JUNE 2021 | ISSUE 1

SUN TO ICARUS

THE RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY FEMINIST PUBLICATION

What's inside this issue:

BALANCE TON QUOI - 4
PROTESTS THAT CHANGED
RML- 5
ART AS

RESISTANCE

By
Emily Vriesman
Payne
IG @emilyvpcreates

EDITORIAL

By Kriti Sharma
I begin by explaining the meaning behind the name of our zine- Sun to Icarus. The
story's lesson is to not fly too close to the sun, for your wings will burn. The story
has traditionally been narrated from the perspective of Icarus. We decided on this
name to change the power dynamic. The warning here is, as the Sun, we burn
artificial constructions. Icarus’ wax wings were man-made; as is patriarchy. And
we’re here to burn it down.

I watched Moxie on Netflix at a time in my life when I had inexplicable rage. I lost
my beautiful mother to Covid, a doctor from AFMC and the roots to my wings, in
November 2020. I lost my grandmother soon after. Everyone tells you the five
stages of grief include anger. But I was born angry. And my anger at the loss of
people I love escalated when I saw how what cripples you, doesn't affect anyone
else around you for as long as it eats you up inside. Life goes on.
2
And there is nothing which makes me angrier at the unfairness of it all except
misogyny, sexism and the artificial, social, man-imposed constructs of gender roles
and patriarchy.

I want to thank a special senior and friend who made this zine possible. Smiti
Verma. Having faced loss unites you. Remarkably, what really made the difference
was her conviction that anger makes you achieve tremendous things. It's true. I
have never been hungrier to prove my worth than when I have been angry. To
change things, to shake them up, to turn the world upside down, you need strength.
And I was lucky to find women and a few good men who have been unconditionally
supportive of an endeavour to change the culture of blatant gender disparity in law
schools, the legal profession and especially RML

Having faced basic equality issues and fighting for my rights every single day was a
harrowing and draining experience. My stories are the stories of all women who felt
the suffocation, frustration and rage at being caged, controlled and targeted for
being women of independent thought who refused to silently obey, tolerate and
endure. They were not afraid to question authority or challenge the status quo,
whether it was discriminatory hostel in-timings for girls and boys, or the
administration- including Girls’ Hostel’s Matron, Warden and security personnel-
targeting certain women for being morally “questionable” due to their preferences
for alcohol, smoking or consensual sex.

During my time at law school, I think I helped to make a difference. It is

unfortunate and disappointing that since then, things have not been going well
culturally with a dying sense of rebellion in students against a society that tells you
what gender appropriate behaviour is. I refuse to let this be the truth. I refuse to
allow sexist men and women in our administration, our faculty and our peer group,
to dictate archaic principles of moral policing in a political atmosphere that awards
abidance and penalizes dissent.

Today, as a lawyer and a human rights advocate in the making, I bring to you the
first edition of a magazine, the first feminist publication of its kind in National Law
Universities that aims to provide a safe space to all persons who have suffered at
the hands of patriarchy- a construct that does not differentiate amongst genders
when it comes to its despicable impact. The purpose of this publication is also to
start a conversation. A narrative that allows young lawyers to be inspired, moved,
enraged and take injustice personally. This is my clarion call on behalf of a team of
brilliant lawyers and students to not let injustice pass you by, unnoticed. I urge you
to read and write and “make good art”, in the words of Neil Gaiman, so we may
resist. It is time to rise and rebel. After all, only those who are crazy enough to
think they can change the world are the ones who do.

3
BALANCE TON QUOI
By Alissa Mustre Del Rio
The first time I felt sexualized was in 5th grade, I was 11 years
old and I would go talk to my friends in my classroom who sat
at another table. I would bend over the table, resting my
elbows on it, and chat away. The next day one of the girls told
me to stop coming and bending over because boys were
looking at my butt and they didn’t want them to think I was a
slut. At the time, I didn’t have the vocabulary to know what was
going on and why I felt ashamed, but this was my first time
realizing my body was (and will continue to be) sexualized. Like
many women and girls, this was one of the first but certainly
not the last time I felt unsafe in and resentful towards my
body. Since then, I’ve unfortunately experienced many other
instances of sexual harassment simply because I am a woman.
These experiences are not unique to me, my mother, sister,
niece, friends, aunts, cousins, etc., but to all women and girls
around the world. Of course, our experiences differ based on
factors such as race/ethnicity, gender identity, sexual
orientation, class, age, among others. But the bottom line is
that patriarchy, sexism, and misogyny are global systems of
oppression.
In my country, Mexico, we have deep-rooted sexist ideologies
that promote violence against women and girls– at institutional
and inter-personal levels alike. Mexico’s machismo culture can
certainly be traced back to colonial times; colonizers imposed
on the Indigenous peoples of the Americas violent ideologies
such as heteronormativity, patriarchy, misogyny, and racism.
Centuries later, we can still see the effects of sexist cultures
and harmful gender norms.
Nevertheless, resistance persists. Mexican and Latin American
feminists, especially Indigenous and decolonial ones, are and
have been for a long time fighting these oppressive systems. I
believe it’s important to honor the women, especially trans
women, who have given their lives to fight the patriarchy and
machismo culture, especially when all odds are against them.
From seeking justice for the 11 femicides that occur every day
in Mexico, to fighting to legalize abortion, to defying
heteronormativity by living their queerest lives– these girls and
women are simply relentless in their pursuit of justice.
It’s because of the many women that came before me and the
many that will come after me, that I am a feminist. And I, too,
contribute to taking down oppressive systems and fight for
justice in their and my own honor. Because if Assata Shakur
taught me anything, it’s that “it is our duty to fight for our
freedom because we have nothing to lose but our chains.”
4
BOOK RECOMMENDATION
By Sukanya Basak
I’ll admit it: I did not read Rebecca in high school
like my peers did. Reading it last year, as a
married woman and a new mother, perhaps, more
than anything else, made me appreciate the
uniqueness of this novel in the vast tapestry of
feminist literature. Does Rebecca have a strong
pro-feminist undercurrent running through the
pages? It would be pretentious to say that it does.
When one begins the book, one can’t help but feel
mildly annoyed by the protagonist, a young
woman. By the time the book is finished, the mild
annoyance has turned into full blown irritation,
bordering on rage.
Why, I asked myself, did a female protagonist
created by a female author, rile me so? The
answer lay in the realization that I, like other
readers, had judged this novel by modern
standards of feminism. Rebecca is narrated from
the point of view of a young woman who was
victim to the 20th century English society’s mores
of how a proper married woman should behave.
Married after a whirlwind romance to a tall,
brooding aristocrat, Maxim de Winter, the
protagonist bows to the inherent sexism of her
times, perhaps unknowingly, by acquiescing to be
referred to forever, as Madame Winter, her
identity subsumed within her husband’s
existence. She learns about his deceased wife, the
enigmatic Rebecca. Rebecca, who we discover
was the antagonist because she was outspoken,
and “loose”, because she befriended men.
Rebecca, who was held in contempt by Maxim,
because she refused to obey his commands.
Rebecca, whom the narrator (while she herself
was referred to by her husband as “lamb” and
“child”) judges as a manipulative liar, only because
Maxim said so. Rebecca, who was gone, because
she refused to conform.
So should you, as a woman living in 2021 read a
dated novel panned by many critics as anti-
feminist? The answer is yes. Du Maurier’s skill
didn’t just lie in portraying a weak woman under
the influence of a sexist, domineering man. The
greatest strength of Rebecca lies in the detailed
psychological study it undertakes to show the
ways men dominate women.
More tellingly, it proves how we, the readers, are
subconsciously goaded into disliking the female
protagonist when our mind realizes that a story is
told through the lips of a woman, but the eyes of
a man.
PROTESTS THAT CHANGED RML
By Deepshri Srivastava & Kriti Sharma
Who are we and what is this freedom that we want? Well, some
people call us feminists and some call us feminazis. But we prefer
to be called by our names. What we want is the freedom to live on
our own terms. And we want it right now.
I recently saw a post which said “what would you do if there were
no men in this world for twenty-four hours?” As silly as this
scenario may sound, it was liberating to think about a world
