I saw the model CV given by our recruitment and internship cell. No pronouns are mentioned. But I saw the model CV of another law school and it was mentioned. So then one firm will receive a set of CVs from NLU-X with pronouns mentioned and another from NLU-Y with no pronouns mentioned. This gives the impression that NLU-X is more sensitive to gender inclusivity and sensitivities of the 2SLGBTQIA+ communities.

Interesting. I went to law school (undergrad) in the UK. The advice there is don't include gender/pronouns, birthdate/age, photograph or any other information that can identify a protected characteristic. Those places have specific career service offices rather than RCC-style setups, and I got my CV checked by the recruitment coaches (or 'career advisors' as they call them) working at my uni's that outfit at an early stage of my law school career. They even told me to abridge my address and not give the full postcode (UK equivalent of a pincode) because it could be possible to gage based on postcode whether or not you live in a rich or poor area. Of course, one was perfectly free to reject these suggestions, if one wished. I suppose the same would be the case with these RCC-style outfits. So I suppose it really depends on you how much exposure you want to give yourself to potential biases because of protected characteristics.

You don't have to look at the unpublished comments. Now look even at the published ones. Totally disgusted. If someone impacted by these issues were to join a profession that would drive them to experiencing suicidal thoughts, the legal profession in India is the one. That is what the law schools should put on their advertisement brochures. At least they'd be honest.

Moderator, how exactly does this conform with your moderation guidelines? How is this acceptable material to publish? Isn't the acceptable standard that an exercise of rights that harms someone else an unacceptable striking of the balance? Of course with free speech, it is high, for we must accept shocking, disturbing, even offensive comments. But exposing people impacted by these issues to comments like this could potentially have a chilling effect on them - have you considered that?

To the one who wrote this disgusting crap: do we have an act like the (now-repealed) UK Local Government Act 1988 which made illegal the "promotion" of homosexuality in certain circumstances? What exactly is your problem in life? If nothing wrong has been done, why do you have a problem? If you can't be civil, why can't you just keep quiet? You are just taking advantage of the anonymity this website affords you to kick down? Do you know that had this been a non-anonymous comment, you could have been accused of engaging in conduct that lowers the confidence of the public in the legal profession? Or are you so drunk on power that you don't care? Haven't you realised that homosexuality has been decriminalised in India?

Well science for one is not limited to physical but also psychological and social. But honestly, when dealing with such matters I have a simple justification. Sometimes we just gotta mind our own business. If someone is hurting because of something and they are fighting for something I can’t understand, doesn’t mean I am right and they are wrong. Things exist I can’t wrap my head around. But if it brings comfort to someone why will I resist it? So I just mind my own business.

Well the issue is since we live in a civilized country, we have civil rights, and some of those rights are specific to certain groups basis biological realities. For instance, women have the right to their separate spaces, including bathrooms, locker rooms, sports leagues, prisons, etc. Hence if someone who has the appearance of a male, has all the biological attributes of a male (muscle mass, bone density, etc) and the sexual characteristics of a male, claims that he is actually a woman because he "feels" like one, and demands access to segregated spaces for women, there has to be some scientific justification for the same other than "mind your business". This is especially relevant in a poor country like ours, since while the privileged few can virtue signal from their ivory towers, the vast majority share public spaces. Biology is an objective truth, not a subjective interpretation. The "psychological" challenges, is simply gender dysphoria, which merits treatment, ▮▮▮. Social "science" is not science, but merely opinions, since they're not universal, hope you're educated enough to understand this. @LI moderators, for once don't be overwhelmed by your woke sensitivities, and in the interest of fairness, do publish this.

I think there is room to have both differentiated by sex and inclusive spaces. Obviously, there must be boundaries around single sex spaces which must be respected, but that does not mean there cannot be gender inclusive spaces as well (and that does not mean relabelling accessible toilets as accessible + gender inclusive, it means doing something genuinely to have provision that addresses both the needs of those who require accessible toilet provision and for those for whom gender inclusive spaces are needed). This very binary argument does not capture the world's realities anymore.

Thank you for this. I am a straight, heterosexual, cisgender male, blind person, so not impacted personally by the issues raised. Reading these comments and finding out what kinds of people comment on this site had made me feel like never visiting it again. Your comment has made me reconsider.