LawSikho Webinar: Unravelling rampant Sexism in the Legal Fraternity

Must Read

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

A Legal Analysis of the West Bengal Political Crisis on IPS Deputation

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has recently summoned three IPS officers of West Bengal (WB). The decision was...

Explained: Postal Ballot for NRIs

At the end of November 2020, Election Commission sent a proposal to the law ministry to amend the Representation...

Explained: Constitutional Provisions and Legislations With Regards to a Person with Disabilities

The world celebrates December 3 as International Day of Persons with Disabilities (IDPD). This day is also called World...

Follow us

LawSikho, is a “leading online education company that creates advanced and practical legal courses”, as per its web page. They recently hosted a webinar on “How can busy professionals have a dating life”. The hosting was done for sole viewing purposes of “men”. This communicates that apparently either women aren’t professionals or simply never busy enough.

Absurd Justifications by the Hosts

This was later justified by the guest speaker, a self-styled “Love Guru” and “dating expert” Mr. Kshitij Sehrawat by claiming “it is always men who ask out women and hardly the other way round”. To his credentials, he claims to have “field experience” with women, a portal he runs called “Iron man lifestyle”. He charges a sum of 15,000/- to teach men to talk to “the cute girl you see in class every day”. In addition to this, his recent tweets range from “drunk South Delhi girls on Indians Vs Foreigners”. Also, how men looking for dates should see themselves as “car buyers”. Therefore, aspire to buy a Mercedes/BMW and not a Maruti.

The Beginning of the Controversy 

On top of that, we have, CEO of LawSikho, Mr. Ramanuj Mukherjee, allegedly a moderator who hastily transformed himself into a co-speaker. Consequently, taking it upon himself to qualify the degree of sexism in the content of this webinar.

The webinar was supposed to help balance work-life stress along with dating as a law professional. But altogether, quickly degraded into basic tips on how to ‘get women’. Mr. Sehrawat continued droning on and on about how men must aim to be alpha males. He advised to not care about grades since women like men who are into sports. Further, he says how men must be funny to attract women. Since this wasn’t enough, he says how women are like football where the more you play, the better you get.

Sehrawat perpetuated the notion that to “get women”, men must be alpha males. In that case, a woman is to be seen as a quest and dating as a game. Shockingly he says that men shouldn’t ask women for advice, as women clearly do not know what other women want. To make matters worse, he used an analogy of “bread”. Those men should “close the deal” within 3-4 days, or else the “bread” becomes stale to hint at the fizzling out of attraction.

A Female Student Speaks up 

What actually managed to still steal the despicable show was a student. A young student of Jindal Global Law School, Avanti chose to speak up. She let them know that they owed a responsibility to young men. That firstly, they cannot perpetuate sexist notions. Secondly, they cannot objectify women. Thirdly, the content being discussed needs to be checked.

Sadly, instead of correcting themselves, the moderator kept interrupting her. They kept demanding she complete her accusation but kept cutting her off repeatedly.

Naturally, when Avanti had had enough of these two, she requested he cut her off if they had no intention of letting a dialogue take place. Unfortunately, the men did. They began mansplaining sexism. Despondently, they say about how she had no grounds to call them out long after she had been cut off.

The Aftermath 

Upon the controversy, numerous students, legal professionals and lawyers called out LawSikho and demanded an apology. This, their Facebook page updated their status stating that they apologized for the harm that was generated. They also apologised for suppressing  Avanti’s voice.

Conclusion

The shocking “Bois Locker Room” incident is still fresh, and everyone is still recovering from it. Not long enough, and this incident emerges. We should see the underlying issues persisting in our society. A bigger question is, “what business does a legal online education site have in hosting a dating webinar in the first place?”. We notice how such frequent incidents point to deep underlying issues of misogyny and rape culture.

At the very least, the bare minimum we can expect from an organization that is allegedly training the future lawyers of our country is that it would stand against objectification and respect the concept of consent, much less perpetuate these ideals.

When social media posts of Sehrawat treating women as tchochke exists on a public platform, it is implied that he advocates objectification. If a legal education organization claims that it did not know of his leanings, then it did not fulfil its due diligence obligations. Whereas if it did possess knowledge of these, and still hosted him, then the organization even more alarmingly can be assumed to be proponents of such narrow thinking.

These are difficult conversations that need to be had and instead of dissuading those who initiate these we should be encouraging them. We need to stop absolving individuals and enterprises that propagate such a sexist and toxic culture for both women and men alike since such ideas have extremely far-reaching consequences. We as part of the legal fraternity should be holding ourselves to a higher standard and reflect on how troublesome the most innocuous ideas end up being if we don’t check ourselves.

Complete Webinar Video

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -