The Supreme Court has recently come out with a ‘Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes.’ This handbook aims to assist judges and the legal community in identifying, understanding and combating stereotypes about women. It contains a glossary of gender-unjust terms and suggests alternative words or phrases which may be used while drafting pleadings as well as orders and judgments. The Handbook identifies common stereotypes about women, many of which have been utilised by courts in the past and demonstrates why they are inaccurate and how they may distort the application of the law. The intention is not to criticise or cast doubts on past judgements but merely to show how stereotypes may unwittingly be employed. Finally, it encapsulates the current doctrine on key legal issues which may be relevant while adjudicating certain cases, particularly those concerning sexual violence.
This Handbook offers guidance on how to avoid utilising harmful gender stereotypes, in particular those about women, in judicial decision making and writing. Among the 43 words that are gender stereotypes are the words ‘hooker’ which is replaced by ‘sex worker,’ ‘adulteress’ – ‘a woman who has engaged in sexual relations outside of marriage,’ ‘housewife’ now homemaker, ‘child prostitute’ is a child who has been trafficked and ‘whore’ to be known simply as ‘woman’ and nothing more. The handbook also tries to accurately describe the individual’s sexual orientation such as homosexual or bisexual Stereotypes are strongly embedded in our consciousness and internalised. They are then translated to words, and actions. This is due to our societal, cultural, and environmental conditioning.
Judges may unconsciously rely on stereotypes which are preconceived assumptions about people or groups when deciding cases or writing judgements and cause incalculable harm. Stereotypes impact the impartiality and the intellectual rigour of judicial decisions. Even when judges reach legally correct outcomes, the use of reasoning or language that promotes gender stereotypes undermines the unique characteristics, autonomy, and dignity of the individuals before the court. Using stereotypes, instead of objectively evaluating the situation, goes against the constitutional principle of ‘equal protection of laws’, which states that the law should apply uniformly and impartially to every individual, irrespective of their membership to a group or category. The use of stereotypes by judges also has the effect of entrenching and perpetuating stereotypes, creating a vicious cycle of injustice.
It is heartening that in the 76th year of India’s Independence the justices have found it fit to challenge and overcome gender stereotypes to ensure an equal, inclusive, and compassionate society. Since the judiciary is daily challenged by cases relating to women in different circumstances it is vital that judges not only avoid relying on stereotypes in their decision making and writing, but also actively challenge and dispel harmful stereotypes. This is precisely the reason for the handbook which was conceived during the Covid lockdown.
