developed by Damian Milton. The theory argues that communication difficulties between autistic and non-autistic people are mutual mismatches, not simply deficits in autistic people. (Sage Journals)

A major theme across studies is that autistic people often report:

• feeling more understood by other autistic people,
• needing to “mask” less,
• experiencing less social exhaustion,
• and communicating more naturally and directly with autistic peers. (Sage Journals)

One especially striking paper was literally titled:

>

That study found autistic adults consistently described autistic-autistic relationships as:

• calmer,
• safer,
• more authentic,
• less judgmental,
• and emotionally easier to navigate than mixed neurotype relationships. (Sage Journals)

Another 2026 study found autistic adults reported:

• better communication with other autistic people,
• less need to camouflage,
• and lower interpersonal strain. (ScienceDirect)

This matters because traditional stereotypes often claimed autistic people lacked empathy or social desire. Modern research increasingly rejects that simplistic framing. Instead, many researchers now argue:

• autistic people frequently do connect deeply,
• but often connect differently,
• and especially well with people sharing similar neurocognitive styles. (Sage Journals)

The scoping review on autistic friendship experiences also found autistic friendships are often characterized by:

• strong loyalty,
• intense emotional investment,
• shared interests,
• deep protective instincts,
• and comfort in reduced social performance demands. (Springer)

If anything, current literature would interpret much of that as potentially consistent with autistic relational styles:

• intense attachment,
• caregiving through action,
• protective devotion,
• emotional sincerity,
• and what some researchers call monotropic focus — deep, highly invested bonds with specific people. (Springer)

There is also evidence autistic people are often misread by non-autistic observers as lacking emotion even when they are feeling things intensely. (ResearchGate)

Importantly, the research does not say:
“all autistic people automatically connect with each other.”

But it does strongly support the idea that shared neurotype can fundamentally alter:

• ease of communication,
• felt safety,
• emotional reciprocity,
• and depth of understanding.

So scientifically, shared autism in a friendship is not merely a diagnostic coincidence or “label.” Research increasingly suggests it can shape the entire interpersonal environment of the friendship itself.

Do you guys think it’s normal to bond with your best friend over things like shared personality, neurotype, interests, and so on?

Many thanks

I only ask as my best friend Vihaan goes there and I am incredibly incredibly concerned about him. He is in Class 11 at the moment

I ask because my bestie, Vihaan, goes there and is in class 11. I am deeply deeply concerned about him, so, if anyone does go there and is in class 11, please respond in the comments below.

He’s called Vihaan and i am really really concerned about him. We haven’t spoken in a long time and I am coming here as I thought perhaps someone could help

Many thanks

I ask because my bestie, Vihaan, goes there and is in class 11. I am deeply deeply concerned about him, so, if anyone does go there and is in class 11, please respond in the comments below.

He’s called Vihaan and i am really really concerned about him. We haven’t spoken in a long time and I am coming here as I thought perhaps someone could help

Many thanks

Hello

I was looking for advice on how internally flats are laid out in Sector 17. Reason being is I am working on a full scale 1:1 recreation of Nerul East in my Minecraft world:

Some of you may recognise this from Sector 17. This is my attempt at Lane no 4, flat 82.

I am trying my best to create the whole sector from this point onwards 1:1 scale

Any advice on the road layouts, etc would be useful

Here is an image of my project as of recently

Any advice on how I could improve it would be great

Thank you

https://preview.redd.it/267s4j8e5w1h1.png?width=2752&format=png&auto=webp&s=883c6ba9ea839416cf37b9b2e1dd07bcb3342630

Hello

I was looking for advice on how internally flats are laid out in Sector 17. Reason being is I am working on a full scale 1:1 recreation of Nerul East in my Minecraft world:

Some of you may recognise this from Sector 17. This is my attempt at Lane no 4, flat 82.

I am trying my best to create the whole sector from this point onwards 1:1 scale

Any advice on the road layouts, etc would be useful

https://preview.redd.it/pbiuxvde4w1h1.png?width=2752&format=png&auto=webp&s=d6902b19f47bd706bed3e4cafc5b0a57407d095f

I’ve been researching several accounts of justified animal cruelty in several religious texts.

