Tag: #sexualharassmentofwomenatworkplaceact

S.no	Contents
1.	Introduction
2.	The deep-rooted gender stereotypes and their legal consequences
3.	Landmark Cases
4.	Legal and Media Reactions to Gender Stereotyping.
5.	Legal Interventions
6.	Workplace Gender Bias: Legal Options and the Situation Today
7.	Conclusion

Introduction: Examining Gender Stereotypes in Indian Society

Deeply embedded in all communities, gender stereotypes frequently uphold social norms that specify anticipated behaviours, roles, and characteristics depending on a person’s perceived gender. In India, a nation rich in variety and cultural tradition, gender stereotypes have long affected the lives and opportunities of millions of individuals. This article examines the negative effects gender stereotypes have on Indian society as well as the initiatives taken to combat them.

The historical records and cultural perspectives have perpetuated gender stereotypes for a long time. As a result, they promote unequal power dynamics and prejudiced attitudes. These prejudices frequently limit the potential of people and uphold gender norms that favour one gender over the other. Such practices not only contravene the equality values stated in the Indian Constitution, but they also inhibit the development of a society that is inclusive.

This article emphasises the importance of the legal system in changing cultural beliefs by highlighting important court decisions that have contested pervasive gender stereotypes¹. It also looks at the legal measures put in place to control such representations as well as how media portrayals continue to reinforce these stereotypes². The article also addresses initiatives in workplaces where gender discrimination still exists as well as in educational institutions, where the foundations of these biases frequently take hold³.

Dismantling deeply embedded gender stereotypes calls for a multifaceted strategy as we navigate the complex web of legal frameworks, societal dynamics, and cultural perspectives. This article seeks to add to the ongoing discussion about changing the legal system to promote a more equal and impartial society for all people, regardless of gender, by examining legal changes, significant cases, and current difficulties.

The deep-rooted gender stereotypes and their legal consequences

Deep-seated gender stereotypes still have a significant impact on legal issues and inequalities in society, casting a wide shadow over social institutions. These stereotypes frequently take the form of presumptions about traditional gender roles and talents, which has an impact on people’s access to opportunities, care, and resources. Therefore, these skewed viewpoints go against the equality values stated in the Indian Constitution and impede the development of a just and inclusive society.

The historic case National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014)⁴ emphasised the need for laws to recognise and defend the rights of transgender people while also highlighting how difficult it is to combat gender stereotypes in the context of the law. Additionally, the 2013 passage of the Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women in the Workplace Act⁵ emphasised the legal commitment to fostering impartial and safe workplaces. Legal changes that reframe societal standards are necessary to combat these preconceptions, creating an environment where the law can be a powerful weapon for eliminating ingrained gender biases.

Legal Conflicts Against Gender Stereotyping: Landmark Cases.

In the continuous battle against deeply embedded gender stereotypes in Indian society, landmark judicial decisions have become significant battlegrounds. These instances not only show the discriminatory effects of such preconceptions but also demonstrate how the judicial system has the ability to question and change social norms.

National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014)⁶ is a landmark case that recognised the rights of transgender people and the need to combat stereotyping. A landmark framework to combat workplace sexual harassment was established by the Supreme Court’s involvement in Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997)⁷, which recognised the need for safe and impartial workplaces free from gender-based discrimination. These examples show how the judiciary has actively interfered to combat the persistence of gender biases, defying conventional wisdom.

Society confronts the damaging effects of gender stereotypes by delving into these incidents. These court cases raise people’s awareness and promote discussions that advance society. They show that eradicating long-held preconceptions necessitates both society’s joint efforts and the judicial system’s authoritative position.

Legal and Media Reactions to Gender Stereotyping. 

The media has a significant impact on how society perceives things, but it also frequently reinforces negative gender stereotypes that impede the advancement of gender equality. This influence has a double-edged effect, reflecting and strengthening existing prejudices. To buck this trend, however, legal responses are starting to emerge.

The National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014)⁸ case brought attention to the media’s influence on public opinion and the need for regulation to stop the spread of damaging stereotypes. In order to meet the need to confront gender biases rather than perpetuate them, the legislative framework places a strong emphasis on the need for responsible media portrayal. By controlling media content, society makes progress towards eradicating entrenched stereotypes and promoting gender equality.