brimming with so many possibilities. I was amused and confused to
see how most women could only talk about all the things they
would finally be free to do at night. But why is that?
If there is one thing that RML has taught us, it is to fight for what
is right, because the moment you become compliant, you become a
part of this problem. And so we fought. And we decided to
continue this fight till there was nothing left to fight for. Our fight
began the moment we saw our fenced cages for the very first time,
i.e. our hostel. When asked why, we were told we are “soft”
animals and we are needed to be protected from the “fierce”
animals, i.e. them bois? Yes, the logic is clearly off but what else
can you expect from patriarchy? The rules of this jungle were also
different. Here, instead of keeping the fierce animals in check, the
soft animals were caged with curfews. They were given food if they
entered before time and were denied food if they were late. Also,
their punishments kept varying. Sometimes, the soft animals were
made to sign their names on a withered register, citing reasons for
delay. Every time someone was late, they were looked down upon
by the guards on duty as if they had just committed a crime
irrespective of the fact that the softies were coming back from
library or from a party- moral policing was for all women.
And occasionally, as punishment, the soft animals were denied
basic first aid even if they had broken bones and were writhing in
pain. I (Deepshri), have personally experienced all of the above,
and more. After denying me first aid in the name of punishment for
entering late and ignoring my friends who were literally crying for
help, the authorities went a step further and managed to issue
hostel expulsion letters in our names. Maybe it was a defense
mechanism to protect themselves after they got to know that I had
to undergo a surgery because of the delayed first aid. Or maybe
they were right in pointing fingers at our characters, because after
I fell, I came back with a broken bone, covered in blood and grass
and my friend was yelling at the Hostel guards for not opening the
Hostel gates or helping the situation in any way. Whatever it was,
it was all done in the name of “protecting” the soft animals.
However, what this society fails to realize is that when animals get
hurt, no matter how “soft” they are, they always fight back. And by
this time, these soft animals were beyond hurt. They were done
being treated like criminals in the name of protection. They were
done being discriminated against when the fierce ones would get
to roam around the campus at all times and do as they please, the
soft ones got slut-shamed even if they were outside taking a walk
alone.
My incident only added fuel to the already burning fire and
further ignited the rage that had been brewing within the
student community for a long time. The students formed a
collective, pulled up their bootstraps and began protesting
against the university administration in the middle of end-
semester examinations. Their demands were simple, they
wanted (1) retrieval of the malafide expulsion letters; (2)
increase in hostel and library timings; and (3) the resignation
of the Warden of the Girls Hostel.
In order to shift pressure on the students and to indirectly
threaten them, the university administration started
identifying the students at the forefront of the protest by
their names. However, with the media covering this protest,
the incident started gaining more traction and the pressure
shifted to the administration’s handling of the situation. The
protesting students sat in the front of the Vice Chancellor’s
house for hours in the middle of the night, when he finally
came out and requested us to first take our exams and
afterwards, meet him in the University Seminar Hall the next
evening. Once the exam ended, a meeting was organized
between the Vice Chancellor, faculty members,
administrative authorities and a very frustrated student
community. As a result of this protest, the demands made by
the students of RML were met- (1) the expulsion letters were
retrieved by the authorities with a promise to give bona fide
character certificates to me (Deepshri) and my friend in
order to clear our names of the false allegations that were
made against us; (2) the hostel and library timings were
increased from 9:30pm to 12am; and (3) the Warden of the
Girls Hostel submitted her resignation.
The questions that we raised when we joined RML still
remain unanswered. This little anecdote is only to remind the
young juniors at RML and other such institutions that such
battles have been fought by us and our seniors in the past
and that the fire that we ignited should continue to burn.
While we have some institutions where the libraries are
open till late and there are no in-timings; there are still a lot
of institutions which have arbitrary, discriminatory and
unreasonable rules specifically for women. I urge you to
remember that your fight for gender parity began long before
you stepped into campus and will continue long after you are
gone. We’re here today to be your stepping blocks to aspire
to a world where women can walk freely when they want,
where they want and whoever they want to with. This is a
fight for the right to live freely and even though we have won
a few battles in the past, the fight continues as we still have a
war to win.
Artwork by Nayanika Chatterjee
IG @isthisart_
5
MY LOVE LETTER TO THE PERFORMATIVE RML (CIS-HET) MALE

By Ayushi Tiwari
As a naïve fresher, the world enclosed within the four walls of RML had elicited great expectations from me. After all, it
seemed to have a comforting disconnectedness from the world outside it. Women around me danced to an enabling
tune of self-expression, it was exhilarating to be a part of it. I agree, it is not as rose-tinted on a daily basis. There is a
battle straight from the entry registers at the gate logging your comings and goings on campus, right up to the
Registrar’s room, but we didn’t come looking for free dinners either. We immerse ourselves in it every day. Male peers of
RML do not step back and for once, we toy with the idea of allies within enemy lines without feeling like a plot device in
our own narrative. But now comes a point in the virtuous story where most would feel we are too angry to score some
real points against the system.

The Performative RML (cis-het) Male is a character found aplenty in the campus. It is difficult not being enamored by
him when you live in a world where a man is rewarded for doing the dishes once. He is well-read by law school
standards. He cheers and jeers with you on social media. He joins in all campus protests. Most of us believe he has done
what it takes, he will engage the fence-sitters with us, he will shift the power in the gender dynamic, and he will be the
harbinger of discourse. And we soon take a fall from the dizzying heights of our own expectations.

Still inside the closet: Our hero, the Performative Male, is adept at the art of disguise. He leads you to believe that
he is one of those who would not reduce the movement to a group of angry women, and yet, he believes it is easy to
keep mum when his friends repeat the “all girls team-male judge” joke, when they limit their idea of intellectual
superiority to a lobby of guys in every batch that actively disregards any person who is unlike them as an inferior or
when one of his friends is accused of doing something inappropriate. He argues that he needs to hear both sides of
the story to make up his mind, but will never be found reaching out to the supposed victim by himself. He believes
that he is but a singular man, a minuscule unit incapable of bringing the change we seek by himself, but he staunchly
believes he is an ally without uttering a simple “hey, calling somebody meetha is wrong” once.

I do not blame you, unlearning conditioning does not come easily to us either.. But supporting women around you is not
supposed to be a covert operation where you remain ‘one of the guys’ or hastily add “I am not a feminist, I only support
what’s reasonable” to preserve your social capital when you are away from us. It takes the higher, less convenient road
where you sometimes disassociate with stubborn friends, to do it.

White Man’s Burden: The only dialogue he utters is “could have/should have”. A common assumption that our hero
holds dear is that alliance allows him to appropriate lived experiences. He does not know when to step back and
make room for people whose routine lives outweigh his newfound enlightenment. His monotone of social media
trials leaving us worse off might be correct on paper but is tone deaf. He self-categorizes his support in two neat
boxes where incidents which cannot be corroborated, or which do not reach the judicial doorstep, are forgotten. Are
we supposed to normalize a guy using his drunkenness to invade personal space up until it becomes grave enough to
meet your metric? Do informal safe spaces to share such experiences which allow other girls the chance to steer
clear, hold no water unless a complaint is filed or a report is lodged?

We understand the need for due process, we do. But living in a legal utopia is not amenable to us. Step away from the
podium, mister, and listen close.

Teach me, sensei: Our hero is akin to a social media communist, well versed in leftist literature but waits for his
mom to set up the dinner table. Each time he steps up, he either revels in his own belief that he has done enough or
innocently brings the ‘it’s my first day’ excuse. We understand that we grow by learning together and we are more
than happy to lead you to the water. But where is our hero when it comes to looking around and taking initiative?
The invisible man hardly notices fellow students screaming about mandatory non-cis-het participation in
tournaments or societies. He hardly thinks in terms of diversity unless it is a social media post. He hardly ever begins
the conversation, devises a policy or thinks of diversity even when he is in a position of power.

