‘Not slut, chaste, harlot, just woman’: SC handbook tells judges to avoid stereotypes

In an attempt to do away with gender unjust terms, the Supreme Court of India released a ‘Handbook on Combating Gender Stereotypes’ on Wednesday, August 16. Put together by a committee led by Calcutta High Court judge Moushumi Bhattacharya, the handbook flags incorrect words that reinforce gender stereotypes and provides alternative usages.

“Even when the use of stereotypes does not alter the outcome of a case, stereotypical language may reinforce ideas contrary to our constitutional ethos. Language is critical to the life of the law,” writes Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, in the foreword to the handbook.

In a list contrasting stereotype-promoting language against preferred usages, the words ‘seductress’, ‘slut’, ‘whore’, ‘woman of loose morals’, ‘harlot’, ‘fallen woman’, and ‘chaste woman’, among others, have been replaced with simply ‘woman’. Similarly, ‘biological sex/male/female’ is replaced with ‘sex assigned at birth’, ‘prostitute’ with ‘sex worker’, ‘forcible rape’ with ‘rape’, ‘dutiful/obedient/good wife’ with ‘wife’, ‘transsexual’ with ‘transgender’, ‘hermaphrodite’ with ‘intersex’, and so on.

Such alternative suggestions in language are based on a deeper recognition of gender stereotypes, and the handbook says that “on a micro-level, stereotypes lead to exclusion and discrimination in workplaces, educational institutions, and public places. For example, even where male and female employees are of the same designation, a female employee may be tasked with administrative duties such as organising office events or buying stationery, while male employees are exempted from such tasks.”

Laying out how gender stereotypes affect judicial decision-making, the handbook further says that enormous harm can be caused if a judge relies on assumptions about people or groups when deciding cases. “Using stereotypes, instead of objectively evaluating the situation, goes against the constitutional principle of ‘equal protection of laws’, which posits 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,” the handbook notes.

Explaining commonly accepted gender stereotypes, the handbook also criticises how certain characteristics are considered ‘inherent’ to a specific gender. For example, citing the stereotype that ‘Women are warm, kind, and compassionate’, the handbook says that this cannot be a general thumb rule since it is a trait assigned to women by our patriarchal morality. “Compassion is an acquired characteristic that is unique to every individual. Individuals of all genders can possess (or not possess) compassion,” the book underlines.

Similarly, dismantling another widely used stereotype that women who are sexually assaulted or raped by men cry incessantly, the handbook says that different people react differently to traumatic events. “For example, the death of a parent may cause one person to cry publicly, whereas another person in a similar situation may not exhibit any emotion in public. Similarly, a woman’s reaction to being sexually assaulted or raped by a man may vary based on her individual characteristics. There is no “correct” or “appropriate” way in which a survivor or victim behaves,” it says.

To the question of why stereotypes should be rejected if they are true, the handbook says that “while some women may conform to a particular stereotype or assumption in certain situations, this is not a reason to extend this assumption to all women. Examining the merits of every case on its own is at the heart of impartial decision making.”

To reinforce the pointers, the handbook also cites various decisions by Indian courts that make poignant observations about gender and sexual violence. It rejects the idea that a woman’s clothing or behaviour is an invitation for sex and reiterates that active consent is non-negotiable. The book further lays down the current doctrine on various legal issues, including the infamous ‘two-finger test’, and reaffirms that they stand rejected.

“It is hoped that this handbook will be a catalyst for change within the legal profession, inspiring the Indian judiciary to discharge its duties impartially with a recognition of the the inherent dignity and unique nature of every individual,” the book concludes.