These legal actions serve as a reminder of the media’s significant influence on society’s views as well as its capacity to accentuate good change. Not only must media representations be changed, but legal measures that will assure their implementation must also be acknowledged in order to effectively combat gender stereotypes.

Legal Interventions: How Educational Institutions Can Drive Change

While educational institutions are important for breaking down gender stereotypes, they can also unintentionally reinforce prejudice. Legal actions are crucial in converting these settings into places that support inclusion and gender equality. Legal actions to combat gender stereotypes and promote diversity have been taken against educational institutions, which play a significant role in forming cultural attitudes. Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India⁹ is one of these important cases in which the Supreme Court emphasised that educational institutions must uphold gender equality and ensure a setting free from prejudice and stereotypes. This case supports the requirement for institutions to stop discriminatory behaviour.

The Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2013, also broadens its application to educational institutions and requires a proactive strategy to combat gender-based discrimination. The value of education in influencing society’s perceptions and achieving equality is reaffirmed by these legal actions.

Workplace Gender Bias: Legal Options and the Situation Today

Strong legal remedies that change with the times are needed to address workplace gender bias. By focusing on equal compensation for equal work, a significant case—Air India v. Nergesh Meerza, (1981)¹⁰—expressed the judiciary’s position against gender discrimination. The precedent set by this decision served as the foundation for later legal systems.

A key piece of legislation that demands harassment-free workplaces and provides remedies for preventing it is the Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women in the Workplace Act, 2013, which was passed in 2013. In terms of recognising and eradicating gender stereotypes in the workplace, this 2013 law is a positive step.

M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2004)¹¹, another significant case, demonstrates the judiciary’s dedication to eradicating gender-based discrimination. Even though it wasn’t specifically about the workplace, this decision demonstrated the Supreme Court’s commitment to environmental justice and gender equality, showing how the two legal fields interact and affect gender bias.

Despite these legislative developments, the labour environment today is nevertheless complicated. There are still gender pay gaps, a shortage of women in senior positions, and covert biases. Legal remedies have set the stage, but ongoing efforts from groups, people, and governments are necessary to create a truly equal working environment.

Conclusion: Using the law to eliminate gender stereotypes.

In conclusion, India’s legal system has greatly changed to address the deeply ingrained gender stereotypes that support inequality and prejudice. Through significant decisions like National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) and Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the judiciary has emphasised its responsibility to combat these prejudices and promote a more equal society.

The legislative instruments created to redefine educational institutions as hubs of inclusivity and gender sensitivity are best illustrated by legislation like the Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2013, and the Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008) case. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013, and the Air India v. Nergesh Meerza (1981) case further highlights the struggle against workplace discrimination.

These legal avenues, linked to developing societal knowledge, highlight how crucial it is to destroy gender stereotypes. A more just and inclusive future is made possible by the Indian judicial system’s dedication to maintaining constitutional ideals and advancing equality.

As we proceed on this road, it becomes increasingly obvious how important it is for institutions, society, and legal systems to work together continuously. India is moving closer to a future in which gender stereotypes are a thing of the past by persistently questioning conventions and pushing for change.

---

Endnotes:

1. National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438.
2. Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241.
3. Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2013.
4. Ibid
5. Gender Sensitization and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2013.
6. Ibid
7. Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241.
8. Ibid
9. Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India, (2008) 3 SCC 1.
10. Air India v. Nergesh Meerza, (1981) 4 SCC 335.
11. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2004) 12 SCC 118.

This article is authored by Srishti Singh, a pass-out student at O P Jindal Global University, Sonipat

Lexpeeps Pvt. Ltd. and Justice Law Firm and Arbitration Centre in collaboration bring a Live Session on the topic, “The Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace”.

About Lexpeeps Pvt. Ltd.

Lexpeeps Pvt. ltd. is an organization that works to assist and help law schools in organizing and managing their events. Lexpeeps also provide you with the recent happening in the legal world in the form of news, opportunities, articles to explore your interests, and many more. The sole purpose of Lexpeeps Pvt. Ltd. is to provide law students and law schools quality and to create value for the legal fraternity.