In this era of information, if you choose to be complacent and then hold a sword over our heads with the threat of losing
your precious allowance should we remain angry- no, thank you.

Any resemblance to people living or dead is purely intentional. I will not soften the blow by coddling your hurt feelings. If
you choose to lash out with examples of good men, save your breath because I know them and see them. I don’t hate you,
but we are going dutch on this, so pick up your part of the bill.
6

By Ananya Sharma
IG @pihusart
THIS HOUSE REJECTS CHOICE FEMINISM
By Smiti Verma
Ladies, most of us here are old enough to have seen
“feminism” transform from a bad word to the bandwagon
everyone wants to jump on suddenly. There has never been a
better time to appear woke. None of your usual “I’m not a
feminist, I just think men and women should have equal
rights” lame celebrity answers anymore. These are times
when more people than ever identify as feminists. That
should, and does make most of us happy.
I’m here, however, to talk about how performative most of it
is and how we need to be scrutinizing it closely. The earlier
law firm that I used to work for would hand out scented
candles and chocolate every year on women’s day and wax
eloquent about how women were indispensable to the
workplace. Except that they also routinely made women
employees feel guilty for taking statutorily sanctioned
maternity leave and did not take it seriously when a co-
worker alleged sexual harassment. Take another example-
continuing pay disparity amongst male and female actors in
Bollywood while the industry indulges in tokenism like
putting the names of women actors first in the credits. What
I mean is, it is easy to be anything if all it takes is self-
proclamation; no one needs to walk the talk!
Speaking of tall proclamations and not having to walk the talk
brings me to the topic of this article- choice feminism. For
some time, I have looked on with a little amusement and a lot
of irritation as most of the discourse on women’s rights has
shifted to women’s ability or lack thereof to make choices.
Sounds good, right? Except that in my opinion, the emphasis
on choice does more harm than good.
7
Choice feminism espouses the idea that the mere fact of a
woman making a choice for herself is inherently feminist,
irrespective of what the choice is. Using this school of
thought, anything qualifies as a feminist act. It becomes an
all-inclusive list where everything from item numbers that
cater specifically to the male gaze to Karwa Chauth can be
called feminist. Just have a variant of the following sentence
ready and you will notice how ridiculous it sounds:
“I chose this eating disorder/size zero body/obvious
objectification/this wedding that’s premised on a woman
being considered chattel….and therefore, it is feminist.”
The problem with choice feminism is that it casts
everything as a feminist act simply on the basis that it has
been freely chosen by women exercising them. This
exercise of such choice ipso facto renders the act feminist
as though choices exist outside of contexts and
consequences. For example, in arguing that women fasting
on Karwa Chauth is not inconsistent with feminist
principles or its observance might just be feminist if women
themselves are choosing to fast, it disregards or considers
as benign so much history and tradition that has
considered women less worthy and sought to discriminate
against them. The deal with sexist practices is that no
amount of dressing them up in silk and finery makes them
okay, not even tall claims of “free will”.
Another problem with this choice-centric discourse is that
it is essentially a politics of convenience. And it pushes the
idea that individual choices can somehow shield women
from or constitute an adequate response to systemic
oppression that has kept them down in the dumps for
millennia. It lessens our accountability to the movement
inasmuch as all that we are required to do is proclaim that
our choices, simply on the basis of our having made them at
all, are feminist. It also makes us hypocritical for the same
reason.
Acknowledging that our decisions do not exist in a vacuum
and there remain objective standards to assess whether or
not they align with the women’s movement can sometimes
lead us to the uncomfortable place that we might have
betrayed our politics, that we might have taken the easier
route. I know it all too well because I’m guilty of it too. But
from the same experience, I believe that we need to hold
ourselves to more stringent standards. It probably begins
by acknowledging that we’ve been lying to ourselves about
it.
"The problem with choice feminism is that it casts
everything as a feminist act simply on the basis
that it has been freely chosen by women exercising
them. This exercise of such choice ipso facto
renders the act feminist as though choices exist
outside of contexts and consequences."
DOING BETTER
By Anushka Lal
Here’s an unpopular opinion- RML is casteist. Now, before
you argue that it’s the 21st century and casteism does not
exist in elite educational institutions in India; “I don’t believe
in caste” or that reservations should be done away with
because they cause more harm than good, I urge you to set
aside these rebuttals; read what I am writing next. And think
hard, beyond the ambit of your own morality and question
your complicity in one of the most outrageously
discriminatory systems in the world that still exists today.
Though this piece intends to call out casual/deliberate
casteism in RML, it also seeks to inform you of a positive
change that was made to correct the issue.