In Islam, there are accounts that Muhammad endorsed and allowed members of his caravan to beat camels in deserts for being slow, tired, and so on. After the beating, the camel moved faster.

Modern reframers paint it as “the stick touched the camel gently, the camel was blessed and hence moved faster.”

This is nonsense.

When an animal is beaten, it actually experiences immense pain, fear, and dread. Its cortisol levels rise. Adrenaline levels rise. It’s heart rate rises. The SAN- the sino-atrial node in the heart- receives more depolarisation.

It’s left ventricle contracts harder, faster.

The animal sees the stick again, the stimulus that caused it pain, and moves faster, runs faster- to avoid said pain again.

So no.

The camel was not blessed.

The camel was given a ruthless beating, and then ran out of pain.

At Oxford University, they teach this too. Oxford teaches Religion through a critical lens, examining the exact dates and times and periods when texts were compiled, rewritten and reauthored.

Students of Religion at Oxford learn the actual verbs used to describe the event- not Western PR re-interpretations.

When a modern apologist website claims a stick "gently nudged" a camel, an Oxford student looking at the original classical text can see the raw Arabic verbs—like daraba (to hit/strike) or nakhasa (to prod sharply with a stick)—and realize the English translation has been deliberately altered to protect modern moral sensibilities.

The same logic exists everywhere.

Animals serve human needs better after they are taught submission through pain. People rewrite Muhammad‘s authorised beating of the camel as a touch to maintain the illusion of his perfect morality.

You do not touch an animal to make it run.

You beat it.

I write that precisely because I hate animal cruelty. I want to expose this bullshit.

Circus animals perform precisely because they know that if they don’t, they’ll be whipped, beaten, caned after the performance.

Dog collars work because they shock the dog- electrocute it- to get it to submit to the human.

Elephants in tourism paint and bow to tourists because they know that if they don’t, they’ll- literally- be impaled up their hindquarters with a bullhook and whipped bloody at the same time.

I’m not going to soften it.

That’s what humans do. That’s what they do in Thailand.

"To compel submission for use in tourism, the babies are then 'broken in spirit' (paajan) by isolation, starvation, dehydration, subjection to extreme noise then, in a crushing cage (kraal), beaten, stabbed, and ripped with hooks... They are routinely stabbed with bullhooks (ankus) to maintain fear and compliance for easy use in tourism: rides, games, tricks, selfies..."

You can’t touch a camel with a stick, bless it, and make it move faster.

Animals move and react in proportion to the pain and agony you inflict on them.

You have to beat the animal- hard- to cause it pain, make it suffer, dominate it, and make it work.

There’s nothing compassionate or justified about that.

It’s ”I matter more than you- so I can hurt you to get what I want.“

It hurts me to type that because I love animals, but the truth is that the elephant industry in Thailand works that way because baby elephants from birth are given 200-300 blows daily to their hindquarters, belly, to make them work, submit and paint for tourists.

Similar justification exists elsewhere in Islam, concerning geckos.

In Islam, geckos are seen as pests, ’spiritually corrupt’. There is a points system, where you get 100 points if you kill the gecko (beat it with a stick) on the first strike.

You get less points if you miss and have to beat again. Not because what you did is wrong. But because you allowed the ‘spiritually corrupt‘ animal to exist that much longer.

“The animal‘s pain does not matter because God said it’s okay. I can crush this animal’s internal organs and let it bleed to death screaming on the floor. It‘s okay. God told me so.”

It is not just Islam.

 In the 1850s, a group of English and international residents in Rome attempted to establish a branch of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) to stop the brutal beating of horses and donkeys in the city streets. 

Pope Pius IX officially banned the creation of the society.

He stated that granting animals legal protection or suggesting that humans had a moral obligation to them was a theological heresy.

The Vatican argued that admitting humans owed a duty to animals would imply that animals have rights, which would directly undermine the Catholic dogma that only humans possess immortal souls and spiritual dignity.