About JUSTICE Law Firm

Justice Law Firm, based in Gujarat firm provides services from legal advisory to legal drafting. The firm areas of practice are Industrial Law, Company Law, Intellectual Property Law, and Family Laws. The firm provides support in developing proper contract agreements and protects its clients from any monetary losses. Justice Law Firm has a huge presence from Subordinate Courts to the Supreme Court of India.

Speakers of the Session

Advocate Sonali Satpathy (Justice Law Firm & Arbitration Centre)
Madhur Rathaur (Lexpeeps Pvt Ltd.)

Date and Time

The session will be live on 16th July 2022 from 4:00-5:00 PM IST.

Registration

For registering, fill out the form provided: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScUOe0PRlu1hpANseDA6puw8uvciyD7hgFoa1SGa89pQ6Ltfg/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&flr=0

For more details, please visit @lexpeeps.in and @justice.lawandarbitration on Instagram.

Gender is an essential part of human life. Our gender can have an impact on our life duties, rights, and responsibilities, as well as our decisions. These choices and actions are then limited by the laws that govern us, and laws play a significant role in pursuing our gender identity. Today, we live in a society where gender equality and civil rights are promoted by various cultures. To comprehend gender-related rights and legislation, however, one must first dismantle the gender idea. It is a socially and culturally constructed term that separates different qualities between men and women, as well as boys and girls, according to the United Nations. This has something to do with a person’s feminine and masculine qualities.

In fact, when determining gender, one must be aware of the differences in gender and sex definitions. Gender has a social dimension, but sex is a biological trait of a human being generated by the association of its chromosomes and hormones, as previously stated. Margaret Mead described the pioneering concept of separating sex and gender during ancient periods in her book Gender and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies. Gender equality is much more than just men and women. Gender-neutral policies are defined as laws and initiatives that have no unequal influence on multiple groups, whether negative or positive. However, if differences in the social and cultural settings of the groups are not taken into consideration when designing policy, gender equality might be reduced to gender discrimination. This could lead to a system that is useless and fruitless. In reality, the importance of gender equality is linked to civil rights. The United Nations supports a similar theory, stating that equality between men and women is required to uphold human rights.

Section 375 and 376 of the Indian Penal code, 1860. The author discusses the conviction of a man for the rape of a lady. Apart from rape laws, there has been a slew of other measures, such as the Domestic Violence Act of 2005, that are gender-specific and only affect women, such as sexual misconduct or non-consensual, where a perpetrator is invariably a man. Increased societal knowledge of these crimes reveals that the primary motivation for conducting a sexual assault or any form of violence may not only be to satisfy sexual cravings, but also to demonstrate the offenders’ power.

Before any positive outcome in society, we, as individuals, must comprehend the societal ramifications of various movements, society in general, and the backlash. As a result, in order to comprehend society and effect change, one must first grasp its history and evolution across time in order to tackle and address contemporary difficulties. It has been taken into account that, historically, the agenda of Indian women has always focused on improvements in the law concerning rape. Women have always struggled with the expanding concept of rape.

The Mathura rape case was one of the most well-known rulings in the world of law, and it was also the catalyst for numerous changes in criminal law. It is considered to be one of the most important instances in the realm of criminal law and the subject of rape. The Supreme Court ruled in this case that the young woman who had been raped by police officers had given her consent because there were no signs of wounds in the case and because the absence of wounds indicated agreement. Following this case, four law professors wrote an open letter to the Chief Justice of India, expressing their displeasure with the situation. This case sparked a trend in which the victim was no longer blamed and the guilt was shifted to the perpetrator. Another demand made by the protestors was for in-camera procedures and the non-disclosure of the identities of the rape victims.

Gender-neutrality is a nebulous term that has yet to be completely defined. So, what exactly does gender-neutrality entail?

To understand the preceding question, we must first comprehend the concept of “gender” The term “gender” has traditionally been defined as a person who falls into one of two categories: male or female. This concept, however, excludes the “transgender” third gender, which includes the “hijras” and “Kothi’s” as well as communities where people are born with both female and male organs or communities that do not define themselves as belonging to any gender.