Here’s my story, which to my surprise, I credit completely to

my stupidity and not fate.

I checked the RMLNLU website to look for admission

procedures and notices after CLAT results were announced
in 2016 and found that they had designated 3 days for the
students to visit the University and enroll themselves.
However, I missed an important detail here, one which
turned out to impact the next 5 years I spent socially. I
figured we could go on any one of the designated days but
since my father insisted we go on the first day, I packed my
documents and off we went. After getting through with all
admission formalities, we were told to head to the Girls’
Hostel to be allotted a room. Any two people coming
together would be allotted one room starting from Room No.
1. Three years later, I’m still friends with people I interacted
with in the first week in the hostel (well, most of them), who
were allotted rooms around mine. We often sat in my room
having mundane conversations that you’d find any law
student bickering about, which moved on to reservations
(another favoured topic by students). It suddenly struck me
that none of my friends (despite having studied affirmative
action) supported reservations. Another thing that struck me
was that all my friends (except one) were upper class/caste
savarnas.
By Prashansa Singh
IG @_artby.ps
My question here is whether the college was intentionally or
unintentionally creating a class/caste divide on campus? I am not
speaking for everyone when I say this but I imagine my life to be
entirely different had I enrolled on the day officially designated for
me.
Why is this practice problematic? The answer is simple. It robs
people of opportunity for interaction and immediate affinity to
certain groups and social circles due to artificial segregations that
ensure students are conscious of caste divides, even if
subconsciously. Caste based discrimination by a prestigious law
school that creates a bifurcation at the first point of interaction is
unacceptable, especially when as a law school it should promote
inclusivity. This is not to say that students do not interact outside of
hostels, but it would be a fatal mistake to underestimate the negative
impact this system will have on a student’s self-image and
confidence.

I went into a spiral of realizations. Remember how I told you
I forgot one detail in the admissions notice? It so happened
that the first day was designated for General Category
students to enroll themselves, and the second day was
designated for Reserved Category students such as SC/ST. I
remember how one Professor even asked me if I had not
read the notice, when he saw my file.
Normal course of action entailed that all General Category
people would be roommates and then all reserved category
people would be designated roommates. Does not sound like
a big deal, does it? Wrong. When you’re a first year staying
in a hostel, you mostly interact with people living in close
vicinity to your room and of course your roommate, which
eventually develops into friendships. This is not the only
likely outcome but also natural behavior at the offset. I
realized that if I hadn’t arrived at RML on the “wrong” day-
because I overlooked the segregation in the notice- it’s
highly likely I would have ended up with an entirely different
social circle.
Consider the case of a first-generation law student who has no social
capital and needs confidence to network but is constantly reminded
of their “otherness” and their place outside the caste system. I find
no rational reason behind the decision of the University
administration to designate different days for enrolment on the basis
of categories, when enrolment is traditionally alphabetic. Some
people will argue it was because of the students’ CLAT rank but even
then, how does it justify the segregation in Hostel room allocations?
Are we absolving the University of its responsibility to ensure
inclusivity, if we accept this argument for the Administration’s
convenience of the documentation process?
The silver lining has been that this segregatory practice has now
been done away with for junior batches by the University
Administration. It is still unfortunate that this practice was occurring
during the second decade of the 21st Century, no less, in an
Institution that is founded to teach and uphold the principles of the
Constitution; and has directly impacted 180 law students.
8
Artwork by Razi Ahmed
IG @nafratnahi 9
 CAREER ADVICE
HOW SHOULD YOU PICK WHICH BAR EXAM
TO TAKE IN THE US?
By Kritika Shukla
If you’re planning to pursue an LL.M. from the US and
intend to work there, deciding upon which State’s Bar
Exam to take can be a terrifyingly important decision.
It’s important because unfortunately in the US, unlike
the Indian legal system, you can practice only in the
state where you pass the Bar. It’s terrifying because the
decision mostly needs to be made before you come to
the US.
There are only some states which allow foreign
applicants with LL.M. degrees to sit for the bar.
California, Massachusetts, and New York are the primary
ones most commonly chosen by Indian candidates. All
states have different criteria and different sets of
requirements for foreign candidates. I will primarily talk
about Massachusetts and New York, since I am the most
familiar with these states.
New York and Massachusetts both require that your
documentation for evaluation be submitted at least 4 to
6 months before the actual exam. The exams are held in
February and July every year. The LL.M. courses
typically begin in September, and end in May. Most
students prefer to take the July exam after their courses
are over (some choose to give it next year).
To apply for the July bar exam, it is recommended that
all your documentation is sent in for evaluation by
October/November the previous year. Since the
evaluation requires receiving your documentation from
the law school you attended and the Bar Council in India
you are enrolled with, most candidates prefer to start
the process while they are in India.
While choosing between New York and Massachusetts,
everyone I reached out to suggested New York based on
the assumption that New York provides access to a
bigger job market and is more welcoming to
international students. Theoretically, this is not wrong.
Indeed New York has a larger market for lawyers, and
also has a higher number of foreign lawyers.
However, looking for a job in the US after a one-year
LL.M. is a difficult process. Most people rely on
networking with lawyers in the area to find jobs. In this
virtual world, while you can network around the globe
while sitting in one place, the reality is that you’ll
primarily be networking with lawyers in the state where
your postgraduate University is.
WOMAN TO WOMAN
Unless you go to a college in a state where foreign
applicants are not allowed, give the bar exam for the
state where your college is located. In all probability
that’s where you’ll find a job because that’s where you’ll
meet people already working in the field.
However, if you do choose the New York bar, make sure
that you meet all the other requirements for the
Massachusetts bar while in school itself. The advent of
the Uniform Bar Exam in the US allows you to transfer
your bar exam score to and from most jurisdictions. If
you’re looking to transfer your score, you may not have
to give the exam again, although you will still have to
meet all the requirements and conditions for the state
you are transferring your score to. Massachusetts, for
example, mandatorily requires foreign applicants to
complete a Constitutional law class during the LL.M.
program. So, if you take and clear the New York Bar, you
might not be required to give the exam again in
Massachusetts. You may, however, be required to
validate your Constitutional law class, and meet all the
other state specific requirements.
In the end, there’s no simple answer to decide which bar
exam to take. Covering your bases and making sure you
meet the requirements for different states where you
might potentially look for employment might be the
smartest thing to do. That’s not to say that you should
aim to fulfil the requirements for all 50 states (since all
of them do not allow international students to appear
for the Bar unless you complete a JD from the US) but
rather, make an informed decision. Speak to your LL.M.
advisor and perhaps, people like me, who are now
compelled to enrol in a Constitutional law class after
completing their LL.M.
Kritika Shukla is a graduate of
RMLNLU and Boston University
School of Law. She cleared the
New York Bar Exam in 2021.
10
 GUEST POST WITH DR. RUHA SHADAB, FOUNDER OF LEDBY

As a doctor who later went on to work at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, as a Young
Professional at NITI Aayog and pursued a Masters in Public Policy from Harvard
Kennedy on full scholarship to setting up LedBy Foundation- what were the struggles
you encountered on the basis of your sex and race in establishing an institution that
empowers Muslim women?
I find it interesting that you talk about sex and
race because you are alluding to the fact that the
Muslim community in India is treated almost along
the kind of racial lines we talk about Black Lives
Matter movement in the USA. And there is a really
good argument made by Isabel Wilkerson that says
racism in America is essentially casteism and what
casteism is when there is a power asymmetry
between two communities. More recently, The
Economist made a really interesting case of how
policy should not be made along racial lines even
though there is racial inequity for a couple of
reasons. One of them is that if you have a broad
policy that doesn’t discriminate on the basis of
race, it is easier to get buy-ins from everyone. For
instance, in giving free education, the poorest of
the society will benefit more and if the poorest in
the US case are Blacks, then they are
disproportionately benefiting from a policy that is
otherwise supposed to not be devised on racial
lines. So the Whites buy in. And the other really
good reason for this is that other communities
benefit like Hispanics, Latinas, who are also
oppressed.

However, this argument about not creating

policies along racial lines which still addresses
racial inequities would be a counter-argument to
what LedBy stands for- which focuses on Indian
Muslim Women- and is not completely in sync
with Isabel Wilkerson’s argument. The Economist
article concludes however, by saying that this
does not apply to education and employment
where you have to be conscious of creating a
diverse environment. Broadly, policies should be
made to benefit the most discriminated,
underprivileged or underrepresented but there
are still certain spaces you need to actively
address these issues head on. And that is exactly
what LedBy is doing.
Portrait by Supriya Tirkey
IG @supriyatirkey
Interestingly, the first struggle- or experience- we had when
LedBy was being incubated upon at Harvard was when I had
reached out to someone from the legal fraternity to help
think through the incorporation of LedBy. I had a couple
conversations with this particular person who was very
interested, I think mostly because they saw my educational
and professional credentials but we only got into the meat of
what LedBy does over an email thread, to which the person
replied by saying they did not feel comfortable supporting
our mission, in less polite words.
And I am a big reader and non-academic student of Law,
especially Constitutional Law and I often think about how
Muslims are just one community in India but it’s unique to
Muslims that on a daily basis they face systemic
discrimination.
11
However, the legal books of the Country prevent any positive discrimination or affirmative action being
taken along religious lines. So you’re discriminated against along religious lines but there is no affirmative
action. And I am not making it a call for affirmative action necessarily but if you were to make it
completely black and white, this is what it looks like. And this is what has led to not just this first legal
person but a couple of them refusing service to us; which is why setting up LedBy requires finding
supporters even within people just carrying out their day to day jobs which will help LedBy become a
thriving entity.

Over the past two and a half years we have found this support and are now an incorporated entity in
India as well as the USA with over 500 people actively involved in our mission through volunteering or
being mentors, interns and members of our core team. And these people come from across the country,
religions, genders and nationalities. So the journey has definitely made us understand the nuances and
rather, shown us more examples of systemic discrimination against Muslims which make our mission and
vision stronger.

Led By Foundation is India's first leadership incubator that

focuses on the professional development of Muslim Women. Dr.
Ruha Shadab is a graduate of Lady Hardinge Medical College and
was a Cheng Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School of Public
Policy.

For questions, contributions, collaborations and

comments, please email us at
suntoicarus@gmail.com
12
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This zine would be impossible without the warm embrace of

Amrita Nair, founder of the Silent Sexism Project; Damini
Mehta, graduate of Kamala Nehru College DU; the artists
who have been featured here and contributed their time and
life to our cause for no economic remuneration. We're
hoping to make it up to you, you beautiful people.

Our own, Apurva Vishwanath who has endured

unimaginable loss and still found it in herself to be there for
us.

Our team of enterprising, driven young women and men who

will change the world one day- watch us.

And Dr. Malvika Sharma for her inspiration and her friend,
Dr. Ruha Shadab, that's got us here today. And late Dr.
(Major) Sonia Sharma- this one's for you, mom.

A special shoutout to Alissa Del Mustre Rio, candidate of

Masters in Human Rights and Humanitarian Action at
Sciences Po; also Research Coordinator, Human
Development Research Initiative and a generally kickass
person.

We're proud of what we stand for here and achieve today by

making this world a little less sexist.
13