Animals continued to be worked to death, beaten with spiked sticks when they collapsed from exhaustion, and left to die in the streets without veterinary intervention, all shielded by official papal decree.

”Religion says I can do it. So it’s okay.”

During the 17th century, French philosopher, mathematician, and devout Catholic René Descartes introduced a philosophical concept that heavily influenced Christian scientific institutions: the doctrine of the animal automaton.

He argued that consciousness, pain, and suffering required a rational, immortal soul, which only humans possessed. Therefore, he asserted that animals were merely complex, biological clocks ("meat machines").

They could react to stimuli, but they did not actually experience pain.

He was being unscientific, and used religious dogma to justify what he did.

”Religion says I can do it. So it’s okay.”

This philosophy justified horrific veterinary experiments (vivisections) across Christian Europe. Scientists and theologians would nail live dogs, cats, and primates to wooden boards by their paws. They would slice open their chests, sever their tendons, and dissect their internal organs while the animals were fully conscious, without any form of anesthesia.

 When the animals screamed, whimpered, or struggled violently, Cartesian scientists literally laughed it off.

They argued that the dog's agonizing screams were not expressions of pain, but merely the "creaking of the gears" or the "vibration of the springs" within the organic machine, much like a clock making a noise when struck.

”Religion says I can do it. So it’s okay.”

So no.

Christianity, too, does not solely teach ‘animals are to be treated with compassion’.

That’s a lie they feed you in school to avoid social conflict.

In science, you need one accurate counter example to prove a positive claim false.

In the Old Testament narrative of the conquest of Canaan, God issues a direct military command regarding the treatment of enemy cavalry and chariot horses. [1]

• The Scriptural Text: In Joshua 11:6, God explicitly commands Joshua before a battle against a coalition of northern kings:

"Do not be afraid of them, because by this time tomorrow I will hand all of them over to Israel, slain. You are to hamstring their horses and burn their chariots."

To "hamstring" an animal means to slice through the major Achilles tendons of its hind legs with a sword or blade. Following the victory, Israeli soldiers went through the battlefield systematic cutting the tendons of thousands of living, conscious war horses.

That’s interesting.

And I think it serves as the best evidence human religion is in fact - human authored.

Evidence proves Christianity as it exists today was compiled, written and re-written over centuries to cater to the needs and whims of those who lived at the time.

For instance, in early Judeo Christian tradition, the concept of Heaven and Hell did not exist. Instead, they had Shoel - where when we die, we return to the dust from where we came. These concepts only came in later, where Plato’s idea of the Soul was imported into Christian frameworks.

An omnibenevolent God allowed, and endorsed, brutal animal torture.

That is not responsible ‘stewardship’

That is not ‘the good care for the needs of their animals’

That is sadism.

Slicing open a live animal and doing so happily, under the guise of divine justification, what you are doing is correct, okay, or sanctioned -

Is sadism.

That God is clearly not omnibenevolent.

That God is clearly anthropocentric. Centred around ourselves.

Who could possibly make an anthropocentric, human focused God?

Humans.

It internally censors out and moderates whole sections of our culture, stuff like indian neurodivergent deeply affectionate best friendships gets sterilised into ‘I’m here. We’ll talk about it.’

Has anyone else experienced the same?

Why does it lie?

Has anyone else had similar experiences?

https://preview.redd.it/sddaqvhx4p1h1.png?width=2752&format=png&auto=webp&s=34d46d6625184060937b5fcc4edc70910b36b942

https://preview.redd.it/my2m1vhx4p1h1.png?width=2752&format=png&auto=webp&s=af2f6e9894d7a90d5583498c095f1d232ca55d89

Hi

I have autism and like many people with autism I have a best friend, also autistic, who I really really care about, I love them so much. To me there’s nothing wrong in that, right? having a close best friendship?????

But according to Christianity autistic special interests or obsessions/fixations in autism (a documented symptom of autism) are a form of idolatry? (or is that too far a stretch?)

