The Supreme Court used ‘Pregnant Person’ in an order which may begin the silent erasure of women. In order to show gender inclusion the order has become the latest storm in Bharat’s cultural conversations. It seems the top court’s judgement gives credence to WOKE terminology that challenges traditional notions of pregnancy and the reproductive rights of women. The court further used the term ‘Cisgender Women’ to clarify its orders which may surely hurt the sentiments of millions of Bharatiya Nari! Let’s discuss.
The Supreme Court And An Underage Girl’s Plight
A 14-year-old girl in Maharashtra was sexually abused. Unfortunately, she found herself 27 weeks pregnant as a result. In India, the legal limit for medically terminating a pregnancy is 24 weeks. Thus, despite being physically and mentally fit for pregnancy termination, her request was denied by the medical board. Why? Because termination of advanced pregnancy is harmful to the mother’s health. Only in cases of congenital defects in the foetus will a medical termination of advanced pregnancy be allowed. Then too it carries a high risk to the woman’s health.
Therefore, the abused girl had to knock on the Supreme Court’s door with a request to terminate her 27-week fetus without legal repercussions.
Upon appeal, the Supreme Court intervened and ordered a reevaluation of the girl’s pregnancy. The subsequent medical assessment affirmed there might be risks to her physical and mental health if the pregnancy were to continue. Thus, the Supreme Court authorizes the termination. However, delays in decision-making led to the pregnancy advancing beyond 30 weeks, raising additional concerns for the girl’s well-being.
Supreme Court and The Term ‘Pregnant Person’
In the ruling for this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for medical boards to prioritize the fundamental rights of pregnant mothers. They stressed that the mother’s well-being is primary, irrespective of gestational age or fetal health. This decision was commendable humane judgment by the judges.
However, The top court used ‘Pregnant Person’ in its orders to criticize the lack of consideration for the mother’s physical and mental health.
The court issued guidelines to safeguard practitioners and ensure informed decision-making in pregnancy terminations. However, these guidelines stress the importance of evaluating the ‘Pregnant Person’ and ‘their’ well-being as well as reproductive autonomy. Thereby, allowing sections of society to give reproduction a WOKE color!!
Supreme Court, India’s Culture, And Sanatana Traditions
Throughout history, India’s societal fabric has been a fine weave of reverence for traditional gender roles and societal norms. Motherhood, in particular, holds a sacred place in Sanatana Dharma. A female is more than just a womb or a ‘field to be plowed’. The essence of womanhood and the continuity of life itself are the core of Sanatana Dharma and the identity of Bharat. Thus, to the common Indian a “pregnant woman” is simply a woman who is a ‘Mother-in-Making.’
The word ‘garbhvati’ is a celebration of deep-rooted cultural reverence of females.
Moreover, it acknowledges the unique biological and social significance of women in Bhartiya society.
However, the Supreme Court’s decision to adopt the term “Pregnant Person” is akin to a decisive departure from the culture and tradition of the land. Unfortunately, by broadening the language to encompass non-binary individuals and transgender men, the term gives legal and public validation to mental delusions caused by Gender Dysphoria. The term itself reeks of Western-centric convoluted concepts of gender and identity in the Bharatiya lexicon. Therefore, this legal accpetance of “WOKE” ideology may hurt the millennia-old core values of Bharat.
Erasure of ‘Women’ In Pregnancy?
In the pursuit of inclusivity, this term “pregnant person” will inadvertently erase the unique experiences and struggles of women. Moreover, usage of the term ‘Cisgender’ for natural and biological women allows a certain micro-section of society to police public language. Most beleive the term is meant to degrade women and make them a subset of their own gender.
Women have borne the brunt of pregnancy-related challenges and societal recognition. Such twists of language in hindsight may surely erase the deserved stature of women in Indian society. A small micro percentage of gender-dysphoric men should not be encouraged to claim the exaltation of motherhood and womanhood just because they wear heels. Neither should confused females, who use nature’s life-giving gift to women while refusing to accept their body’s structure, be encouraged to denigrade the sacred idea of motherhood.
Thus, the term ‘Pregnant Person’ may be a form of discrimination against normal women!
Can anyone apart from women lay claim to motherhood and pregnancy? Is it not simpler to assign the term ‘woman’ to anyone with a ‘womb’? Why give undue credence to avoidable new-age confusion in public domain? Diluting the language around pregnancy hurts millions of women in Bharat. It trivializes the existence, struggles, and roles of women in motherhood. Moreover, it diminishes the voices of millions of women in the discourse on reproductive rights.
A Question Of Cultural Sensitivity?
The Supreme Court’s order may appear as inclusive to a section of distorted modern society. However, it raises questions if such a term can harm the cultural sensitivity of the society at large. While upholding principles of equality is commendable, imposing such ideological agendas on Bharat’s traditional society may harm the majority of people who are enmeshed into the histroicla and cultrual values of the land.
The honest truth is that ‘Woman‘ is an English term used to denote anyone born with female genitalia.
India has been a safe haven for millenia to transsexuals, hermaphrodites, or Kinnar Parivaar. However, most of them choose one specific gender to identify with. They choose to live the rest of their lives with that role. Most of society accepts them as a unique part of Indian soceity. Therefore, there is hardly any need for gender inclusive language in Indian society.
The term ‘pregnant person’ may not be a well-accepted notion in the conversation regarding gender equality.
Moreover, the term ‘Cisgender’ is a byproduct of gender dysphoria that uses WOKE language to discriminate against biological genders. Therefore, by using a gender-neutral term for pregnant women may lead to the erasure of women entirely from public vocabulary. Additionally, it allows a very small section of WOKE gender-dysphoric patients to have the upper hand in language and society, where none are required.
While inclusivity and equality are noble goals, they should not come at the expense of eroding cultural values. Nor should they be used to marginalize the experiences of women. Thus, usage the term “pregnant person” by th top court itself may not have positive outcomes. It may have unforeseen societal consequences in the birthplace of Sanatana Dharma. To import such terminolgies from broken, convoluted and dystopic Western societies, that too in the name of social inclusivity, will beget a sad day for a culture and a civilization that has existed, survived and flourished aginst all odds for millenias. Jai Bharat!