The Binary Gender and Gender Neutrality

The fact that males and females are just two races is referred to as gender identity. It rejects the gender-sex divide as a concept. Furthermore, because it only believes in the existence of two genders, it argues that all human beings can act entirely in a feminine manner if they are female, and in a masculine manner if they are male. It completely rejects the idea of the third gender and implicitly criticizes the presence of LGBTQ people. The existence of these ideologies has a direct impact on the civil rights of persons from developing countries. Furthermore, it is particularly unjust to operate under the assumption that the LGBTQ culture does not exist. Only China has seen an increase in its LGBTQ population in recent years, with 3.5 percent of adults in the United States identifying as lesbian, gay, or bisexual. In 2017, about 1.1 million individuals aged 16 and up identified as LGBT and only China has seen an increase in its LGBTQ population in recent years. As a result, before enacting gender-neutral laws and legislation, it is necessary to recognize the meaning of identity. This is critical to ensure that no country draughts a gender-neutral law that favors only two genders while rejecting the others, as is the case with the gender-binary delusion.

It’s crucial to remember that gender isn’t limited to two or more widely recognized ideas. Gender neutrality does not mean promoting policies that favor women and force us to believe that men cannot be raped. Gender neutrality, as the name implies, is a neutral concept that should not be slanted against any group in the country. “It’s time we all understood gender as a spectrum, rather than two sets of conflicting values” Emma Watson stated more eloquently.

Why laws should be gender-neutral?

The initial presumption that women can never be predators stems from the fact that, despite the fact that the laws’ definition of rape mentions multiple ways in which an action could be constituted rape, they would still be perceived as penile-vaginal intercourse by the general public. Because men are often constructed stronger than women in biological respects, this gives the general public the impression that only men can establish dominance.

The second presumption stems from the idea that males can never be raped because they are excited by any sexual act, meaning that they have given their consent. This is to imply that arousal in the male body can be produced by a variety of factors, including the desire to be a willing participant. However, studies have shown that arousal can be produced by a variety of factors, including fear, embarrassment, and anxiety, all of which can lead to erections. There is now an increasing acceptance of the idea that male exploitation does happen. There have also been a few industrialized countries, such as Canada, Finland, Australia, the Republic of Ireland, and the majority of the states in the United States of America, that have accepted unbiased and gender-neutral legislation.

Although the Preamble of India emphasizes ideas of equity and social justice, certain policies and regulations are in direct opposition to these objectives. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redress) Act of 2013 focuses on safeguarding women from all kinds of workplace harassment. It further states that the purpose of this act is to protect women’s fundamental rights to equality and dignity. The point of dispute, however, is that in India, fundamental rights to equality and dignity are not gender-specific, and then how sexual abuse occurs in the workplace. This Act reaffirms the notion that violence is confined to women and that males, or any other group, should never be subjected to it.

In fact, rape is defined as an act of non-consensual sexual activity perpetrated against a woman under section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. This section is also based on the assumption that only a man can rape and only a woman can be raped. The notion of gender equality is supported by a number of judgments and statutes. Iceland, for example, was the first country to establish an equal pay clause in 2018, promoting the idea of a gender-neutral policy. Businesses with 25 or more employees must now submit certifications demonstrating compliance with the fair pay provision. This aims to eliminate the significant salary disparity between men and women, promoting gender equity and equality. In the view of the law, Article 14 states that everyone has the right to equality. This article claims that everyone, nevertheless their gender, is equal.

Article 15 prohibits separation on the basis of gender, i.e., no one can discriminate on the basis of a person’s or a case’s sex, creed, or any other type of discrimination.

Despite the fact that male assaults are less common than female assaults, it is important to recognize that guys are not exempt from the need for legislation to protect them. Equal rights for men in cases of sexual assault does not mean that women are deprived of their rights. Giving males a platform to speak out about their assault and the ability to file complaints would, on the other hand, lessen the toxic masculinity of asserting dominance, hence reducing assault on women, as an assertion of dominance has been the major source of violence against women.

The fear of being judged by society and fearing a backlash from a society that maintains the stigma that “men cannot be victims of the attack” is one of the reasons why men do not open out about being victims of sexual assault against them.

References

1. The Need for enacting Gender-Neutral Laws: A Critical Analysis – Lex Jura Law (wordpress.com)
2. Need for Gender Neutral Laws in India – iPleaders

This article is written by Vidushi Joshi student at UPES, Dehradun.