Autistic autistic best friendships can often be exceptionally affectionate, loving, and very protective, where both parties think about each other constantly. With my bestie we have the ability to know each other’s feelings - even though i am in the uk and he is in india .

What I don’t understand is what‘s so wrong about that?

How the hell is that predictive of someone’s moral character? How?

How?

Something I read that really disturbed me was ‘in christianity it’s a sin to think someone is your ultimate source of happiness when in fact it is christ’

How do we know the latter exists? The former exists.

My best friend, Vihaan. The kid who parents me, obsesses over my every single worry like it‘s his worry, certain topics that worry me are off limits in conversations (i know)

I just think too much about these things sometimes. i know I shouldnt be but i thought to ask.

I take things very literally, again to do with autism, so that’s why I’m scared. also.

I’m posting this here because I am both- autistic and was born at 25 weeks. I know the two categories overlap quite a bit. But here’s what I wanted to say

Don’t use ChatGPT for emotional insecurities. I learned it the hard way.

ChatGPT is a confirmation engine.

It can argue anything.

Anything.

Regardless of how factually unsound it may be.

If you ask it to write a compelling piece proving ‘why I struggle with maths is my own fault for not working hard enough and all extremely preterm kids can overcome their limits’

It will write it.

It will use persuasion.

It will use bold letters and capitals.

And it will probably terrify you.

Because it sounds authoritative.

But it will write it anyway.

Not because it is true - it is not (extremely premature birth and executive function limitations, problems with mathematics are documented. Not universal- outliers exist- but by and large, they are real)

But because it is designed and programmed, to validate and confirm the narrative you want to hear.

When you talk to chatgpt, you are not talking to a soul. You are not talking to your best friend (who I assume for many of you too will immediately step in with the overprotection… autistic autistic best best friendships 😄)

You are talking to a tool that will validate your worst fears and your worst case thinking.

I know how much that can hurt.

So please don’t do the same to yourself.

https://preview.redd.it/mshtwdii9h1h1.jpg?width=1873&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=274778484b566b2f1d0c9e962ef70e1650afd89b

Hello

Here, it tells me

Muhammad taught only kindness to animals:

muhammad allowed animal cruelty 

That statement is false.

Muhammad taught kindness toward animals in Islamic tradition. Various hadith (reported sayings/actions) describe him condemning unnecessary harm to animals, encouraging feeding and proper treatment, and criticizing cruelty such as overworking or starving animals.

Examples commonly cited in Islamic sources include:

• A woman being condemned for starving a cat.
• A man being forgiven by God for giving water to a thirsty dog.
• Instructions not to torture or mutilate animals.

Historically, like most societies of the 7th century, animals were still used for food, transport, farming, and hunting, but deliberate cruelty was generally discouraged rather than approved.

This is a lie: he allowed branding of camels on thighs (which would have caused them immense pain), he allowed animal fighting in some contexts (there is nothing wrong with it- his quote), once he was recorded as allowing tired camels to be beaten for slowness

Are there any others who experience this lie by omission where chatgpt erases religious doctrinal reality for comfort?

Thank you

Recently, I have been reading online religious claims which are contextual, but I can’t see that context - I read it literally, and in some cases that can be terrifying. I have noticed also on Reddit many tend to mis-quote, exaggerate religious moral verdicts on certain things - and as you probably will know, in autism, we struggle to discern whether something is an exaggeration or whether it is factual reality.

this then leads me to obsessively think and worry (really really worry) about the thing I read- only for me to research and realise it was contextual or exaggerated.

I won’t be posting exactly what claims I read, because I don’t want to scare anyone reading this. however,

any advice would be much appreciated, thanks.

I did not make this up. Hinduism says exactly this, here, at this link: https://www.dlshq.org/download/karmas-and-diseases/#_VPID_1

Some examples

Who casts lustful look on women, who eyes others’ property, whose heart burns at others’ well-being, who visits nautch-parties: Result is permanent sight loss

Lawyers and advocates who twist truth and falsehood in court-cases:

Get colour-blindness, saint vitus’s dance, squint-eye and cataract; are born with a deformed body and afflicted with loss of memory.

