Comparative legal analysis demonstrates diverging definitions of womanhood in UK and Indian jurisprudence, highlighting evolving human rights frameworks in the Global South.
This article examines the growing disjuncture in trans rights jurisprudence in the United Kingdom (UK) and India. The UK Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling retrenched rights protections for trans women by limiting womanhood, for all Equality Act 2010 purposes, to individuals assigned female at birth. By contrast, the Andhra Pradesh High Court of India, in the Viswanathan ruling, expanded such protections by acknowledging the applicability of all statutes protecting women from harm and violence to individuals who self-identify as women. I discuss the possible causes of this divergence and highlight the role of global Southern jurisdictions in setting new human rights standards.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aditya Anand Singh (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: