“Such unwritten norms perpetuate casual sexism and strengthen the glass ceiling for women, with control being considered exclusive to men. Unfortunately, through time, unwritten dress codes impact women throughout their lives. The sexualization and policing of women’s clothes, even from early school days, become active barriers to self-actualization and a full life,” the bench said.Referring to the Family Court’s reasons for granting custody to the father, the High Court said that the lower court found the mother to be a person of loose morals as the husband alleged that she wore revealing dresses and had posted her pictures on dating apps.The High Court said that the Family Court arrived at the conclusion without any basis and without considering the woman’s argument that it was her husband who created her account in the dating app and posted her pictures there.”Such conclusions are unfortunately sexist in tenor, and lazed by archaic notions of patriarchy, especially when no one has a right to judge women by the manner in which she dresses, or by the choices of her manner of life.””Though we cannot find the findings of the Family Court to be true even factually, we deem it necessary to remind that clothing is a form of self expression being part of an individual’s identity, or an expression of general aesthetics,” the bench said.It further said that it was “unpardonable and impermissible in any civilized society to judge a woman solely on the basis of her dress, or to thus conclude upon her virtue or her modesty”.”The sartorial preferences that a woman makes, is that of her own choice, which cannot be subjected to moral policing or assessment, particularly by courts,” it added.The bench said the Constitution grants equal rights to all without reference to gender and it was unfortunate that it has to make such an observation, as a reminder, when the country is celebrating the 75th anniversary of its Constitution.It also said that it cannot approve of the “gender statements”, like women ought to be subdued, servile and submissive and feel sad on being divorced, made by the Family Court.”The notion that women should be happy only with marriage and should feel sad on being divorced is, in our view, so ineffable that it requires no further expatiation (explanation),” the bench said.
Source link