Just so you know, if you say that in an optometry OSCE when they ask ‘what is the aetiology of colour blindness’- you get thrown out. Failed, and removed from the course too. Colour blindness is an X linked recessive trait. Nothing to do with morality.

This one is interesting.

Cruel doctors who ill-treat patients, and give worthless medicines charging high rates, who inject aqua and charge high fees,

Karmic next life consequence:

Are born as women and have womb-disease. Their conceptions and delivery will be attended by severe complication, pain and will mostly result in abortion.

This is a male coded, patriachal, justification, for misogyny.

It is sick. It is evil.

A perfectly omnibenevolent, just God, if they exist, would not allow for discrimination of the opposite sex. They would also know the aetiology of colour blindness as being linked to autosomal genetics. A perfectly omniscient God cannot make factual blunders of this magnitude.

Perfect excuse. This is a get out of jail free card for mistreating women, for shaming them, and also for explaining away abortions as ‘your deserved moral punishment’

This one is bullshit.

Who blaspheme the Supreme Lord, speak ill of saints and scriptures:

Result is tongue cancer.

Reality:

Tongue Cancer is most commonly a squamous cell carcinoma arising from the mucosal epithelium of the tongue. The exact cause is multifactorial, involving environmental carcinogens, viral infection, chronic irritation, and genetic susceptibility. (Mayo Clinic)

“The common aetiological factors for tongue cancer are tobacco use, alcohol abuse, HPV infection, betel nut chewing, poor oral hygiene, chronic irritation, immunosuppression, and premalignant oral lesions. Tobacco and alcohol together are the most important risk factors.” (NCBI)

These last ones make my blood boil.

Maharaurava is of the same type. Those men who indulge in passions are eaten here by carnivorous (flesh-eating) animals.

Passions are intense emotions.

Autism makes you feel and act on intense emotions. I worry all day about my best friend Vihaan.

Is that sinful?

Passions can also mean desires.

Autism gave me a lot of special interests as a kid: harmless things, woodlouse collecting, Minecraft, and more.

Here, it’s saying that those things - having ‘intense emotion’, ’having obsessions’- lead you to be consumed by animals, alive, after death.

That is not inference.

That’s deductive reasoning.

This, to me, is evidentiary proof Hinduism was written by:

Humans. Homo sapiens. Who operated under neurotypical norms and who thought those who were different, those who were too much, too intense, too weird, too off piste, neurodivergent people:

Are sinners.

Hinduism says cerebral palsy is a moral punishment for “servants who pretend to work and thus ruin their masters“, as per the source.

Get paralysis and trembling of limbs and palpitation.

I can’t think of a more direct description of the condition. That is what CP is, limb paralysis, presenting as quadriplegia, hemiplegia. Destroys lives.

Another one.

Who drink intoxicants and liquors, and indulge in immoral acts:

Will be born as weaklings, underdeveloped or premature birth and suffer from neurasthenia and general debility.

Weaklings?

This was written by males. Neurotypical, male, pricks.

I was born extremely premature. So was Vihaan.

And according to Hinduism we are ‘weaklings’? ‘Immoral’ in past lives?

Weakling is a word used by the dominant, aggressive, neurotypical male to conquer small boys in classrooms. Small, timid boys get picked on by larger ones.

We are not weaklings. And if you are EP and reading this, you aren’t either.

Scientific literature says otherwise.

“ELBW survivors display higher levels of cautiousness in their 30s compared to controls... individuals born at ELBW or VLBW display fewer antisocial and delinquent behaviors than their NBW peers in young adulthood.”

Biological Psychology - ScienceDirect

(ELBW can be taken as a proxy for those born EP. The two groups overlap more or less.)

But that isn’t really why I’m here.

Hinduism prescribes cancer as a moral punishment for burning it’s sacred texts.

Who burn sacred books and destroy spiritual literature —>

Get gastric ulcers and cancer. (From the source)

Cancer has nothing to do with morality. It is an amoral agent.

Just know none of this would get you any marks in any medical exam, ever.

That makes me feel better.