HELLO! Been less than 48 hours and I am back here. It's 3.46am right now and I've been pissed for more than an hour.
Due to privacy reasons, I will name this person "X" and label "it" instead of he or she.
X is such a manipulative person where I almost fell into it's trap. By asking me questions like, "Do you think they're nice people?" I said, "I'm not sure, I don't know them well enough." It replied, "So you mean they're not nice?" Excuse me? From our dear ChatGPT: X repeatedly misrepresents your words, insists it's interpretation is correct, and makes you responsible for defending yourself.
"You told me that you gongtao him but he say different things" (To translate: “You told me that you have him wrapped around your finger / that he’s really into you, but he told me something different.”)
Sometimes, manipulation doesn't come in the form of an outright lie. It comes through vague insinuations that make you question someone without giving you anything concrete to verify. The sentence itself implies that there is a contradiction or a hidden truth, yet refusing to elaborate leaves the other person with nothing but doubt and uncertainty.
The problem with this kind of communication is that it encourages suspicion without providing evidence. In this situation, the only known information was that the couple were still dating and were not officially together, which does not necessarily contradict the possibility of genuine feelings. When someone introduces doubt but refuses to substantiate their claims, it is worth questioning whether they are genuinely trying to inform you or simply influencing how you perceive another person. Not every insinuation deserves your suspicion, and not every vague claim deserves your trust.
Next, we debated about the paid service for rental of space for a couple of hours in a RENTED terrace house.
Is it legal to rent out a residential property in Singapore as a private event venue? A five-storey landed house being sublet by the hour for birthday parties, Halloween events and other private gatherings, with food and drinks prepared on-site, raises important questions about compliance with Singapore's property regulations. Under URA's planning rules, residential properties cannot automatically be used as commercial event venues, and recurring paid events may require planning approval depending on the property's approved use and circumstances.
Beyond planning permission, operators may also need to consider landlord consent, food safety requirements under SFA, and applicable fire safety regulations under SCDF. While this does not automatically mean the business is illegal, operating a commercial party venue from a residential property without the necessary approvals could result in enforcement action. Before booking or operating such a venue, it is important to verify that the property's use and activities comply with the relevant regulations.
Depending on the nature of the breach, unauthorised use of a residential property may expose an operator to enforcement action and substantial financial penalties. Singapore's Planning Act provides for fines of up to S$200,000 per charge for applicable offences involving unauthorised short-term accommodation, while serious fire safety offences can also carry significant fines and imprisonment. Whether these penalties apply to a particular party venue depends on the facts and the specific legislation breached.
Lastly, imagine saying that you would stop your friend from drink-driving before they even get the chance to walk towards their car, and the response was, “Then you probably have no friends.”
Apparently, caring enough to prevent someone from making a potentially fatal decision makes you a bad friend, but standing aside and letting them make their own choices makes you respectful of their autonomy. To me, that is a rather disturbing way of looking at friendship. I would rather have a friend be upset with me for stopping them than risk them injuring themselves or an innocent person. Some decisions have consequences far beyond the individual making them, and drink-driving is one of them.
What frustrates me most is not that people have different opinions. It is when someone treats their own perspective as the only reasonable one and judges others without making an effort to understand their intentions. The same person who insists that we should consider how others feel should also be willing to consider why someone might choose to intervene out of concern. Empathy cannot be something we demand from others while refusing to extend it to them.
There is a difference between respecting someone's autonomy and using it as an excuse to avoid confrontation. There is also a difference between understanding someone's circumstances and automatically defending their choices. Being an adult does not make someone immune to poor judgement, and being someone's friend does not mean we have to stand by silently when they are about to do something dangerous.
What I find particularly disappointing is when someone is quick to tell others that they are wrong, yet seems unwilling to acknowledge that their own reasoning can be flawed. You can disagree with me without belittling my judgement. You can challenge my perspective without assuming that yours is morally superior. And you can respect someone's freedom without pretending that every decision they make deserves unquestioning acceptance.
Ultimately, I believe friendship should involve more than keeping someone happy or avoiding difficult conversations. Sometimes, being a good friend means having the courage to say no, to intervene, and to risk being disliked for doing
It's 4.24am now and I'm finally done ranting and I'm going to sleep.